HomeMy WebLinkAbout08/30/1973
MINUTES
August 3D, 1973
The two hundred and twelth regular meeting of the Wheat Ridge City
Council was called to order at 7 40 p.m. at 7390 West 38 Avenue
by Mayor Albert E. Anderson.
Aldermen attending were Dr Paul Abramson, Mary Jo Cavarra, Joseph
Donaldson, Robert Howard, Calvin Hulsey and Ray Pepe.
Also attending were Mayor Anderson, City Clerk Louise Turner, City
Attorney Maurice Fox, staff personnel and approximately 150 interested
citizens.
Minutes of the regular meeting of August 16, 1973 and Sepcial Meeting
of August 20, 1973 were read and approved.
Motion by Alderman Hulsey "I move that 38 Avenue be put on the Agenda
under 9b." Motion was seconded by Alderman Donaldson and passed 5-1.
Alderman Cavarra stated the Agenda had been prepared the preceeding
Friday and voted "nay."
Citizens' Comments were made by
William Cornelison of 3570 Nelson representing the Chamber of
Commerce who stated he wanted to say "thank you to the City for the
tremendous spirit of cooperation" shown for the Carnation Festival and
named especially Chief Pinson and the Police Department, Glen Taylor
and the Public Works Department, Boyd Kraemer and the Parks Department,
Jim Malone, Walter Grande and the Treasurer Department, Louise Turner
and the City Clerk's Office, Mayor Anderson and Aldermen Abramson, Cavarra,
Donaldson, Howard, Hulsey and Pepe. He presented a carnation plate to
Mayor Anderson to hang in his office and extended an invitation for the
Chamber of Commerce Parks Day on September 16, 1973 beginning at 10 00 a.m.
The Final Report of the Citizens' Task Force was presented by Chairman
Ron Davis who thanked the Council for giving the group the "chance to
benefit the City." He said the group had put in lots of time and had
had good response from the control group and that 120 questionnaires
available at City Hall and in the Sentinel had been answered and returned.
He recommended that an "on-going committee" be formed. He read the
portion of the report entitled "Final Report of Wheat Ridge Citizens'
Task Force, August 3D, 1973." The portion read is attached to the Minutes
and the complete report is in the General File under "Citizens' Task
Force - Final Report August 1973."
Alderman Cavarra thanked the Committee Members and suggested that a
Resolution commending them be written.
Rezoning Case WZ-73-13 was brought up for decision which was a request
by Don and Beulah Hawley for a change from Agricultural-One to Restricted-
Commercial and Restricted-Commercial-One at 11500 West 44 Avenue.
Motion by Alderman Cavarra "I move that WZ-73-13 be tabled indefinitely
until the applicants are able to offer proof that the request is not in
violation of House Bill 1529." There was no second and the Motion died.
Motion by Alderman Abramson "I move that Case WZ-73-13 be denied because
it is not in agreement with the Land Use Plan and the Planning Commission
recommended denial." Motion was seconded by Alderman Donaldson and passed
4-2. Aldermen Pepe and Cavarra voted "nay."
Citizens were present to make comments on 38 Avenue. Mayor Anderson sum-
marized that bids had been opened on June 15, 1973, a contract for paving
approved on June 21, 1973, additional work and paving approved in the area
near Lutheran Hospital on July 12, 1973 called change Order No.1, that
litigation and a preliminary injunction and restraining order followed and
then later a hearing at which it was determined the City must show that
change Order No 1 was a matter of public necessity, that a "Finding by
Council" was needed concerning public safety regarding change Order No. 1
and it was this which would be considered at this meeting.
MINUTES - August 3D, 1973 - Continued
-2-
Mayor Anderson added that a pamphlet had been distributed which he
considered "somewhat misleading" in that there were "no plans to widen
38th beyond Dudley or maybe Estes", 44 Avenue was "not yet a budget
item" because there wasn't a budget yet and there were "no plans on 32nd"
and that the City was not purchasing ROW from Lutheran Hospital, but
Lutheran was going to donate the additional RDW. He asked that comments
be limited to the matter at hand.
City Attornev Maurice Fox stated it was improper for citizens to question
the Council but that they might present evidence.
Comments were made by
H.R. McCollister of 4001 Field Drive who stated
1. He was responsible in part for distribution of the pamphlets.
2. That Council already had its Motion prepared with 15 points
indicating change Order No. 1 was in "the best interest of the City and
needed for public safety and welfare."
3. That since the 15 points had been prepared he was certain the
Council intended to qo ahead.
4. That he had understood that the hospital had been completely
neutral, and that if the first four points were valid, the hospital should
have been consulted.
5. That those opposing Change Order No.1 favored 3 lanes and the
contract without Change Order No.1.
6. That they were in favor of progress, in favor of "improving"
West 38 Avenue and in favor of sidewalks.
7. That there had been no change since June 21, that the hospital
and the emergency vehicles had always been there.
8. It must have been embarrassing for the Council to have been placed
in a spot where it said "I didn't know what I was doing."
9. That PW-73-02 had been discussed since August 1972 and had in-
volved much time and analysis even including one-way streets.
10. That he didn't think "that compromise hammered out over a
period of months"should have been discarded on three weeks notice.
11. That he realized there were emotional overtones and alignments
of personality on the Council.
12 That he understood from Mayor Anderson that he (the Mayor) sin-
cerely believes the people want 4 and 5 lanes to Dudley, but that those who
had spoken to him (Mr. McCollister) without exception were opposed.
He asked that the Council open their minds and listen and hear the people.
(Applause).
Helen Cooke of 8740 West 38 Avenue who said
1. There had been nothing new in the three weeks.
2. That she had been told in January, it would happen.
3. That Sam Gadalla had told her it was planned and subject to
Council approval.
4 Alderman Abramson and Alderman Bramble had told her they were
opposed.
5. Mayor Anderson had told her people said he was in favor, but
that he didn't know how he felt.
6. That even though the plans were being drawn up in January, facts
were not available on June 21, 1973 but suddenly. became available three weeks
later (Applause.)
Bob Burgess of 4005 Everett who said:
1. He was one of the plaintiffs in the suit.
2. He couldn't see why the present two lanes in poor shape needed
to go to 4 or 5 or how this could be safer with the added ease of traffic
and the creation of truck traffic.
3. 38th was the only access to Evertt Jr. High.
4. That crossing a main street with this kind of traffic would
endanger children crossing to go to school (Applause).
MINUTES - August 3D, 1973 - Continued
-3-
Phyllis Swanson of 8203 West 38 Avenue who said
1. She lived a little to the east of Lutheran and 35 Avenue.
2. She was an employss of ths hospital, in charge of the volunteers,
but she was not speaking for the hospital.
3 That instead of the 702 volunteers which Alderman Howard had
said used access from 38 Avenue, there were in fact 50 coming and going
over a 12 hour period, 12 at a time.
4. She had lived here less than two years and that even though
traffic slowed at her corner for the turn, it was much faster than two
years ago, and she shuddered to think how fast it would be if a 5 lane
highway existed. (Applause.)
Lynn McCollister of 4001 Field Drive who said
1. She had spoken with Mr. Streuffert who told her the hospital
had neither requested nor opposed the widening, that the hospital was more concer
2. She had been involved with the distribution of the pamphlet ned with
and that if they had been trying to pack the house it would have been its ac-
distributed on 38 Avenue in Ward III instead of in Wards I and II and cess
away from 38 Avenue. from 32
~enuEl______
Alderman Pepe stated he had received 26 calls, that 16 had been from
Ward III from people who live on 38 Avenue near Lutheran and were for
the Widening. He said he had had 4 calls against
Alderman Abramson said he had had 38 calls, 31 of which were opposed to
anything wider than 3 lanes.
Don Klinger of 11735 West 38 Avenue who said
1. He lived on 38 Avenue near Simms.
2 He was concerned and thought from the
that a walkway was to be extended on 38 Avenue.
