Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout04-28-2025 - City Council Meeting AgendaAGENDA CITY COUNCIL MEETING CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE, COLORADO Monday, April 28, 2025, 6:30 p.m. This meeting will be conducted as a virtual meeting, and in person, at: 7500 West 29th Avenue, Municipal Building, Council Chambers. City Council members and City staff members will be physically present at the Municipal building for this meeting. The public may participate in these ways: 2. Attend the meeting in person at City Hall. Use the appropriate roster to sign up to speak upon arrival. 3. Provide comment in advance at www.wheatridgespeaks.org (comment by noon on April 28, 2025) 4. Virtually attend and participate in the meeting through a device or phone: Click here to pre-register and provide public comment by Zoom (You must preregister before 6:00 p.m. on April 28, 2025) 5. View the meeting live or later at www.wheatridgespeaks.org, Channel 8, or YouTube Live at https://www.ci.wheatridge.co.us/view Individuals with disabilities are encouraged to participate in all public meetings sponsored by the City of Wheat Ridge. The City will upon request, provide auxiliary aids and services leading to effective communication for people with disabilities, including qualified sign language interpreters, assistive listening devices, documents in Braille, and other ways of making communications accessible to people who have speech, hearing, or vision impairments. To request auxiliary aid, service for effective communication, or document in a different format, please use this form or contact ADA Coordinator, (Kelly McLaughlin at ada@ci.wheatridge.co.us or 303-235-2885) as soon as possible, preferably 7 days before the activity or event. CALL TO ORDER PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL OF MEMBERS APPROVAL OF MINUTES Study Session Notes, April 7, 2025 City Council Meeting Minutes, April 14, 2025 APPROVAL OF AGENDA PROCLAMATIONS AND CEREMONIES 1. Proclamation – Municipal Clerk’s Week 2. Proclamation – Older American’s Month PUBLICS’ RIGHT TO SPEAK a. Public may speak on any matter not on the agenda for a maximum of 3 minutes under Publics’ Right to Speak. Please speak up to be heard when directed by the mayor. b. Members of the Public who wish to speak on a Public Hearing item or Decision, Resolution, or Motion may speak when directed by the mayor at the conclusion of the staff report for that specific agenda item. c. Members of the Public may comment on any agenda item in writing by noon on the day of the meeting at www.WheatRidgeSpeaks.org. Comments made on Wheat Ridge Speaks are considered part of the public record. CONSENT AGENDA None PUBLIC HEARINGS AND ORDINANCES ON SECOND READING 1. Council Bill No. 06-2025 – an ordinance approving a city-initiated zone change of the Lutheran Legacy Campus from Planned Hospital Development (PHD), Planned Commercial Development (PCD), Residential-Two (R-2), and Residential-One (R-1) to the Mixed Use – Lutheran Legacy Campus (MU-LLC) zone district ORDINANCES ON FIRST READING 2. Council Bill No. 07-2025 – an ordinance amending the Wheat Ridge Code of Laws concerning membership of the Urban Renewal Authority 3. Council Bill No. 08-2025 – an ordinance amending Chapter 26 of the Wheat Ridge Code of Laws regarding Freestanding Emergency Departments 4. Council Bill No. 09-2025 – an ordinance amending Section 26-646 of the Wheat Ridge Code of Laws regarding Accessory Dwelling Units and making conforming amendments therewith 5. Council Bill No. 10-2025 – an ordinance amending Chapter 26 of the Wheat Ridge Code of Laws regarding Residential Occupancy Limits and making conforming amendments therewith DECISIONS, RESOLUTIONS, AND MOTIONS 6. Resolution 23-2025 – a resolution in opposition of HB25-1220, Regulation of Medical Nutrition Therapy 7. Resolution No. 24-2025 – a resolution in opposition of HB25-1300, Workers’ Compensation Benefits Proof of Entitlement 8. Resolution No. 25-2025 – a resolution in support of SB25-030, Increase Transportation Mode Choice Reduce Emissions CITY MANAGER’S MATTERS CITY ATTORNEY’S MATTERS ELECTED OFFICIALS’ MATTERS City Council Study Session NOTES CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE, COLORADO 7500 WEST 29TH AVENUE, MUNICIPAL BUILDING  APRIL 07, 2025  Note:    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. Eight members of Council were present in Council Chambers for this session.  Before calling the meeting to order, Mayor Starker stated the rules and procedures necessitated by this meeting format.  1. Call to Order Mayor Starker called the Regular City Council Meeting to order at 6:30 p.m. 2. Roll Call Council Members present: Scott Ohm, Rachel Hultin, Amanda Weaver, Korey Stites, Janeece Hoppe, Leah Dozeman (via Zoom) and Dan Larson. Absent: Jenny Snell Also present: City Manager Patrick Goff; Deputy City Manager Allison Scheck, Police Chief Chris Murtha, Parks and Recreation Director Karen O’Donnell, Sr. Deputy City Clerk Margy Greer and many of the Board and Commissions liaisons and members. 3. Public Comment None. 4. 2024 Boards and Commissions Annual Report Management Analyst Cole Haselip introduced the Report stating the focus is on the 2024 accomplishments of each board or commission and the goals for 2025. There are 9 public bodies with 85 volunteers. Each liaison and/or member of each board/commission presented, including the Election Commission, Board of Adjustment, Building Advisory Code Commission, IDEA Committee, the Community Partners Grant Program, Sustainable Wheat Ridge Committee, Park and Recreation Commission, and the Cultural Commission. A question-and-answer period between Council, staff, and members took place after each presentation. 5. Hotel Licensing Update City Manager Patrick Goff stated that Council passed an ordinance regarding the licensing of hotels and within that ordinance, there was a requirement to give an update to Council every 18 months. He then turned the presentation over to Deputy City Manager Allison Scheck and Police Chief Chris Murtha. Scheck gave a brief presentation stating that on July 15, 2019, there was an extended stay lodging ordinance discussion with Council; July 28, 2021, Council gave direction to staff to draft a hotel licensing ordinance and reach out to the community for feedback; October 25, 2021, Council passed Ordinance 1723 enacting the licensing program; and on August 29, 2023, Council passed Ordinance 1771 updating the ordinance. She reviewed the regulations in place for the hotel licensing program. Chief Murtha spoke to the Calls for Service rate, how the rate is determined, and calls which are not counted toward the Calls for Service program. He showed a slide which showed a drastic reduction in Calls for Service to the local hotels from 2022 to 2024. He then went through the list of hotels in Wheat Ridge and their status of safety-initiated efforts. Goff stated that the American Hotel is the process of being purchased, however, until the power grid is improved by Excel Energy and CDOT approves, the purchase is on hold. Scheck stated that Council had approved a partnership with Family Tree using ARPA funds and were able to provide 40 households/64 individuals in long term, permanent housing. She stated it was a great opportunity. Scheck stated that the City will remain vigilant when it comes to ensuring the Hotel licensing program is followed up and maintained. A question-and-answer period followed between Council and staff. Council directed staff to update the application portion of the code to remove the 18-month update requirement and instead provide for updates to Council as necessary. 