3. Lakewood had built a walk and bikeway
separated.
4.
5.
discussion last Spring,
along Alameda, that was
Schonl would be starting and there was no walkway on 38 Avenue.
He asked what happened to the walkway. (Applause.)
Mayor Anderson requested that the audience restrain the outbursts.
Virgil Anderson of 3860 Balsam who said
1 18 months ago in this same room an overflow crowd voted street
by street that there would be no widening on 26, 32, 38 and 44 Avenues.
2. They were told there were no plans for widening at that time or
in the future.
3. There had been no plans for 4 lanes or 5 lanes 2 months ago,
but now there were. The fact that there were no plans then didn't mean
we wouldn't have them now.
4. Safety had not been a point until now, and now it is a diversionary
tactic. "The point is how we got 4 lanes (or 5) from 2."
Ken Knudsen of 4099 Field Drive who said
1. He was responsible for printing the flyer, and it was really
not misleading.
2. That Mr. Anderson had said there would not be widening past Dudley,
but widening to Dudley would increase traffic so that the widening would have
to go to YOJngfield.
3 That he had never before raised his voice to a governing body,
and woudl prefer to be at home, but that "we can't be hogwashed like we are."
4. That it was important to "our children."
5 His children cross 38 Avenue to go to Swimland and cross it twice
to go to school, and he didn't want them to cross a highway.
R.C. Lamont of 25 Paramount Parkway in Ward III who said he was opposed to
the widening, that another plan had been agreed upon after study and he
would like to see it done
Elizabeth
1 .
2.
38 Avenue.
Ramsey of 11225 West 38 Avenue who said
She had learned the night before of the widening
She had gotten no answer from the surveyors when
they went down
MINUTES - August 30, 1973 - Continued
-4-
3 That 4 schools, 2 of them grade schools will have children
crossing 38 Avenue.
4. She was opposed to 4
and she had seen a child hit on
5. 35 m.p h. is not the
themselves
6.
lanes because the speed is terrible,
32 Avenue.
limit and children can't speak out for
A 4 lane highway is not the most important thing for Wheat Ridge.
Andy Christianson of 3851 Hoyt who said 38 Avenue should be paved from
one side to the other as all other streets were, not a 5 lane highway
but a regular city street to Youngfield.
Jim DeLong of 3890 Everett in Ward III who said
1 He was a co-plaintiff with Mr. Burgess and Mr Knudsen.
2. That it was difficult to say over again what had been said
"at all those other hearings "
3. That he was grateful this had been put on the Agenda.
4. That in reply to Virgil Anderson who said safety was
diversionary, that it was the issue, that the judge had ruled that the
City would have to find th~adding 2 lanes to the original 3 was in the
interest of public safety.
5. That the list of reasons prepared by the City was the same list
presented to the Judge and not ftund to be valid.
6. That 4 and 5 lanes are less safe for the following reasons
a. It is more difficult for an auto to cross 4 lanes.
b. It is more difficult to turn left when there are 4 ~nes.
c. More lanes invite more traffic, Kipling is a good example.
d. More lanes invite truck traffic.
e. It is far safer to taper west of Wadsworth than at Dover
at the top of a hill. Tapering is safer where vision is better.
Raise in speed is possible with increase in lanes and increase
to pass.
g. It is less safe for bikers and walkers along side the
street with no separation.
h. Children walk along 38 Avenue to 6 schools - Wheat Ridge
Jr. High, Kullerstrand, Prospect Valley, Wilmore Davis, Lutheran and Everett.
i. Without a walkway it is safer alongside 2 lanes.
j. With 4 lanes it has to be closer to the street.
k. One separated walk was settled upon in the Spring when it
was decided there was not enough money for one on each side of the street,
but with 4 lanes there may not be enough room for even one with a separation.
They will be closer to faster and perhaps heavier traffic.
1 With a two lane street it was possible to consider a bikeway.
m. There can't be any bus turnouts with 4 lanes, the bus musttr~~~'~
7. That he did not want his children crossing a 4 lane highway. 1
8. That the issue was safety and the just mentioned items pertained
to safety. What was being talked about with the wider road was traffic capacity
not traffic safety.
and Estes
f.
in chance
Gale Donahue of 3775 Dudley who said
1. This was strictly a residential area.
2. 40 years ago in Los Angeles they had residential
with 2 lanes, drainage and gutters and hospitals with quiet
limits.
3.
thoroughfares
zones and special
She asked if no one had heard of "residential thoroughfares."
Henry Deare of 7960 West 38 Avenue who said
1 He agreed with Mayor Anderson that the flyer was deceiving.
2. That the street should be widened and if it were and there was
curb, gutter and sidewalks it would be safer than now.
3. That others speaking don't live on 38 Avenue and don't know-that
they live on streets with curb and gutter.
4. That it was almost impossible to get off and on under present
conditions.
5. Even though the hospital has been there for years, there is a
new wing with increased capacity which cost 4Y2 million dollars.
6. That the 5 lane street could be made just as safe as the present
street, that it would need an extra light or a walk light.
MINUTES - August 3D, 1973 - Continued
-5-
7. That he favored 5 lanes turnouts either way.
8. That people should have open minds and do it right even if it
meant waiting a year and not have to do it over in 2 years, and that it
has been talked about for 10 years
9. Wadsworth would not have been widened if it had not been needed
and widening Kipling brought more traffic because it took some from Wadsworth.
10 That common sense must be used and progress can't be stopped.
Mary Lou Zarlenqo of 8391 West 38 Avenue on Carr Street opposite the
emergency exit of the hospital stated
1. That she was a direct observer.
2. That she had never seen an emergency vehicle have difficulty
getting in and that they do have the ROW.
3 That Lutheran had not requested the widening.
4. That she had talked with 8 people living between Wadsworth and
Dudley all of whom had "very definitely" had the same opinions she had that
they were interested in safety and their safety was jeopardized for additional
lanes by this plan.
5. They agreed that if 38 Avenue had no chuckholes, had a sidewalk
on both sides and had a third lane for turning it would be safe for everyone.
6. It was impossible to get onto 38 Avenue now, and with 5 lanes
she would have to walk to work but she would have to cross to the south
side to do so.
7. She was frightened by the prospect of 5 lanes.
R L. Stevenson of 3795 Dudley, the southwest corner of 38 Avenue and Dudley
said
1 As of now 2 lanes moved freely past his home.
2. Safety was the main factor for the area, and the people who
live on 38 Avenue, and that this was a residential area and not a business area.
3. Four lanes will mean more and faster traffic including trucks
and more trucks.
4. Children had to cross 38 Avenue to go to school. He asked if
there would be school lights and how many, and if there would be policing
at the corners.
Annabel Krebs of 4073 Field Drive who said
1. There were 302 beds at the time the hospital opened. By the time
the 22 additional beds would be in use the new entrance would be open.
2. That she had two cars and no curb and walks on her street.
3. She didn't want 38 Avenue to become a Wadsworth.
4. That progress used to be cars and black top and now there were
many lots of junk cars.
5. That this was not progressive any more, it was old fashioned.
6. 38 Avenue was residential area, it could be made non-residential,
it could be ruined.
7. She'd like for her kids to be able to walk to the junior high
school without walking on lawns or being hit.
8. That like others she wanted 38 Avenue improved which didn't mean
putting a shovel full in the holes which was a "sneaky way of making people
think the City is doing something."
9. The terms "channelization and improvements" frightened her because
she didn't want roads like Wadsworth and Youngfield on all the east-west streets.
10. That if the Mayor felt the flyer was misleading she felt he
should be reminded that he had told a comparable crowd 18 months ago,
"Just because we have the right of way doesn't mean we'll do it."
11. She didn't think a good example had been set for their children.
J.E. Morrison of 3820 Robb who said
1. He wanted the area to remain residential.
2. That the street should be made safer and should serve the people.
3. He didn't like to see what was happening.
4. The noise level was becoming "terrific" and he was 300 feet from it.
5. If 28 Avenue was widened to Dudley there was no place for it to
stop next year it would go to Kipling and then to Youngfield.
6. That he'd like to see 38 Avenue closed to trucks and the speed
reduced. It should be for the benefit of residents, not commercial
vehicles.
MINUTES - August 30, 1973 - Continued
-6-
Lee Gerviq of Dudley Strset who said
1. He crossed 38 Avenue two times a day, and it wasn't easy,
and wouldn't be any safer with five lanes.
2. The Council was supposed to represent the people. He asked
why the first contract had not been signed for three weeks but when the
work had been expanded it had been signed the next day.
Mike Merkl of 6815 West 29 Avenue who said
1. He had begun riding a bicycle 70 years ago when he was five
2. He still rode.
3. From 32 Avenue and Dudley he saw a "nice road open up" behind
Lutheran Hospital and was told it would be blacktopped to the hospital
within the week and this would take care of the overflow.
4. He asked Council not to forget a bike path for the bicycles.
David Davia of 8151 West 38 Avenue who said
1. He had bought his property from Lutheran Sanitarium.
2. He could tell time by the noise of the traffic.
3. It is not a disaster area.
4. Most accidents are in winter.
5. A turn lane and slowing for turns would prevent most serious
accidents.
6. He was concerned about 5 lanes, he would have a problem getting
out and wouldn't be able to use his drive or garage.
7. Walkways would cut down on traffic.
8. Parents don't want kids to walk in the traffic.
9. There are traffic jams at schools.
Charles Lehrer of 3838 Dover who said
1. The Mayor and Council were concerned with the feelings of the
citizens.
2. Citizens had voiced their opinions on this matter "so many
times at many many meetings."
3. They want sensible widening, i.e. 3 lanes.
4. A place for walking and bicycles "that isn't just an extension
of the asphalt with white lines" would benefit students.
5. Bicycles are pleasant now except for the fumes.
6. All other avenues such as 35 Avenue from Dudley and 32 Avenue
into the hospital should be explored first.
7. That he was pleading with them to think before they condemn
the people to 5 lanes.
8. That once 5 lanes is layed, it will never be removed.
After brief discussion by Citv Attorney Fox and Aldermen Hulsey and Pepe
as to the possibility of continuing other hearings on the Agenda, the
speakers continued.
Marilyn Arp of 3885 Ammons who said
1. Why not try widening to the drains and making it three lanes
and see if it won't work.
2. That a speaker who lived across from the entrance of Lutheran
mentioned that noise was too high and it would be 2 to 3 times higher
after it was widened.
3. One of the sections of the Council's findings says one reason
for the widening was the hospital, and an Alderman had said there would
be no widening west of the hospital. If this were true the hospital
should provide more outlets on Dudley and on 32 Avenue to take traffic
away from the main entrance on 38 Avenue.
4 That Council could ask the hospital to widen the main entrance
so traffic didn't have to go out a single lane.
5 That a third lane for turning would take care of the back up
problem that some people think exists.
6. Apparently the idea was to widen it to the hospital just because
the hospital was there, and that present percentages of traffic were higher
from the east, and when th~ increased from the west because of increased
population in the west, this would justify widening to the west.
MINUTES - August 30, 1973 - Continued
-7-
7. That there was no justification for widening 38 Avenue.
8. It was not at full capacity.
9. There was plenty of room between vehicles.
10. She would have more difficulty getting onto 38 Avenue if it
were four lanes.
11. Safety would be decreased for pedestrians.
12. That she favored improvement of present road, a center turn
lane and walkways on both sides of the street
13. That when one side of the street was chosen for a walkway,
it should have been the residential side in the area of the hospital.
Motion by Alderman Pepe "I move we continue Case WZ-73-19, Minor
Subdivision-73-11 and Variance 73-01 until September 13, 1973." There
was no second and Motion died.
City Attorney Fox stated 15 days posting would be required.
Motion by Alderman Pepe:
be continued to September
Abramson and passed 6-0.
"I move that Case WZ-73-19, Variance 73-01
20, 1973." Motion was seconded by Alderman
Mayor Anderson announced that Case MS-73-11 would go back to the Planning
Commission and City Attorney Fox recommended that the liquor violation
be continued also.
Mayor Anderson asked if people were present to speak in favor of widening
38 Avenue, and since response was negative, called for city evidence.
Brian Moss, Traffic Technician for the City stated he was available to
answer questions. Alderman Abramson said he had spoken with several
planners and/or traffic engineers who were not willing to make a statement.
Mr. Moss introduced Mr. Skinner from Memphis, Tennessee and stated his
qualifications including his employment with the Federal Highway Administration.
Harry Skinner of 2650 Tabor, Lakewood emphasized that he was not appearing
on behalf of the FHA, but rather an individual
In answer to a question from Alderman Abramson as to which is safer with
data to document it, a 3 or 5 lane street, Mr. Skinner said he could not
give an unqualified answer that
1. If there were no subsequent increase, 5 lanes would be safer.
2. There would be an increase of 10-20%, probably closer to 10% but could
be as high as 20%. It would not be major.
3. Traffic would be drawn from hearby parallel streets such as 41 Ave.
In answer to questions from Aldermen Donaldson and HUlsey, he said there
should be expected a slight increase because of stores and new homes to
the west and could be some (perhaps 5%) if street were paved and had
no chuckholes. Also, that three lanes would increase it a "little bit"
maybe to "12,000 and at that point congestion occurs and capacity will
limit the increase." Alderman Donaldson pointed out that polls on January 4,
1973 were almost the same as "polls today."
Mr. Skinner added ~ More lanes would make it safer for more cars and would
make it safer for more cars and would allow more increase.
5. The fact that a significant increase was not evident in polls
today as compared to January might be an irregularity on the particular
days the polls were taken or normal fluctuation.
6. Three lanes would "peak out in 4 or 5 years as to the ability
to draw from other streets."
7. If increase continues RTD would take major traffic and increase
the life time of a three lane street.
Alderman Abramson asked if it were not typical that a street such as Kipling
had a gradual increase as a two lane street, then a rapid increase when
widened to 6 lanes, then a slow increase again.
MINUTES - August 30, 1973 - Continued
-8-
Mr. Skinner said that was correct and when capacity was achieved it
leveled out.
Alderman Hulsey said people would not get on 38 Avenue for only 6 blocks.
Mr. Skinner stated 38 Avenue Wffi not typical and not the same as a "highway
that's going someplace."
He added the projections are for 19,000 cars per day by 1990 and 22,000
cars per day by the year 2000, and that traditionally projections are low.
When asked if these figures were for a widened or not widened street,
he said they were probably figured with "some resistance to flow but
no restraint" and that he didn't know what population projections were used.
In answer to Mayor Anderson who asked if it were "safe to say a minimum
of 4 lanes is desirable on 38 Avenue", Mr. Skinner said "Ves" but he felt
more should be encouraged. He agreed with Mayor Anderson that "traffic
dispersed laterally is safer than traffic restricted latterally" but that
either 3 or 5 lanes would get rid of left turn problems.
He added in answer to questions from Alderman Abramson that
1. He was speaking in terms of safety for autos.
2 If traffic didn't increase, 5 lanes would be much safer, but it
would increase.
3. If increase is 100% it would be "much less safe."
4. If the increase is only 10-15% a pedestrian would be "able to
find a gap better in 5 lanes."
5. Regardless of conditions or load, spreading it out would be safer.
5. There was evidence of "near head-ons" and most accidents were the
result of "violations of driver expectancy."
7. Special signs and pavement markers would make these conditions
less unsafe.
8 In answer to a question from Alderman Cavarra, 11 feet is the
nationwide standard width of lanes, 9 feet is too narrow.