6. Outdoor Pool Replacement Community Engagement Parks and Recreation Director Karen O’Donnell stated that staff is looking for grants to help with updating the pool at Anderson Park. She then introduced Sara Heisdorffer, Aquatics Supervisor and Brandon Altenburg, Grants and Special Projects Coordinator, who spoke to the specifics regarding the needed replacement of Anderson Pool. Heisdorffer stated that Anderson Pool opened in 1979 and received a facelift in 2008. However, the 2008 renovation was not enough for the heavy commercial use that the pool receives on a regular basis. Therefore, Anderson Pool is reaching its useful life span. She stated that in the next 3-5 years, Anderson Pool would need to be closed or totally replaced. She spoke to the major failing construction issues that are causing the need for a new pool. Altenburg spoke to the timeline for community engagement which includes questions for the community and stakeholders using the pool regarding whether to replace the pool or close the pool. There will be a large public relations component to the timeline as well. They will be asking for feedback from the public while providing them with information about budget limitations and other issues. Council Comments Council Member Hultin stated that the community outreach planned is impressive. She stated it is important for residents to understand the cost of replacement, why it needs to be replaced rather than renovated, and that Council does not have this in their budget moving forward. An entire community effort will be needed to make this happen. Council Member Ohm asked there is an assessment of who are the biggest user groups. Heisdorffer stated while there are not specific numbers for swim groups and others, however, in the summer of 2024,there were just under 25,000 users. Ohm asked about the City of Arvada’s partnership with Jeffco Schools. Heisdorffer stated that that facility hosts Jeffco schools’ swim meets and classes and therefore has been partially paid for by Jeffco Schools. Ohm asked if some other newer amenities at the pool could make it more inviting. Council Member Dozeman stated she hopes the community supports a new facility, as it is important to her and her family as well. She asked if the new pool facility would be the exact same footprint as the current. O’Donnell stated that decision has not been made at this time. Council Member Larson asked if the survey is currently up online. Altenburg said yes. Altenburg stated he could add the estimated cost of design and construction to the website as well. Larson asked about the possibility of approaching a private company for some type of deal to help fund the building of the pool. Goff stated that any private/public partnerships are on the table at this point. 7. Staff(s) Report City Manager Patrick Goff stated the City is working with the car wash daily to help mitigate the noise issues. Chief Murtha stated that they are working with the car wash and trying to keep the neighbors informed of their progress. There is a court date set for the violation hearing. In answer to another question from Ohm, Goff stated that improvements are being made to the shooting range regarding noise mitigation as well. 8. Elected Officials’ Report Mayor and City Council Members stated their pride in the City, thanked staff for their hard work, and reported on events and activities they attended over the past weeks 9. Adjournment There being no further business to come before Council, Mayor Starker adjourned the Study Session at 8:53 p.m. _________________________________ Margy Greer, Sr. Deputy City Clerk _________________________________ Korey Stites, Mayor Pro Tem City Council Meeting Minutes CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE, COLORADO 7500 WEST 29TH AVENUE, MUNICIPAL BUILDING  APRIL 14, 2025  Note:    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. Eight members of Council were present in Council Chambers for this session.  Before calling the meeting to order, Mayor Starker stated the rules and procedures necessitated by this meeting format.  1. Call to Order Mayor Starker called the Regular City Council Meeting to order at 6:30 p.m. 2. Pledge of Allegiance Those present stood and recited the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag. 3. Roll Call Council Members present: Jenny Snell, Scott Ohm, Rachel Hultin, Amanda Weaver, Korey Stites, Janeece Hoppe, Leah Dozeman (via Zoom) and Dan Larson. Absent: None. A quorum was established. Also present: City Manager Patrick Goff; Public Works Director Maria D’Andrea, City Attorney Gerald Dahl, Deputy City Manager Allison Scheck, Police Chief Chris Murtha, Division Chief Eric Kellogg, Parks and Recreation Director Karen O’Donnell, Community Development Director Lauren Mikulak, and Sr. Deputy City Clerk Margy Greer 4. Approval of Minutes Study Session Notes, March 17, 2025 City Council Meeting Minutes, March 24, 2025 Notes and Minutes stood as presented. 5. Approval of Agenda Without objection or correction, the agenda stood as presented. 6. Proclamations A. Mayor Starker April 13-19, 2025, as Animal Care and Control Officer Appreciation Week and read the proclamation into the record. B. Mayor Starker proclaimed April 6-12, 2025, as National Victims’ Rights Week and read the proclamation into the record. C. Mayor Starker proclaimed April 22, 2025, Earth Day and April 25, 2025, as National Arbor Day and read the proclamation into the record. D. Mayor Starker proclaimed April 14, 202,5 as Leave No Trace Awareness Day and read the proclamation into the record. 7. Public’s Right to Speak Bob Timm with the Wheat Ridge Rotary spoke on the Rotary’s 50th Anniversary, the Tree Scholarship Program and other activities Rotary provides for the community. 8. CONSENT AGENDA Council Member Dozeman read the Consent Agenda and corresponding Issue Statements into the record. The Consent Agenda consists of Items 8a through 8c, inclusive. a. Motion to approve the purchase of salt materials for snow and ice control from Independent Salt Company in a total amount not to exceed $135,000 b. Motion to approve the purchase of three Police Department replacement vehicles and installation of lighting and auxiliary equipment in a total amount not to exceed $208,670 c. Resolution No. 15-2025 – a resolution amending the 2025 Fiscal Year General Fund budget to reflect the approval of a supplemental budget appropriation in the amount of $25,000 for the purpose of accepting a grant from Colorado Gives Foundation Council Member Dozeman made a motion to adopt the Consent Agenda as read into the Record. It was seconded Mayor Pro Tem Stites. Vote: 8 Ayes. 0 Nays. The motion carried. PUBLIC HEARING ORDINANCES ON SECOND READING 9. Council Bill No. 06-2025 – an ordinance approving a city-initiated zone change of the Lutheran Legacy Campus from Planned Hospital Development (PHD), Planned Commercial Development (PCD), Residential-Two (R-2), and Residential-One (R-1) to the Mixed Use-Lutheran Legacy Campus (MU-LLC) zone district Council Member Weaver read the Bill Title into the record. Mayor Starker stated it was an ordinance on second reading and opened the public hearings. He stated that the City had received a protest on the matter and that affects the procedures to be followed. City Attorney Jerry Dahl explained the legal protest, which was received by the City, stating that the City Charter establishes the right to adjacent property owners to protest the rezoning and went on to explain that the legal protest was found to be valid between first and second reading of the ordinance and therefore the public hearing must