9. East of Dudley the 4 or 5 lanes would make it safer for pedestrians.
10. West of Dudley would be "considerably less safe" for pedestrians.
11. Steps should be taken to protect the pedestrian such as traffic
lights and grade separations.
12. Conditions were less safe downstream of the funnel, but lines
on the pavement could have "some impact on safety."
He agreed with Alderman Abramson who said "we are trading a possible increase
in safety east of Dudley for a definite decrease in safety west of Dudley."
Alderman Donaldson asked Brian Moss for an accident report for this stretch.
Mr. Moss said there were 15 accidents in 1972 as compared to 20 in 1971,
a decrease rather than an increase and that the high accident spot would
be 38 Avenue and Dudley.
Fire Chief Jack Willis said he had no opinion on the number of lanes, but
there were 1,000+ emergency vehicles per year, the road was now inadequate
that the fire department would oppose 2 lanes with a curb and gutter because
cars need to be able to pull off the road and the fire trucks are sometimes
delayed behind cars waiting to turn left.
Motion by Alderman Pepe "I move we hear Rezoning Case WZ-73-12 now and
have remaining comments on 38 Avenue after this hearing." Motion was
seconded by Alderman Howard who stated it was unfair to the people on
the Agenda to have a special interest group "tie up the Council all evening."
Motion passed 6-0.
Rezoning Case WZ-73-12 was heard. Acting Director of Planning Glen Taylor
stated that the United Presbyterian Assoc. had requested a change from
Residential-Two and Residential-Three to Residential-Three-A to build a
home for the aged at 35 Avenue and Kendall on 129,299 square feet.
MINUTES - August 30, 1973 - Continued
-9-
He added:
1. The Planning Commission had recommended denial because it
didn't comply with the Land Use Plan, it didn't comply with the wishes
of the neighbors and constituted spot zoning.
2. At the Planning Commission Hearing petitions wer presented
signed by approximately 300 residents who opposed the request on grounds
of drainage, increase in density, fire hazards in multi-story nursing
homes and Senate Bill 19.
3. Senate Bill 19 required that health care facilities be allowed
only where a certificate of need had been issued.
4. Residential-Three-A was essentially a residential zone allowing
14.52 units per acre.
5. Residential-Three-A Zoning would permit 35-40 units on this
parcel and present zoning would permit approximately 19 units
6 Petitions were also presented signed by 122 residents of
HighlamWest Apartments in favor of the proposal and in favor of close-by
nursing care facilities.
Alderman Howard asked if the Residential-Three portion of the property
was committed as support footage for Highland West.
City Attorney Fox stated this needed to be ascertained, that it it were
it could not be taken from one use designation and given to another because
it would render Highland West non-conforming.
Harold Lutz, attorney for the applicant stated
1. The land was unplatted.
2. The 39 feet mentioned by Alderman Howard was not part of the
Highland West obligation and that the Planning Department had felt it
was proper to include this with the ReSidential-Two in the request.
3 That sometimes there is a tendency to deny a rezoning when
there is an unanswered question of legality and that he would consider
it wiser to continue the hearing until the technicality could be cleared
up rather than have the case denied on a legal technicality that didn't exist.
4. That if the Planning Director couldn't answer the question, he
didn't expect Council to take his (Mr. Lutz's) legal opinion on it.
5. The applicants surely had no intention of making the apartment
house non-conforming and that he understood the appliEtion had been worked
out with the former Planning Department, but that he had not represented
these people at that time.
6. That he would move the matter be continued until he and City
Attorney Fox could clear up the matter because neither the proponents or the
opponents deserved "to be caught in this tupe of trap."
Lon Liley, applicant stated
1. At the time Highland West was built, 2000 square feet per unit
was allowed and there was no question that more than 240,000 qu.ft. existed.
He did not want the apartment house to be illegal.
2. That he had presented a survey by a qualified surveyer to the
Planning Department which could easily have been checked
Mr. Lutz stated this had not been mentioned in the Planning Commission
Minutes or he could have been prepared. Also, that if the case were heard
at this time and it was determined later that the square footage was not
proper, he would withdraw the application and resubmit it with an amended
legal description. It was indicated he should proceed, and he stated
1. The area was approximately 3 acres.
2. It was zoned Residential-Two, all but 39 feet.
3. It belonged to the United Presbyterian Association.
4. It had not been developed for two reasons the Residential-Two
zoning and the shape, it was "L" shaped.
5. The location was adjacent to flower shops, a church, Christopher
House - a high or intensive care nursing home, and the apartment home to
the north
6. The only intent is to build a home for the aged for which the
Residential-Three-A zoning is needed.
7. There were 3 levels of care, high intensity
House, middle care for those who didn't need full time
home proposed, and the third was no assistance at all,
as in
care,
as in
Christopher
this was the
Highland West.
MINUTES - August 3D, 1973 - Continued
-10-
center "
8. The three levels available together would comprise a "geriatrics
9. They were limited by the zoning ordinance to a 3 story building.
10. If a drainage problem existed as some had said, the project
provided an excellent chance for it to be corrected.
11 The citizens' report had expressed "concern for the aged"and
concern for taxes This proposal would provide higher taxes than single
family homes
Lon Liley of 6270 West 38 Avenue said
1. The proposal was for a home for older people with some care,
but less than in Christopher House
2. A resident care home was needed in the area.
3. There would be no increase in children and limited traffic.
4 Ground was not likely to develop as Residential-Two or as
homesites because of surrounding uses.
5. Drainage was not a problem the contract says water would be
taken east and then to 38 Avenue.
6. Density as Residential-Two would be 33 units and as Residential-
Three-A would be 40. This increase would not be sufficient to warrant a
rezoning, and the height limit is the same in Residential-Three-A as in
Residential-Two
7 He had operated Christopher House for 12 years and had done a
good job and would do a good job here.
8. That home was the only intent, he was not asking for units.
9. (In answer to a question from Alderman Donaldson as to Planned
Development and the certificate of need), that he had been turned down
on a request for PUD two years ago, and that he saw no problem in obtaining
a certificate of need. The rezoning had to come first.
10. The use would be in keeping with the area.
11. That he was not sure this would come under House Bill 19.
12. It would differ from Highland West only in that there would be
buzzers in the rooms and meals would be furnished.
13. Area in between is in weeds and would be improved. Alderman
Cavarra stated weed area should be landscaped.
Mr. Lutz said
That it had been said if the certificate of need was denied then
apartments would be built, and that he was willing to covenant the ground
for this use to enter into a neutral covenant agreement with the opponents
and guarantee the use because this was the only intent. In answer to a
question from Alderman Hulsey that either a covenant could be made for a
guarantee Dr the property could revert to Residential-Two. The legality
of a covenant agreement was discussed and City Attorney Fox said the
intent must be considered and attention given to the Comprehensive Plan.
Also speaking in favor was
Rex Glass, Vice-President of the Board of Directors who felt the
facility was needed, that it would be a facility with attendant care that
"may be needed by all of us someday." He requested favorable consideration.
Frank Lancaster of 6340 West 38 Avenue said he lived at Highland West Apart-
ments and represented the 148 tenants who lived there, that this facility
was needed and the location was ideal. There would be no traffic and no
burden on the schools. People would be close to friends in Highland West
and in Christopher House, and that 148 neighbors in Highland West and
Christopher House would like to see this proposed home built.
In answer to a question from Alderman Howard, Mr. Lancaster said he had
a granddaughter who was the wife of a member of Council
Ron Davis of 7975 West 39 Avenue who said he and his family owned the devel-
opment on the east and would favor this development. He said the open
ground is a fire hazard and there are 5,6 or 7 fires on it per year. New
laws prohibited them from burning off the weeds as they use to and kids on
motor bikes frequent it. The proposed development would not add to the
traffic or schools.
MINUTES - August 30, 1973 - Continued
-11-
A show of hands indicated 43 people present in favor of the proposal
and it was stated that 15 had gone home because of the hour (12 3D a.m.).