be continued until the next council meeting. In addition, in order for the ordinance to be adopted, it must pass with a 3/4 vote (supermajority), which means six affirmative votes from council members. Regarding public notification of the continuance of the public hearing to April 28, 2025, notice will be posted and published in the newspaper, staff is reposting signage on the property and mailing notices to surrounding property owners. Dahl stated that a motion is not necessary to continue the hearing, as it is continued automatically by the Code and therefore Council considered the next Agenda item. ORDINANCES ON FIRST READING None. DECISIONS, RESOLUTIONS, AND MOTIONS 10. Resolution No. 20-2025- a resolution of the City of Wheat Ridge, Colorado approving a Memorandum of Understanding concerning the Jeferson County Community Crisis Response Pilot program. Council Member Snell read the Resolution Title and Issue Statement into the record. Division Chief Eric Kellogg gave a brief PowerPoint Presentation and stated that the resolution is for an MOU among the City, Jefferson County Sheriff’s Office, West Metro Fire Protection District, Town of Mountain View, City of Edgewater, Intermountain Health, Jefferson Center for Mental Health and the Jefferson County Public Health. He stated the MOU will allow the city of Wheat Ridge and Wheat Ridge Police Department to utilize multiple resources, both internal and external to assist in crisis management, homelessness, and case management. Council Member Snell made a motion to approve Resolution No. 20-2025. It was seconded by Council Member Hoppe. Council Members spoke in favor of the resolution. Vote: 8 Ayes. 0 Nays. The motion carried. 11. Resolution No. 21-2025 -a resolution of support of an application to the Jefferson County Open Space and Conservation Partnership program. Mayor Pro Tem Stites read the Title of the Resolution and Issue Statement into the record. Brandon Altenburg, Grant and Special Project Administrator, gave a brief presentation on the application process and spoke to the parcel under consideration at 4150 Kipling Street. Mayor Pro Tem Stites made a motion to adopt Resolution No. 21-2025. It was seconded by Council Member Ohm. Council Members spoke in favor of the resolution. Vote: 8 Ayes. 0 Nays. The motion carried. 14. City Manager’s Matters None. 15. City Attorney’s Matters None. 16. Elected Official’s Matters Mayor and City Council Members stated their pride in the City, thanked staff for their hard work, and reported on events and activities they attended over the past weeks. 17. Motion for Executive Session Council Member Ohm made a motion to go into Executive Session for a conference with the City Manager, City Attorney, and appropriate staff under Charter Section 5.7(1) and CRS 24-6-402(4)(b), for legal advice on specific legal questions: a contract dispute between the City and Concrete Works Colorado involving the Wadsworth widening project. It was seconded by Council Member Hoppe. Vote: 8 Ayes. 0 Nays. The motion carried. 18. Adjournment After a brief recess, the Executive session commenced at 7:35 pm, and concluded at 8:27pm, whereupon the meeting was adjourned. _________________________________ Margy Greer, Sr. Deputy City Clerk _________________________________ Korey Stites, Mayor Pro Tem PROCLAMATION 56TH ANNUAL PROFESSIONAL MUNICIPAL CLERK’S WEEK MAY 4-10, 2025 WHEREAS, The Office of the Professional Municipal Clerk, a time honored and vital part of local government exists throughout the world, and WHEREAS, The Office of the Professional Municipal Clerk is the oldest among public servants, and WHEREAS, The Office of the Professional Municipal Clerk provides the professional link between the residents, the local governing bodies and agencies of government at other levels, and WHEREAS, Professional Municipal Clerks have pledged to be ever mindful of their neutrality and impartiality, rendering equal service to all. WHEREAS, The Professional Municipal Clerk serves as the information center on functions of the local government and community. WHEREAS, Professional Municipal Clerks continually strive to improve the administration of the affairs of the Office of the Professional Municipal Clerk through participation in education programs, seminars, workshops and the annual meetings of their state, provincial, county and international professional organizations. WHEREAS, it is most appropriate that we recognize the accomplishments of the Office of the Professional Municipal Clerk. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that I Bud Starker Mayor of the City of Wheat Ridge, and the Wheat Ridge City Council do hereby declare the week of May 4-10, 2025, as Professional Municipal Clerks Week and further extend appreciation to our Professional Municipal Clerk Margy Greer and to all the Professional Municipal Clerks for the vital services they perform and their exemplary dedication to the communities they represent IN WITNESS WHEREOF, On this 28th day of April 2025. Margy Greer, Sr. Deputy City Clerk Bud Starker, Mayor PROCLAMATION OLDER AMERICANS’ MONTH MAY 2025 WHEREAS, Older Americans, those 65 years and older, represent 17% of the population of the United States and 21% of the population of Wheat Ridge; and WHEREAS, Older Americans are often faced with negative stereotypes and attitudes that can lead to marginalization; and WHEREAS, Older Americans are valued members of their families and their communities and whose wisdom and experience can benefit younger persons; and WHEREAS, Older Americans often serve as mentors and guides and share their knowledge of traditional customs and cultural practices; and WHEREAS, Older Americans often provide unpaid caregiving services for family members, friends, and neighbors; and WHEREAS, Older Americans are frequently volunteers providing their time and skills to various organizations and causes. WHEREAS, Older Americans help provide economic stability through their spending habits and investments. WHEREAS, the theme of Older Americans’ Month for 2025 is “Flip the Script” and it draws attention to transforming how society perceives, talks about, and approaches aging. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that I Bud Starker Mayor of the City of Wheat Ridge, and the Wheat Ridge City Council do hereby declare the month of May 2025, as OLDER AMERICANS’ MONTH IN WITNESS WHEREOF, On this 28th day of April 2025. Margy Greer, Sr. Deputy City Clerk Bud Starker, Mayor ITEM NUMBER:1 DATE: April 28, 2025 REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION COUNCIL BILL NO. 06-2025 TITLE: AN ORDINANCE APPROVING A CITY-INITIATED ZONE CHANGE OF THE LUTHERAN LEGACY CAMPUS FROM PLANNED HOSPITAL DEVELOPMENT (PHD), PLANNED COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT (PCD), RESIDENTIAL-TWO (R-2), AND RESIDENTIAL-ONE (R-1) TO THE MIXED USE – LUTHERAN LEGACY CAMPUS (MU-LLC) ZONE DISTRICT ☒PUBLIC HEARING ☐BIDS/MOTIONS ☐RESOLUTIONS ☐ORDINANCES FOR 1st READING ☒ORDINANCES FOR 2nd READING QUASI-JUDICIAL ☐YES ☒NO ISSUE: In order to implement the Lutheran Legacy Campus Master Plan, the city intends to legislatively rezone the former hospital campus to the newly-created Mixed Use – Lutheran Legacy Campus (MU-LLC) zone district. PRIOR ACTION: On May 13, 2024, City Council passed Resolution 26-2024 in support of initiating a legislative zone change for the Lutheran Legacy Campus. The legislative zone change is based on the Lutheran Legacy Campus Master Plan, adopted by City Council on October 25, 2021, through creation of a new mixed use zone district specifically for the campus. After several study sessions in 2024, the new zone district, called Mixed Use – Lutheran Legacy Campus (MU-LLC) was approved by City Council at a public hearing on January 27, 2025. The next step in the process is to rezone the campus to the new MU-LLC zone district. City Council approved this ordinance on first reading on March 24, 2025. A motion was made by Councilmember Weaver and seconded by Councilmember Stites and was approved by a vote of 7 to 0. The City Council second reading (public hearing) was originally scheduled for April 14, 2025 but was automatically continued to April 28, 2025 due to a valid protest against Council Action Form – Lutheran Rezoning April 28, 2025 Page 2 the rezoning that was submitted to the city. A memo regarding the protest is attached. FINANCIAL IMPACT: The proposed ordinance is not anticipated to have a direct financial impact on the city. As part of future development, building permit revenue will be received by the city. BACKGROUND: Subject Property The Lutheran Legacy Campus is just under 100 acres in size and currently contains many hospital-related buildings including West Pines Behavioral Health, Collier hospice facility, various medical office buildings, multiple accessory buildings such as the blue house and chapel, and most notably, the original Lutheran Hospital building. Intermountain Health (formerly SCL Health) moved their operations in August 2024 to the new Lutheran hospital building at the Clear Creek Crossing development, approximately three miles west of this site. The site is currently zoned primarily Planned Hospital District (PHD), and permitted uses include only hospitals, hospice care, and accessory uses customarily associated with a medical campus. There are small portions of other zone districts on the campus: one medical office building zoned Planned Commercial Development (PCD), and some lots along Dudley Street zoned Residential-Two (R-2) and Residential-One (R-1) that were platted in the 1940s as part of the hospital development but never developed. Master Plan The city began preparing for the hospital’s departure from the Legacy Campus over four years ago in early 2021 by facilitating a master planning process. From April 2021 to October 2021, community members were asked to share their vision for the future of the Legacy Campus. That public process culminated in a plan that outlines key community expectations and goals: • provide public open space, • provide a mix of housing types, • integrate existing assets like the chapel, blue house, and rocky mountain ditch, • ensure development on the perimeter serves as a buffer and transition between the campus and existing adjacent neighborhoods, • integrate office and civic uses, and • provide neighborhood-serving retail that complements the area but doesn’t compete with economic development efforts at nearby Wadsworth and 38th Avenue. Ultimately, City Council approved the Lutheran Legacy Campus Master Plan in October 2021. The plan outlines the next steps required to bring this vision to reality, and that has been the focus of the last year and half. Council Action Form – Lutheran Rezoning April 28, 2025 Page 3 Legislative Zone Change The purpose of the legislative zone change is to eliminate the current zoning designations and instead apply one zone district that aligns with the vision in the Master Plan—allowing a mix of land uses (residential, office, civic, retail, and cultural), allowing a mix of housing types, and requiring open space and multimodal facilities. Section 26-113 of the City Code specifically allows the city to initiate zone changes. There are two types of zone changes allowed by City Code: city-initiated and private. The most common type of zone change in Wheat Ridge is a private rezoning which is initiated by private property owners. These requests are considered “quasi-judicial,” and decision makers are prohibited from discussing the merits of a zone change with each other or the public outside of the public hearing. A zone change proposal that is city-initiated or legislative (these terms can be used interchangeably) is one that is initiated by City Council. This is different than a private rezoning because legislative actions are those which affect the general public and decision makers can engage in public discussion. While not frequent in Wheat Ridge, the city has a history of legislative rezonings including along portions of Wadsworth and W. 38th Avenue. Like those corridors, the Wheat Ridge community has a broad vested interest in the Lutheran Legacy Campus, and this is memorialized in the Master Plan. To achieve the vision of any long-range plan, zoning rules need to be aligned with a plan. This is why legislative zone changes often follow planning efforts, and this is why the Lutheran Legacy Campus is an ideal candidate for such action. Instead of waiting for a private zone change request, the city knows best and can apply the zoning regulations that align with the community’s vision. Section 26-113 of the Wheat Ridge Code of Laws describes the process and requirements associated with a legislative zone change. Specifically, it describes these key points: • City-initiated rezonings may be made with or without consent from affected property owners. • City-initiated rezonings may be to any zone district. • The process of a city-initiated zone change is formally commenced by adoption of a resolution that describes the general area of the proposed rezoning and the intended purpose and objectives to be achieved by the rezoning. (Completed by passage of Resolution 26-2024) • Similar to a private zone change request, a series of public meetings are required: o Neighborhood meeting (Completed on September 17, 2024) o Planning Commission public hearing (February 20, 2025): recommended for approval by a vote of 6-0. o City Council first reading (March 24, 2025): approved on first reading by a vote of 7-0. o City Council public hearing (April 14, 2025) Council Action Form – Lutheran Rezoning April 28, 2025 Page 4 Proposed MU-LLC Zoning The new MU-LLC zoning regulations were approved by City Council on January 27, 2025, at a public hearing. The specific standards of the MU-LLC zoning were previously discussed with City Council at its July 15, 2024, and October 9, 2024 study sessions, with additional study sessions at Planning Commission. The Planning Division, with assistance from the City Attorney, developed a custom zone district for the Lutheran Legacy Campus which aligns with the recommendations of the Lutheran Legacy Campus Master Plan. The zoning regulations are based on the current mixed-use zoning regulations in Article XI of Chapter 26 but are highly customized to include specific recommendations and requirements of the master plan, including: • Low-density overlay around the campus perimeter which limits permitted uses in these areas to low-density housing (single-unit or duplex) and lowers building heights. • Requires 20% of the campus to be designated as public open space for the benefit of the entire community (double the standard for other mixed-use zones). • Taller buildings (up to 5 stories) including apartments will only be permitted in the center of the campus, not on the edges. • Important community assets like the chapel and Blue House will be required to be preserved. • Landscape buffers and large setback requirements to protect existing residential neighborhoods to the east and south. These regulations are built into the MU-LLC zoning requirements. Permitted uses, such as the type of housing allowed or building heights, will vary depending on the location within the campus. The MU-LLC regulations specifically take into account the surrounding areas