Mary Ann Knott speaking on behalf of the League of Women Voters said a
two year study had indicated that nothing was available for persons over
65 years who couldn't maintain a home other than nursing homes. This
facility would offer a choice to the elderly resident, he could be
with comparable neighbors and this might also "free-up needed low to
moderate housing."
Dr. Gerald Marsico of 3940 Balsam who said the situation has been studied
in other cities and this proposal could furnish Wheat Ridge a beautiful
"geriatric park."
Speaking in opposition were
Kenneth V. Adams of 3505 Marshall Street who said
1. Many of the people present in opposition earlier were wage
earners and had gone home.
2. There was a weed ordinance and if the owner was concerned
about weeds he could cut them.
3. All in favor had a self interest or were residents of Highland
West rather than representing the area
4. The Planning Commission had recommended denial because the
request was not in accord with the Land Use Plan and would be spot zoning.
5. The applicant had not obtained a license or a certificate of need.
6. The intent of the State Board is to spread such facilities
around and other places do not have as many as Wheat Ridge.
7. That an increase of 7 units was 20% and was a significant increase
8. That he (Mr. Adams) felt the applican~s wish was for greater
density which is greater profit.
9. That over 300 signed petitions in opposition including Mrs Van
Scoyk at 6240 West 35 Avenue.
Mr. Adams presented a drawing pointed out Mrs. Van Scoyk's property as being
across the street from and extending the distance of the applicant's pro-
perty as it abutted 35 Avenue. He also pointed out homes on the drawing
which he said covered most of the surrounding area to the southeast and
southwest and were single family, even though they were zoned Residential-Two.
He stated
10. High density zoning was being proposed on 9 square blocks with
no new streets.
11. Applicants said the greenhouse would preclude Residential-Two
development, but the greenhouse was there when they bought the land.
12. A greenhouse had been torn down and a Residential-Two development
put in to the south.
13. It could be developed as zoned.
14. If this were rezoned Residential-Three-A and a certificate of
need not granted, applicants would utilize "the highest and best use" namely
apartments
15. Opponents resented the intent to impose high density on their
low density neighborhood.
Lucille Tomppert of 3675 Marshall Street stated
1. Petition signers had been challenged but had not changed.
2. Pictures of the flooding on May 6, 1973 had been submitted to
the Planning Commission. (These were shown to the Counci.)
3. Water drained from the Baptist Church and Marshall Park subdivision
was filling in the low places.
4. Construction of a 120 people faCility would be ~ll advised"
for the applicant and drainage would be a problem to garden level apartments.
5. That she had a letter from former Wheat Ridge District Fire
Chief Gerald Rose describing inherent dangers in multi-storied nursing
homes. (The letter was read by Mrs. Tomppert and is attached to the Minutes.)
6. This type facility would place a greater load on sanitation services.
7 That she did not live on 38 Avenue but was constantly awakened
by sirens
8. When Highland West was approved, grounds were to have been landscaped
and cottages built so they and not the neighbors are responsible for the weeds.
MINUTES - August 30, 1973 - Continued
-12-
Mrs. Velma Kroft of 3605 Marshall Street who said
1. The request was for high density zoning in a low density
neighborhood.
2. Members of Council wouldn't like it next to them.
3. Opponents were not aSking that it remain vacant, but that
the zoning remain the same.
4. That applicant had not mentioned medicare or medicaid.
5 That this would not qualify as a medicaid facility. That
residential care facilities, if under medicaid, are no more than 10 beds
according to information from the Federal Bureau of Health Facilities.
6. Mr. Wolf, the head of Nursing Home facilities in response
to inquiries from the opposition had indicated the Following
a. He had received no request for a "certificate of need"
for this facility.
b. Senate Bill 19 makes it almost impossible to get a
"certificate of need."
c. He would not grant a certificate or a license for this home.
d That he would not issue one in Wheat Ridge because it
is overbuilt.
e.
was great for a
boarding houses
That in homes which did not require a license, the potential
"shoddy operation", that they were frequently "glorified
where people would live and be served meals."
Mayor Anderson stated if Residential-Three-A zoning were granted, any
allowed use could be utilized.
In answer to a question from Alderman Cavarra as to granting a rezoning
contingent upon getting a license, City Attorney Fox said the policy had
been one of no contingent rezonings.
In answer to Alderman Cavarra's question as to whether he had considered
Hospital-One zoning, Mr. Liley stated he was not familiar with it.
Karl Mayer of 6471 West 35 Avenue who said
1. The area was and had for many years been bascially one of
single family homes and a church and a greenhouse with adequate street
lights and little or no crime.
2. That it had been said the property was too valuable for single
family homes, and that it was no more valuable than his.
3. That Council should consider the request and turn it down.
A show of hands indicated 16 people were still present opposing.
Mr. Lutz summarized that facts were being stretched, that he did not
appreciate the suggestion that his client was doing something dishonest,
that opponents had no real basis for opposition, that covenants were possible,
or any kind of a document Council desired to prove that intent was only
for the home which would fit into the existing neighborhood uses.
Mr. Adams im summary for the opposition said Hospital-One Zoning would
remove the need for covenants, that according to the Building Department
the development needed only to discharge drainage into the nearest street,
and that if a Certificate of Need were denied it would be logical to sell
the property for apartment development, if Residential-Three-A zoning were
granted.
Motion by Alderman Abramson "I move the matter be tabled for one week
with a decision to be rendered during the normal course of the meeting
on September 6, 1973." Motion was seconded by Alderman Pepe and passed 6-0.
Discussion of 38 Avenue was resumed and Police Chief Ed Pinson was called
and stated that he had no oplnlon as to 2,3 or 5 lanes, but that "through
traffic with a turn lane" was safer, and the need for a turn lane was the
main issue
Alderman Abramson said that one car out of
a given 1,000 feet of street could be used
of any cars being involved in an accident.
every 1,000 in a given year on
as a measure of the probability
Using figures from a sheet
MINUTES - August 3D, 1973 - Continued
-13-
of accident statistics given him by Chief Pinson, he stated that
the probability for Wadsworth and Kipling was about the same. The pro-
bability for 38 Avenue west of Wadsworth was slightly less and that of
38 Avenue east of Wadsworth was about double that of Wadsworth and Kipling.
He said that changing 38 Avenue west of Wadsworth to be the same in width
and number of lanes as that east of Wadsworth would increase the probability
of accidents.
Alderman Abramson said he had used the following figures Wadsworth north
of 32 Avenue - 34,000 cars per day, average number of accidents per year
for 2 years was 260 or .52 probability, Kipling - 23,000 cars per day
with an average of 169 accidents per year or .5 probability, 38 Avenue _
Wadsworth to Dudley - 11,300 cars per day with an average number of accidents
under 18 or .4 probability and 38 Avenue - east of Wadsworth for the same
distance - 13,300 cars per day, an average of accidents numbering 45 per
year or 1.0 probability. He said the accident probability for cars east
of Wadsworth was more than double that of the area west of Wadsworth.
In answer to a question from Alderman Howard, Alderman Abramson said the
accident probability on 38 Avenue west of Wadsworth would be increased
by the proposed widening.
Chief Pinson said he would like to make comments as a resident of the area
and City Attorney Fox said he was to testify only in his official capacity
ffid it would be "contrary to allow" him to speak as a citizen.
Chief Pinson in answer to questions stated 38 Avenue east of Wadsworth
has 9 foot lanes, 38 Avenue west of Wadsworth has 11 foot lanes, narrowness
had contributed to accidents east of Wadsworth He added
1. Mowing the brush back had reduced the rate west of Wadsworth
and enforcement had contributed.
2. Pavement should extend
3. There should be proper
4. Cars could stop faster
to curb line and
curb, gutter and
on pavement than
should be striped.
sidewalk.
on gravel.
Brian Moss stated Lutheran was the only general purpose hospital so traffic
would increase and there was no way to get a snow plow in and out with
curbs and this affected safety.
Alderman Howard stated the task force report indicated 71% contacted
wanted some widening - that 43% had said 38 Avenue and 48% had said
44 Avenue and 20% had said none should be widened. He said the over-
whelming majority wanted streets widened.
Attorney McCollister stated those opposing change Order No. 1 also were
for widening, so they too were in the majority, and that they favored
widening but only to three lanes.
Mayor Anderson asked for an executive session for a finding of fact.
Motion by Alderman Hulsey "Based on testimony and evidence before the
City Council I move that the Council adopt the following finding of fact
and accept Change Order Numbered One to that certain Contract, captioned
P.W. 73-02. Finding of Fact
1. That Lutheran Hospital is located at approximately 8300 West
38th Avenue, which is west of Wadsworth Boulevard and within project P.W. 73-02.
2. That Lutheran Hospital is the only hospital in the County of
Jefferson serving the public.
3. That within the last two and one-half to three year period of
time, approximately 43 automobile accidents occurred on West 38th Avenue
between Wadsworth Boulevard and Estes Street.
4. That a great number of these automobile accidents occurred at or
near the hospital and as a result of people entering or leaving the hospital
property.
5. That many of these automobile accidents involved personal injury.
MINUTES - August 30, 1973 - Continued
-14-
6. That emergency vehicles attempting to gain entrance to
Lutheran Hospital via West 38th Avenue, are seriously impeded by the
existing road condition, that additional lanes over and above those
depicted on the original P.W. 73-02 plans are necessary to alleviate
this problem.
7. That the current two lane road does not adequately provide
for the public health, safety and welfare.
8. That engineering and State of Colorado data furnished this
Council concerning traffic flow and count indicates that a minimum
of four lanes are necessary to accomodate automobile traffic on West
38th Avenue west of Wadsworth and at least to the hospital.
9. That the reconstruction of West 38th Avenue between Wadsworth
Boulevard and Estes Street originally set forth in Project P.W. 73-02
does not adequately provide for or protect the public health, safety
and welfare.
10. That if West 38th Avenue were reconstructed as depicted in
the original P.W. 73-02 plans, the existing storm sewer and catch basins,
placed at public expense, would be damaged or clogged during storms
resulting in expenditure of additional public funds to correct the defect.
11. That reconstruction of West 38th Avenue as depicted in Change
Order Number One will eliminate or reduce the damage and clogging of the
storm sewer with the resulting reduction of necessary expenditures of
public funds in the future
12. That a careful examination of all of the evidence presented
to Council indicates that the public health, safety and welfare would
be endangered by continuing project P.W. 73-02 as depicted in the original
plans.
13. That the public health, safety and welfare would be enhanced
and protected by accepting change order Number One.
14. That an impartial survey conducted by the Wheat Ridge Citizen's
Task Force, dated August 30, 1973, shows that a majority of the citizens
of Wheat Ridge, favor widening some major streets, that West 38th Avenue
and West 44th Avenue, according to the survey, are considered by the
largest number of citizens of the City of Wheat Ridge, as streets that
should be so widened to improve traffic flow.
15. That the Mayor of the City of Wheat Ridge be requested and
authorized to execute Change Order Number One to Project P.W. 73-02 as
quickly as possible." Motion was seconded by Alderman Pepe.
Alderman Abramson stated he did not see how Council could find safety
in this Motion that numbers 1 and 2. were not relevant, No.9 was
not proved, that No. 10. the possible clogging of storm sewers was not
a welfare matter, and that there was not "one grain of evidence to back
up No. 12. when the expert had admitted it was a trade off."
Question was called and Motion passed 4-2. Aldermen Abramson and Cavarra
voted "nay "
Alderman Pepe moved to adjourn.
Alderman Hulsey said he had a matter to bring up, and Alderman Cavarra
said she'd like to propose a compromise on 38 Avenue.
Mavor Anderson said he would take Alderman Hulsey's comment because Mr.
Hulsey had mentioned it to him earlier and then Alderman Pepe's Motion to
adjourn.
Alderman Hulsey said a "monstrosity was being constructed at 4669 DudleV~
a 3-story garage behind a house and made the following Motion "I move
that the City take steps for injunctive relief to halt construction."
Motion was seconded by Alderman Howard.
In answer to question from Alderman Cavarra as to whether or not there was
a specific violation, Alderman Hulsey said the permit was for one story.
Motion passed 5-1. Alderman Pepe voted "nay."
Motion to adjourn passed 4-2. Aldermen Abramson and Cavarra voted "nay."
Meeting was adjourned at 2 35 a.m
./.(>~ ~/</~
~~,-7'k4.~
Louise F Turner, City Clerk
~'l. ./?I/--~ "'E- -
MINUTES - ~gust 3D, 1973 - Page 15.
F 1 uAL r-';LFCj~T
nF'
LJ,-jEI-i T R ILlLt: CI TI ZEiJ' 5 T t=\SK FORCE
August 30, 1973
On January 12, 1973 staff members of the Ci~y government adopted a
Resolution as~ing City Council to form a Citizen's Task Force. This
task force of twenty-one members was to study the opinions and ideas
of all citizens and determine goals and priorities for the City. On
the 15th of March City Council passed the Resolution, and applica-
tions were accepted until April 15th with appointments made the night
of April 19th.
The first meeting was held Tuesday, May 1, at Everitt Junior High
School. Nancy Snow was made Chairwoman pro tem with r1arilyn Forney
acting as Secretary pro tem. Meeting nights were changed to Mondays.
At the next meeting Ron Davis was elected Chairman with Anthony Sargent
elected as Vice-Chairm~n, and Marilyn Forney elected as Secretary.
Also, a simple set of By-laws was adopted that night.
At the meeting of May 14th five sub-committees were formed for easier
management. They were 1) Land Use, Commerce, and Industry,
2) Public Works and Public Safety, 3) Parks, Recreation, and Com-
munity Service, 4) Local Government, and 5) Transportation. A
week later a Survey Committee was formed. The function of this
committee was to take the input from the other sub-committees, to
submit a questionnaire for a survey, and determine the method of
sampling for this survey
During the following weeks many of the department heads and elected
oFficiels wer2 interviewed. A public meeting was held in the Council
Chambers on June 14th.
The Task Force obtained the serVlces of Dr. Dan SchIer of the
University of Colorado as a proFeSSional advisor and to program the
survey and tabulate it. Ben Theis provided a map of the City
r;L
J -.J Ui I~-"
" elTI - I~ r" ,c_YC~
.,
t~\/id~,.J i
~ twsrltY-G 2 neighbJrlJJ~3 In
o:=,d~r tiJ fL.:,t;-lPI' l"I::.J! /-'::' T;-',CO
- .....-j-'-' ,-,!I~
3_lrvev r~5LjLt~ if n~C~332r~~ ~i^ti-fGLlr volunt2~rs ~Br2 r~c~uit2d
for dooI'-t:J-door d21i,./2l:V 2ild pick-u:J oF' the s~r\ 2YS
Fi~8 hundred and eightV-si\ housEholds, picked at rvndom by computer
from the 11,724 households in Wheat Ridge, ~8re o21ivereo sur~e{s.
Of these 586 sur~eys, 439 (74.8%) were returned completed, 31 (5.3%)
were not delivered due to vacancy or non-existing addresses, 61 (10.4%)
were re~u3sd, and 56 (9.5%) were either unable to be delivered or
unable to be picked up. The completed surveys were then collected and
transferred to IBM comp~ter cards for computer ~nalys~s.
In addition, questionnaires were made availab18 at the City Holl and
a copy of the questionnaire was printed in the local paper. A total
of 129 volunteer surveys ware returned as of August 27, 1973. The
results of the volunte3r returns will b2 t~buloted and 3n~lyzed
separately from the random-sampled returns.