and include transition and buffer requirements to ensure limited impacts on adjacent existing residential neighborhoods. Charter Amendment Wheat Ridge is one of the few communities that restricts building height in its City Charter, and an amendment to the City Charter was recommended by the Master Plan to achieve several goals within the plan. In short, the low density overlay and open space requirements in the MU-LLC zoning are made possible by allowing clustering of taller buildings in the middle of the campus. On November 5, 2024, Wheat Ridge voters approved a Charter amendment with 67% support to modify the permitted building heights on the campus based on recommendations from the Master Plan. Public Process and Public Benefit The 100-acre property is more than just centrally located in Wheat Ridge; it is also central to the fabric and foundation of this community. Over the past 100 years, the Council Action Form – Lutheran Rezoning April 28, 2025 Page 3 hospital campus has evolved tremendously, impacting the lives of countless people in Wheat Ridge and beyond. Many residents have deep emotional connections to this place, recalling births, losses, and major life events. For the past four years, public involvement has been at the heart of planning and decision-making for the campus’s next chapter. The Master Plan itself is a community-created document. In 2024, the public was reengaged with the drafting of the zoning regulations and the presentation of a ballot question, including: • 3 public open houses • 4 intercept events • 3 presentations for community groups • 12 public meetings before City Council and Planning Commission • The relaunch of a project website (which saw over 13,000 visits in the last year) • A citywide postcard mailing • Several stories in print and television media • 2 rounds of official polling The Master Plan and MU-LLC zoning aim to create a realistic future—one that balances the most likely future land uses with the values of this community. While it is unlikely that every Wheat Ridge resident will embrace every aspect of this vision, at 100 acres in size and with a wide range of goals, there is something for everyone within the plan and the zoning: • Acres of dedicated publicly accessible open space • An improved and publicly accessible trail along the alignment of the Rocky Mountain Ditch • New sidewalks along Dudley Street and along both sides of Lutheran Parkway and Lutheran Parkway West • New bicycle facilities along Lutheran Parkway and Lutheran Parkway West • A first-of-its-kind tree preservation and replacement approach that protects the mature tree canopy • Protection of important landmarks like the Blue House and chapel that maintain the cultural heritage of the city and campus • A wide range of housing types that diversifies the city’s housing stock • Housing and open space along the perimeter of the campus that honors the character of the adjacent neighborhoods • Civic uses and a minimum 10,000 square feet of retail development RECOMMENDATION: The city has never been in the position to purchase the former hospital campus, but it has the power and opportunity to shape its future. This legislative zone change is the culmination of several years of planning, and it creates a predictable future that aligns with the community’s vision. For these reasons, staff recommends approval Council Action Form – Lutheran Rezoning April 28, 2025 Page 6 of the ordinance. If the zone change is approved, then a future buyer would be responsible for a concept plan, subdivision plat and site plans. The project website (https://whatsupwheatridge.com/lutheran) will continue to be a resource for updates and information. A neighborhood meeting would be a required first step before a concept plan application is received. RECOMMENDED MOTION: “I move to approve Council Bill No. 06-2025, an ordinance approving a city-initiated zone change of the Lutheran Legacy Campus from Planned Hospital Development (PHD), Planned Commercial Development (PCD), Residential-Two (R-2), and Residential-One (R- 1) to the Mixed Use – Lutheran Legacy Campus (MU-LLC) zone district, on second reading, order it published, and that it take effect immediately upon adoption at second reading.” Or, “I move to postpone indefinitely Council Bill No. 06-2025, an ordinance approving a city- initiated zone change of the Lutheran Legacy Campus…, for the following reason(s): _______________________________________.” REPORT PREPARED/REVIEWED BY: Scott Cutler, Senior Planner Jana Easley, Planning Manager Lauren Mikulak, Community Development Director Patrick Goff, City Manager ATTACHMENTS: 1. Council Bill No. 06-2025 2. Planning Commission Minutes 3. Protest Memo CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE, COLORADO INTRODUCED BY COUNCIL MEMBER WEAVER Council Bill No. 06 Ordinance No. 1819 Series of 2025 TITLE: AN ORDINANCE APPROVING A CITY-INITIATED ZONE CHANGE OF THE LUTHERAN LEGACY CAMPUS FROM PLANNED HOSPITAL DEVELOPMENT (PHD), PLANNED COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT (PCD), RESIDENTIAL-TWO (R-2), AND RESIDENTIAL-ONE (R-1) TO THE MIXED USE – LUTHERAN LEGACY CAMPUS (MU-LLC) ZONE DISTRICT WHEREAS, the City of Wheat Ridge (“City”) is a Colorado home rule municipality operating under a Charter approved by the electorate pursuant to Article XX of the Colorado Constitution and governed by its elected City Council (“Council”); and WHEREAS, the Council has authority pursuant to the Home Rule Charter and C.R.S. §31-16-101, et seq. to adopt and enforce all ordinances; and WHEREAS, on October 25, 2021, the Council adopted the Lutheran Legacy Campus Master Plan after months of robust public engagement, which describes a vision for the future of the Lutheran Legacy Campus; and WHEREAS, on May 13, 2024, the Council adopted Resolution 26-2024 in support of a legislative zone change for the Lutheran Legacy Campus based on the adopted Master Plan; and WHEREAS, the City of Wheat Ridge staff have engaged in a series of public open houses and meetings for the legislative zone change and Charter amendment throughout the year 2024; and WHEREAS, in November 2024, Wheat Ridge voters approved an amendment to the City Charter modifying permitted building heights within the Lutheran Legacy Campus to support redevelopment; and WHEREAS, on January 27, 2025, the Council adopted Ordinance 1814 which created the Mixed Use – Lutheran Legacy Campus (MU-LLC) zone district; and WHEREAS, the Council finds there is a vested interest to approve a legislative zone change to the new MU-LLC zone district to guide future development of the Lutheran Legacy Campus in accordance with the adopted Master Plan. ATTACHMENT 1 NOW THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE, COLORADO: Section 1. Upon application by the City of Wheat Ridge for approval of a zone change ordinance from Planned Hospital Development (PHD), Planned Commercial Development (PCD), Residential-Two (R-2), and Residential-One (R-1) to Mixed Use – Lutheran Legacy Campus (MU-LLC) for the Lutheran Legacy Campus, and pursuant to the findings made based on testimony and evidence presented at a public hearing before the Wheat Ridge City Council, a zone change is approved for the following described land: Those parcels subject to the Lutheran Legacy Campus Master Plan, generally bounded by W. 32nd Avenue, Dudley Street, W. 38th Avenue, and Allison Court owned by the Sisters of Charity of Leavenworth Health, Foothills Medical Building Company LLP, and the City and County of Denver, as shown in Exhibit A. Section 2. Vested Property Rights. Approval of this zone change does not create a vested property right. Vested property rights may only arise and accrue pursuant to the provisions of Section 26-121 of the Code of Laws and the City of Wheat Ridge. Section 3. Safety Clause. The City of Wheat Ridge hereby finds, determines, and declares that this ordinance is promulgated under the general police power of the City of Wheat Ridge, that it is promulgated for the health, safety, and welfare of the public and that this ordinance is necessary for the preservation of health and safety and for the protection of public convenience and welfare. The City Council further determines that the ordinance bears a rational relation to the proper legislative object sought to be attained. Section 4. Severability, Conflicting Ordinances Repealed. If any section, subsection, or clause of this Ordinance shall be deemed to be unconstitutional or otherwise invalid, the validity of the remaining sections, subsections and clauses shall not be affected thereby. All other ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict with the provisions of this Ordinance are hereby repealed. Section 5. Recording. This Ordinance shall be filed for record with the office of the Jefferson County Clerk and Recorder. Section 6. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall take effect immediately upon adoption at second reading, as provided by Section 5.11 of the Charter. INTRODUCED, READ, AND ADOPTED on first reading by a vote of 7 to 0 on this 24th day of March 2025, ordered published by title in the newspaper and in full on the City’s website as provided by the Home Rule Charter, and Public Hearing and consideration on final passage set for April 14, 2025 and continued to April 28, 2025, at 6:30 p.m., in the Council Chambers, 7500 West 29th Avenue, Wheat Ridge, Colorado. READ, ADOPTED AND ORDERED PUBLISHED on second and final reading by a vote of ___ to ___, this 28th day of April 2025. SIGNED by the Mayor on this _____ day of ____________, 2025. ATTEST: Margy Greer, Senior Deputy City Clerk Bud Starker, Mayor Approved as to Form: Gerald E. Dahl, City Attorney First Publication: March 25, 2025 Second Publication: April 15, 2025 Third Publication: April 29, 2025 Effective Date: April 28, 2025 Published: Jeffco Transcript, Denver Post, and www.ci.wheatridge.co.us Exhibit A � � '4' ... _ ., City of • ]P'"\VheatRi___dge PLANNING COMMISSION Minutes of Meeting February 20, 2025 1.CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER The meeting was called to order by Vice Chair QUINN at 6:31 p.m. This meeting was held in person and virtually, using Zoom video-teleconferencing technology. 2.ROLL CALL OF MEMBERS Commission Members Present: Commission Members Absent: Staff Members Present: 3.PLEDGE OF ALLEGIAN CE Daniel Graeve Krista Holub Will Kerns Michael Moore Patrick Quinn Jonathan Schelke Kristine Disney Syrma Quinones Jana Easley, Planning Manager Scott Cutler, Senior Planner Tammy Odean, Recording Secretary 4.APPROVE ORDER OF THE AGENDA It was moved by consensus to approve the order of the agenda. 5.APPROVAL OF MINUTES -February 6, 2025 It was moved by consensus to approve the minutes of February 6, 2025, as written. 6.PUBLIC FORUM (This is the time for any person to speak on any subject not appearing on the Public Hearing agenda.) No one wished to speak at this time. 7.PUBLIC HEARING Planning Commission Minutes February 20, 2025 - 1 - ATTACHMENT 2 A.Case No. WZ-25-02: A City-initiated zone change of the Lutheran Legacy Campus from Planned Hospital Development (PHD), Planned Commercial Development (PCD), Residential-Two (R-2) and Residential-One (R-1) to the Mixed Use Lutheran Legacy Campus (MU-LLC) zone district. Vice Chair QUINN opened the Public Hearing. Mr. Cutler gave a short presentation regarding the zone change and the application. He entered into the record the contents of the case file, packet materials, the zoning ordinance, and the contents of the digital presentation. He stated the public noticeand posting requirements have been met, therefore the Planning Commission has jurisdiction to hear this case. Public Comment Anne Brinkman, resident 7420 West 34th Avenue Ms. Brinkman mentioned she served 10 years on the Planning Commission and said she is in favor of the zone change and is speaking on behalf of the ditch water rights. She wanted it known that the ditch area is not a recreational area and is owned by Rocky Mountain Ditch and the water rights owners. She said the ditch is an agricultural service right-of-way and it is important to keep it flowing for the people downstream because they rely on it. She also mentioned she is ok if it is piped underground. Betty Jo Page, resident 3945 Ingalls Street Ms. Page reiterated Ms. Brinkman's thoughts that the ditch is not a recreational area. Vice Chair QUINN closed the public comment and reopened it. In response to a question from Commissioner SCHELKE, Ms. Brinkman clarified that she was trying to explain that the ditch flow cannot be broken, for example into a detention pond. Commissioner KERNS mentioned that one of the long-term goals is to get a more formalized pedestrian and bicycle easement along the ditch so it can function as a high-line canal trail system. Ms. Brinkman said it will take a negotiation between the City and Rocky Mountain Ditch to create an easement for a trail. Mr. Cutler added that with any future development the City will refer the application to the ditch company and there could be a large easement that the ditch has control over. Planning Commission Minutes February 20, 2025 -2- Vice Chair QUINN closed the public comment. It was moved by Commissioner KERNS and seconded by Commissioner GRAEVE to recommend APPROVAL of Case No. WZ-25-02, a request for approval of a city-initiated zone change of the Lutheran Legacy Campus from Planned Hospital Development (PHD), Planned Commercial Development (PCD), Residential-Two (R-2) and Residential-One (R-1) to the Mixed Use Lutheran Legacy Campus (MU-LLC zone district, for the following reasons: 1.The proposed zone change will promote the public health, safety, or welfare of the community and does not result in an adverse effect on the surrounding area. 2.A future developer will be required to upgrade infrastructure and utilities to serve the types of uses allowed by the change of zone. 3.The proposed zone change is consistent with the goals and objectives of the City's adopted plans and policies, including the adopted Lutheran Legacy Campus Master Plan. 4.The zone change will provide additional opportunity for reinvestment in the area. 5.The criteria used to evaluate a zone change supports the request. Motion carried 6-0. Commissioner KERNS said he will be voting in favor of the motion and added he would like to see lower heights of buildings around the ditch; support for preserving the ditch and trail alongside it; he would like to see adaptive reuse of the current hospital and medical office buildings; include affordable housing within the development and diversity of housing types; street connections to existing neighborhoods in a grid system; support for bike/pedestrian connections to Crown Hill; and to preserve the tree canopy. Commissioner GRAEVE agreed with Commissioner KERNS and his comments. He mentioned this is an exciting time and there is a lot of work that lays ahead in the process and thanked staff for getting us to this point. He also encouraged the reuse of existing buildings, incorporating transit, and would like to see diversity in housing types. He added he will be voting in favor. Commissioner HOLUB mentioned her appreciation to the voters and the process and looks forward to what's ahead. Commissioner MOORE said this is a good thing and thanked the City and community for making it happen. Commissioner SCHELKE echoed the City to work with the ditch company to preserve a trail that all can be proud of. Planning Commission Minutes February 20, 2025 - 3- Commissioner QUINN thanked staff for the big undertaking of this master plan for Lutheran Legacy Campus and for the two public comments. 