Attached is 8 copy of th3 survey with the final computed percentages
inserted
Also attached is a brief addendum of the uard differences,
and a complete breakdown by warda will ba available later. Some
interpretation of thesa figures LS gi~8n hara. Howe~er, it should be
mentioned that interpretation is an individual thing, and when each
question in the survey was answered by someone, he or she interpreted
that question according to their own knOWledge or personal beliefs.
The same holds true when someone reads the answers. On that basis,
breakdown of the questlons and answers in the survey lS 3S follows
1}2 - Rating Wheat Ridge. Eighty-five percent of the people
rate Wheat Ridge as a good to excellent place to live, and
this would seem to be especially high considering that 43%
hove been here rlve years or lass.
3,4 - Full-time Administrator. A large majorlt~ fovor a full-
tir:i2 2diilinistI'aTcl'] but a 13 aL~:; no Opl.nlOn i71igh t SilLJ~ SU:2
MINUTES - r 'ust 30, 1973 - Page 16.
FI --\L pC-"rli T n L! iA
J _ =- C 1 T [ :. i:.: I'~ I '-~ I I~ I
'--
-3
lac~ of' ~ncul~d~e 0 this iS3~e
,f, 31igltl'1 hiqh2~ p2rc2nt~J]e
favcr3 an B12ctej 012)J~ over ~ pTofassionJl a~~lnist~ator.
S, 6. - Elected Terms. Unque3tion~bly people want two-year
1 ,- ,
2 =:=~l 8 L2~m:J...
St=;q2rlng ~f th3 t~~83 S~~G3 to 08 p~e~2~r2j~
7. - Full-time Attorney. A ~ery high percentage are of no
opinion, and this may indicate some lack of knowledge on
this question, but nearly half oppose a full-time attorney.
8. - City Hall Compley. The closeness of percentages here
indicate a controversial issue. Nearly same amount of people
are content with present facilities as favor purchase of
Wheat Ridge Junior High School. Building of a new complex is
definitely out. The question on capital improvements (#19)
substantiates that a City Hall is the most undesirable.
There is a significant percentage of no opinion and no
answers.
9, 10. - Rating Present Government. We are of the opinion
that a very high percentage of "don't knowU probably reflects
general public apathy and lack of knowledge and experience to
overall government operation.
At this time the difference between questions #12, #13, #14 and #15
should be noted. Question #12 asks the citizen to rate present
services, #13 asks ~h2th3~ they shc~ld 02 inc~eased or decreased,
#14 asks what service the citizen deems most important, and #15
asks if they are willing to pay for it.
12. Municipal Ser~Lc3s. Police and public saFety, and en-
forcement of traffic laws are considered the most outstanjing
of city services. Maintenance of city par~s is a distant
third. Considarad th2 poorest are street maintan3nce, public
trGnsportation, Rfld d~ain6g2 2nd flooj ccntr~l~ Weed GnD
litter control shows 3 lorge negative response. High paTcen-
II ~L j t.l" ~ -:- LJ;- LJ,~;=~\:- qIL.- -~~ CITI7 - I ~ TJ\5 I F-U'Cl
_0._
t' ::-:!w
"":=1 '
..J C riel opin2.rJil
I. .
Sll=:J~S In
2==:!.JisititJn
~f opel space, land-
US2 pl~nning, air pollution cJntrol acquisition of pa~k
lands, and development of par~ lands.
1 ~
_.0
- i\;L!;licipal S::::;I'\/.:..C3S..
The s2~vic8 803L stro~gl~ i~d_c2t=d
for increase is street maintenance. Drainage and flood
control, and public transportation follow in that order.
Interestingly enough, weed and litter control is another
service people want increased. Citizens want police and
public safety, enforcement of traffic laws, maintenance of
parks, and street lighting maintained at present level. No
one wants anything decreased. Again no opinion runs high
for acquisition of open space, land-use planning, air pollu-
tion control, and acquisition of park lands.
14, 15. - 1'1unicipal Services. Street maintenance, poli ce
and publi c safety, drainage and flood control, and public trans-
portation, in that order, are what is important to the citizens.
Further, that is what they are willing to pay for. It should
be pointed out here about a 50% response to question #15
indicates an unwillingness to commit themselves to increased
taxes.
16, 17, and 22. - Taxes. If the voters indicate an additional
source of revenue is necessary, an increased sales tax is much
more popular than an increased property tax. There is strong
support for a tax rebate for the elderly. The survey comments
indicate a reluctance to commit themselves to taxes of any kind.
19, 20 and 21. - Capital Improvements. Major road and bridge
improvements and major drainage development ran a strong one
and two in all three of these questions. Again, only half
the citizens answered #21 which involves increasing taxes.
DecsIopment of par~ land and a recreation center are somewhat
desirClbIe.
MINUTES - r 'ust 30, 1973 - Page 17.
~- i. !.!4L Pl~~ _ - T [;I=- IJriE,c.. T ~
- CITL~= ~ T~~h ~G ~~
-J-
2L~ 25. - L2rld-U2~ ~l~n_ Thr2g-fourths of thB pe~112 erg not
aware of a l~nd-uaa plan.
26 _ - Densi ty. A lac';]e majori t'J believe in density coiltrol
and from lata~ qL23~io~s ii~dic3t2 that h~gh d3nsLtv is
what they oppose.
28. - Ailnexatioil. rJ82rly half say "yes" in favor of annexa-
tion, while 24% say "no", and 23% have no opinion.
29. - Neighborhood Problems. About all we leariled here is
that Wheat Ridge does not smell. There is some small concern
over animal control.
3D. - Neighborhood Services. Bus service is the most desired
neighborhood service. There are as many people opposed to
additional neighborhood parks and recreational facilities as
favor them. High percentage of no opinion and no answers on
health services probably indicates question ambiguity. This
question should be more fully evaluated in terms of the
twenty-one neighborhoods.
31. - Land Development. There is not a majority of people
for anything, not surprising however, they favor parks and
single-family dwellings. They found streets and doubles to
be about right. They want less multi-family dwellings.
Nearly half are satisfied with the present amount of commer-
ci al faci 1i ti es.
34. - Density. Citizens generally favor decreasing maximum
densities for apartment zoning.
35. - Rezoning R3 and R3A Land. A mejority of citizens fovor
rezoning part of the undeveloped R3 and R3~ land to R2 land,
~J P=i' ~
:- Gj =-.--\ h fi; ~=- r':ITI i= ~ j ~Sl~ F!J IL,
-5-
3nSLU2:'
but a 3uj~t~nti31 carcent either h~d no CDlnlon or did not
to encD~ca~in~ de eloo~3nt O+h3r than O~g-F3mily dwellings,
35. - Encouraging DeJ2lopment. There lS general oPposition
housing for the elderly, and light industry. There is oppo-
sition to heavy industry, commercial development, multi-
family dwellings, and low to moderate-income housing.
32, 33. - Open Space. A majority of people feel that 25%
open space in industrial development is about right. There,
however, seems to be some leaning towards more than the 10%
required of commercial development.
37, 38, and 39. - Flood Plain. Thirty percent of the people
have had serious flooding or drainage problems this year and
about half the populace think the City should purchase flood
plain property for parks. A large majority favor a flood
plain statement attached to deeds.
40, 41. - Drainage System. Responses indicate that the City
should bear a substantial portion of the cost of a drainage
system in already developed areas. In the areas to be
developed, the responses were nearly evenly divided between
the City and developers bearing full cost, and developers
bearing full cost.
43. - Recreaticn. Rated excellent and good are athletic
fields, picnic facilities, and playgrounds. Fair and poor
ratings are generally given to facilities that do not exist
or thet are relatively new. This question needs additional
study.
44. - Recreation Proqrams. The 0ignific3nc2 of the large
nu~ber of no opinion answers is unclear and deserves further
study.