8.OLD BUSINESS Ms. Easley thanked Commissioner KERNS for his service on the commission and looks forward to seeing him in the future. 9.NEW BUSINESS A.Upcoming Dates Ms. Easley mentioned there will be a meeting on March 6 to discuss the City Plan Phase 4, introduce new commissioners, and vote for Chair and Vice Chair. She added the meeting on March 20 is tentative. B.Project and Development Updates Ms. Easley announced that Lakeside Autowash is open and added the new ERP OpenGov permitting system went live at the first of the year. Commissioner GRAEVE asked if this new system will speed up the permitting process. Ms. Easley said that is the hope, but there will be a transition period to get used to. Mr. Cutler added the communication through the new system will be easier. C.Commissioner Updates Commissioner HOLUB mentioned she attended the City Plan Open House and would recommend the community take the survey in What's Up Wheat Ridge. She also encouraged people to weigh-in on the DRCOG survey regarding Sheridan Blvd. 10.ADJOURNMENT It was m9ved by Commissioner KERNS and seconded by Commissioner SCHELKE to adjou the meeting at 7:20 p.m. Motion carried 6-0. Planning Commission Minutes February 20, 2025 -4- Memorandum To: Case File From: Scott Jones, Engineering Tech Lauren Mikulak, Community Development Director Date: April 15, 2025 Subject: Protest of Lutheran Legacy Campus City-Initiated Zone Change The purpose of this memo is to document the analysis of the protests received in relationship to Case No. WZ-25-02, a city-initiated zone change of the Lutheran Legacy Campus from Planned Hospital Development (PHD), Planned Commercial Development (PCD), Residential-Two (R-2) and Residential-One (R-1) to the Mixed Use Lutheran Legacy Campus (MU-LLC) zone district. Charter Provision A zone change protest is a process created in the City Charter and detailed in the zoning code that gives adjacent property owners the right to protest a zone change. This kind of protest can impact the timing of the public hearing and the number of votes required by Council to approve a zone change. Section 5.10 of the City Charter provides the minimum land area requirements that can trigger a three-fourths vote of the entire council (six votes instead of five) to approve the ordinance. It states: […] The council shall have the power to amend, supplement, change, or repeal the regulations, restrictions and boundaries of zoning districts within the city. Such changes shall be adopted by ordinance after a public hearing at which parties in interest and citizens shall have an opportunity to be heard. In the event of a protest such changes signed by the owners of twenty (20) percent or more of the area: (1) Of the property included within the proposed change; or, (2) Of those immediately adjacent to the rear or any side of the property, extending one hundred (100) feet from the property; or, (3) Of those directly opposite across the street from the property, extending one hundred (100) feet from the street frontage of such opposite property, ATTACHMENT 3 LLC Zone Change Protest Page 2 such changes shall not become effective except by the favorable vote of three- fourths of the entire city council. Where land within the area proposed for change, or adjacent or opposite land as defined above is owned by the City of Wheat Ridge, such property shall be excluded in computing the required twenty (20) percent, and owners of noncity land within the one-hundred-foot limit as defined above shall be considered adjacent or opposite despite such intervening city land. […] Analysis Outlined in pink in the image below is the land area within 100 feet adjacent to the site. Protest from 20% of the land area on any given side can trigger a super majority vote. LLC Zone Change Protest Page 3 On April 10, 11 and 14, the city received protest forms from several property owners objecting to the rezoning of the Lutheran Legacy Campus. Those protests were reviewed to confirm they met the requirements of the charter: 1) that the signer was the owner of record and 2) that the property was located within the 100-foot protest boundary. Attached are the received protest forms with validation notes from staff. If the property met both charter requirements it was marked as “good.” If it is marked “out of range,” it did not meet the geographic requirements. Where the signer and owner of record deviated, additional follow-up may have been necessary if the protest was not yet at the 20% threshold (this did not occur). In total, 61 protest forms were received. About half of those met the ownership and geographic requirements, and those are shaded blue in the image below. Conclusion The protest is determined to sufficiently meet the Charter thresholds to require a super majority of Council (six votes instead of five) to approve a zone change. LLC Zone Change Protest Page 4 Enclosed on the following pages are scanned copies of the protest forms received on April 10, 11 and 14. ADA Accessibility Statement The City of Wheat Ridge (City) is committed to providing accessible facilities, services, and communication to all members of the public. As part of this commitment, the City aims to provide an accessible website compatible with W3C Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG 2.2) that is in compliance with Colorado HB 21-1110, allowing individuals with a disability to understand and use the website to the same degree as someone without a disability. As the City works toward this goal, you may have a need to access documents in an accessible format (e.g., Braille, large print, audio, etc.). In that event, please contact the ADA Coordinator, Kelly McLaughlin, at ada@ci.wheatridge.co.us or 303-235-2885 who will make every effort to respond to your inquiry and provide an alternative solution. ITEM NUMBER:2 DATE: APRIL 28, 2025 REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION COUNCIL BILL NO. 07-2025 TITLE: AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE WHEAT RIDGE CODE OF LAWS CONCERNING MEMBERSHIP OF THE URBAN RENEWAL AUTHORITY ☐PUBLIC HEARING ☐BIDS/MOTIONS ☐RESOLUTIONS ☒ORDINANCES FOR 1st READING ☐ORDINANCES FOR 2nd READING QUASI-JUDICIAL ☐YES ☒NO ISSUE: In 2015, the Colorado Legislature passed HB15-1348 amending the urban renewal statute requiring certain processes occur upon the adoption of a new plan area or a substantial modification to an existing plan. One requirement is the addition of new board members representing the affected taxing entities. This expands the Wheat Ridge Urban Renewal Authority, dba Renewal Wheat Ridge, membership to thirteen. This ordinance will amend the current code section in the Wheat Ridge Code of Laws to provide for the new members. PRIOR ACTION: The City adopted Chapter 25 of the Code of Laws providing for the establishment of the urban renewal authority of which membership is set. FINANCIAL IMPACT: None BACKGROUND: As amended by House Bill 15-1348 in 2015, C.R.S. § 31-25-104(2.5), the Colorado Urban Renewal Law requires the appointment of at least three additional members to the Board of Commissioners of the urban renewal authority, triggered by the adoption of a new urban renewal plan or the substantial modification to an existing urban renewal plan by the City Council. The three additional required