MINUTES - " gust 30, 1973 - Page 18.
"i
!-, r-(... T
:J
_ 7_
L. ~,
I
.
~:r2'J'~=i:::::l F-:--r=_~lit -.-0'-'
,lill
~ciliti2s were desl~-
~~12 tJ ~ m3Jor17y ~ :2J~ Clt ~~ditJ~iu~ city gjn1~3Sium ~~d
Tolls~-s ~ting Tln,. Ih3S~ thE~2 r2ciliti25 ~~r2 further
con5Ld~ ed the moat und25ira~1~. Job p12c3~ant for youth W23
tl ~ 3 ~ ~ricrlt~ fD~1~U3j u 3 CC~Gln2ti~n indoo~-out~Gor
swim~ing pool, adulc education service, and senior citizen's
center.
48.- Transportation. Apparently c~tizens feel that all are
irilportant.
49, 50, and 51. - Street Widening. A majority of the people
favor widening some streets. There is 3 stronger feeling for
widening East-West streets, rather than North-South streets.
Of these, W. 44th Avenue and W. 38th Avenue received the
strongest response
Summary Citizens find Wheat Ridge a good place to live, but are
unaware of a land-use plan, and express some displeasure with quality
of development permitted and zoning in general. They are also unfam-
iliar with the policies governing the everyday operations of tha City.
They tend, in large part, to favor low density (single-family dwallings
as opposed to multi-family dwellings). They favor development of
housing for the elderly, and oppose low to moderate-income housing.
They might favor annexation, if selective. They want something done
about drainage and this is a high priority item.
They favor a full-time ad~inistretor, two-year terms for elected
officials, and a part-time attorney. They are undecided about the
purchase of a City hall, and at this time would prefer to see any
capital improvements go into streets and bridqas, 2nd drainage
improvements""
They wont increased public transportation includ~ng increased bus
~2rVlce, tnBV tJant to U~d~l or impro~2 s~m3 t~~roughf~rBs, 2~d
lil.L2L
,-
I Lr
~ ~r T
_Lll L
C TTT l__
f.J T qS~
~r" -: :-
i '--' --.J!_
- -J-
traffic
112', uJ~J-'-~ Ii ,~ sum", ~FI' isions i--:=]Je 1'0, PGd=3~i"-'-Gn3 Cind bLcl,cl"
l"epaiE, s~=2~ing and cl~3ning, and snaG remGv8l. This s~alds 2S
They want better maintenance of streets including actual street
a top priority now. They are pleased with their police and public
safety, and do not want it decreased but want it maintained at
present levels. Animal control and weed and litter control are
also of Some concern.
They Want parks and recreational facilities, but not in their own
neighborhood. They, on the whole, seem less concerned with the
acquisition and development of parks than some of the other City
functions. Top priority items under recreation would be job
placement for youth, a combination indoor-outdoor swimming pool,
and facilities for senior citizens.
Most City services, as well as decisions on zoning and development
are not rated as very good at this time. There seems to be a gen-
eral dissatisfaction with the way things are going. There is a
definite resistance to any increase in taxes.
Recommendations Top priority at this time is definitely improve-
ment of streets and drainage. A city-wide drainage plan with some
widening of main thoroughfares, and a positive up-grading of all
services connected with streets and drainage is a must. Street
improvement programs should be carefully integrated with drainage
control.
The task force strongly requests that City Council recommend to the
RTD that introcity transportation be considered and implemented as
soon as possible or concurrent with the inter-regional de,elopment.
Public interest in pedestrian facilities and bicycle paths is grow-
ing and must be included in any cmnprehellsil/e p12n.
MINUTES - Au~ ~t 30, 1973 - Page 19.
"J .:..
-'
r '"
,
~ , -
1 ~ _ _
I.L F:: -
l .) -:; J ll.JC; ,'-' ~
cJ ~i
~~ _J:t-
;,-"'---i::i; ! Li-;=iJ t-:: c!...-:
,::.-1 -.!.., ~ -I
l :J=: ;= _~__ i:
7"' ~~: 1
f ;] IJ
r i:~ CiJ.J,l r- I
if] =11
,I. .
~r" - -
J
ri tize ~ ~-=l;o
f~ J~~d ~!~l,i-!q p3Cp__ 2~3r~ th~t
r :l~--: \f
GL-"'::r- ~ :j": 'lrl~-=;:"~-'- _f: th~ f'.ll'j~ ol-ii.il~ r-1G--, \::;:- 02r'JL...!S2~::' ~
Ul.r(J..cL.l-'--j c;:ld ~ln3s1b1.8 il~8;F3.11G1 iJf' 8:1-='o]:L2rnent of t11.i..3 on the c..ir-V
level, we sUgg83t that the City of Uhest Ridge Forward a recommsndation
to the Stste Legislature aaking them to consider a Dill making this
~~njato?y st2te~ide.
The t~m~ for hiring a full-time 3d:l~~istrator is now. Citizens are
discouraged with the attit~de5 of tn3 Citj and its 3mplo~ees. A stro,g
ad~inistrator, prop2rl~ BY-3TlBnc2d snd educated is nSBded to suggest
dirsction for the City, to l83d its staff and emplo/gas, and to
generate pr~de in all facets of daily City operations.
The purch~s8 of Wheat Ridge Junior ~i_gh as a Clty com~lBx will requlre
some good selling and publiC relations work on the part of the City.
People do not want a "m"rrble palace". It must be Slown that the
building will provide the space so badly needed by the police, will
provide the many facilities wanted, and is a goed bargain for the
pri ce.
Decisions on zoning and development have been subject to m~ch criti-
cism. Althouqh citizGns show a preference to single-family dwellings,
they, on the other hand, do not want an increase in taxes. It becomes
naC2S32rYJ therefore, to en~ourag2 qualitv co~m2rci21 and industrial
development. It is jU3t 33 importa~t to B1COJr~gd it in the right
proportion and in the right places
On tha oth2r S~dB of the coin,
single-Family dwelllngs are not goin] to be developed if the City
d023 no.t moderate its p~5ition Ofl m3n~ of t
. ".L
~ rRqulrem~n~s l~ now
lmpOSBS on dev8lope~s.
It ~owld not seem advis3bl~ to attgspt 3n lncr23SB Ln t=xes of 3n)
ind a~ th_~ tLn2~ The CLt\ n~2~S ~2J ~~~ to p~ov d3 t~.~ n~n\
,
'-'.l....
-'
- '\ i r- J
~ th..:: r:LLi -
1-1., 1'1 C~ il j
"' nj
:; _l: _! I -;
eeL ~
'-3 tJ
07'"J .:... _
-~ --4
L_ L I , -
U '0 '0 G , J ~ S ~ - ~
~ , C , , ~ - -, 1 r
, - c "'
~~8 qJ' L:
~jIL)OI' t-ch l;J~-;j II
Ar:- I p-~ .Jdlng of S~I'\';'t__=':~ j~1..- It L)":::;;
~i13 dGui' Tel' 12lLl ta -=:~ i;- Ci2j Is"]ll~f 3i'2 need2:1...
The members of the tos~ force would like to close chis report with
this advLc8. This surte~ is not a mandate, but an indication as to
wnat the people want. When determinLng direction, use public opinion
G\!ailQbl2 t8-OhnologY1 '-1 32t of prio::::'itJ...8S, and "good old common S8fse
Ron Davis, Chairman
Larry f'1eri<1
A. J. Sargent
Dougal G:ruham
Damon Swisher
Jim Reyciulds
Dr. Fred WolF
PJancy Sncw
Ben Theis
\1ernon T:ru~
fr8ud" Williams
John B:JGman
r'iarilyn Forney
Betty Winagar
fJ]ary Harloi.u
I van HawIl
Chu=~ Hoc~enb8rry
"Hank" S ti tes
Betty Hosburgh
J2cl- i'L~21on
Can LO\fco