members are representatives of Jefferson County, the special districts imposing a mill levy within an urban renewal area in the City, and a representative of the Jefferson County School District. More particularly, the County Council Action Form – Membership of Urban Renewal Authority April 28, 2025 Page 2 representative is appointed by the Board of County Commissioners of Jefferson County, and the statute does not contain any qualifications regarding the Board of County Commissioners' appointee. The special district representative must be an elected official of a special district levying a mill levy in the urban renewal area and is selected by agreement of the special districts levying a mill levy in the urban renewal area. The school district representative must be an elected member of the Jefferson County School District and is selected by the School District. Additional members may also be appointed to maintain an odd number of commissioners as set forth in the proposed ordinance. RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends the approval of this ordinance change due to the anticipated Council adoption of the two new urban renewal plans. RECOMMENDED MOTION: “I move to approve council bill number 07-2025 – an ordinance amending the Wheat Ridge Code of Laws concerning membership of the urban renewal authority on first reading, order it published, the public hearing sent for Monday, May 12, 2025 at 6:30 p.m. as a virtual meeting and in City Council Chambers, and that it take effect immediately.” Or, “I move to postpone indefinitely council bill number 07-2025 an ordinance amending the Wheat Ridge Code of Laws concerning membership of the urban renewal authority for the following reasons _____________.” REPORT/ORDINANCE PREPARED/REVIEWED BY: Steve Art – Executive Director Wheat Ridge Urban Renewal Authority Corey Hoffmann – URA Legal Counsel Gerald Dahl – City Legal Counsel Patrick Goff, City Manager ATTACHMENTS: 1. Council Bill No. 07-2025 ATTACHMENT 1 CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE, COLORADO INTRODUCED BY COUNCIL MEMBER Council Bill No. 07 Ordinance No. 1820 Series TITLE: AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE WHEAT RIDGE CODE OF LAWS CONCERNING MEMBERSHIP OF THE URBAN RENEWAL AUTHORITY WHEREAS, the City of Wheat Ridge is a home rule municipality having all powers conferred by Article XX of the Colorado Constitution; and WHEREAS, the Council is authorized by CRS 31-25-101 et seq to create an urban renewal authority; WHEREAS, in the exercise of this authority, the Council has previously adopted Chapter 25 of the Code of Laws (the “Code”) providing for the establishment of the urban renewal authority (the “Authority”) for the City, its duties, and membership; and WHEREAS, the Authority presently consists of seven members; one from each Council district and three at-large members; and WHEREAS, in 2015, the Colorado Legislature amended the urban renewal statute to require a membership of thirteen, with three members appointed by out-of-city authorities: one by the board of county commissioners, one by the school district, and one by the special districts having a mill levy in the City. WHEREAS, the 2015 requirement only applies to urban renewal authorities governing urban renewal districts formed after the effective date of the bill; and because until now the City has not created any new urban renewal areas since 2015, it was permitted to retain its seven member authority; and WHEREAS, because the City is preparing to create one or more new urban renewal areas, the 2015 requirement now will apply, and the membership of the Authority must be increased to thirteen; and WHEREAS, the Council wishes to expand the membership of the Authority to comply with the statute by expanding the City members to ten, such that there shall be one member from each Council district, five at-large members, and one elected City official member. NOW THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE, COLORADO: Section 1. Section 25-24 of the Code is amended to read: Sec. 25-24. Same-Appointment of members; number. (a) MEMBERSHIP. The authority shall consist of THIRTEEN (13) seven (7) members. TEN OF SUCH MEMBERS SHALL BE APPOINTED BY THE CITY (THE “CITY MEMBERS”). THE AUTHORITY MEMBERSHIP SHALL ALSO INCLUDE THREE (3) ADDITIONAL MEMBERS: ONE APPOINTED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, ONE BY THE SCHOOL DISTRICT, AND ONE BY THE SPECIAL DISTRICTS HAVING A MILL LEVY IN THE CITY (THE ‘NON-CITY MEMBERS”). (b) CITY MEMBERS; APPOINTMENT; TERMS. One (1) of such members SHALL BEbeing from each of the existing, or hereafter altered, city council districts, FIVE (5) and three (3) members to serve at large, AND ONE (1) CITY ELECTED OFFICIAL. If, after reasonable advertisement, no applications are received from residents within the relevant city council district for a vacancy on the authority, any otherwise qualified resident of the city may be appointed. The at large members may include one (1) elected city official (excluding the mayor), and/or one (1) non-resident individual who owns an interest in or is a corporate officer of a licensed business in good standing located within the city. Each appointment to the authority shall be made by the mayor subject to approval by majority vote of the entire city council. The term of office of each member shall be five (5) years, LIMITED TO TWO CONSECUTIVE TERMS WITH ELIGIBILITY TO BE APPOINTED AGAIN TWO (2) YEARS AFTER THE END OF THE SECOND TERM. IN THE EVENT THERE ARE NO APPLICANTS FOR AN UPCOMING VACANCY, THE THEN-CURRENT MEMBER MAY SERVE FOR AN ADDITIONAL ONE YEAR. THE SEAT OF Aany member (with the exception of a nonresident business owner member) who shall change THEIRhis personal residence to an address outside the city or outside the district THEYhe represents shall cease to be a member of the authority and THEIRhis seat shall automatically be deemed vacant as of the date on which THEYhe ceased to be a resident of the city or of the district. Any nonresident business owner member whose business is no longer in good standing with the city or whose business ceases operations or moves outside the city limits shall cease to be a member of the authority and the member's seat shall be deemed vacant as of the date of that occurrence. A member whose term has expired shall continue to hold office until THEIRhis successor has been appointed and has qualified. Terms of office shall be staggered so that the term of at least one (1) member shall expire each year. The city council may appoint any number of ex-officio nonvoting members to serve for terms at the pleasure of the city council. (c) NON-CITY MEMBERS. THE NON-CITY MEMBERS SHALL BE APPOINTED AS FOLLOWS: ONE APPOINTED BY THE JEFFERSON COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, ONE APPOINTED BY THE JEFFERSON COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT, AND ONE APPOINTED BY THE SPECIAL DISTRICTS HAVING A MILL LEVY WITHIN THE CITY, AS THOSE DISTRICTS SHALL MUTUALLY AGREE. THE NON-CITY MEMBERS SHALL SERVE TERMS OF SUCH DURATION AND UNDER SUCH LIMITATIONS AS THEIR APPOINTING BODIES SHALL DETERMINE. Section 2. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall take effect immediately upon adoption at second reading and signature by the Mayor, as permitted by Section 5.11 of the Charter. INTRODUCED, READ, AND ADOPTED on first reading by a vote of ___ to ___ on this 28th day of April, 2025, ordered published by title in full in on the City’s website as provided by the Home Rule Charter, and Public Hearing and consideration on final passage set for May 12, 2025, at 6:30 p.m., in the Council Chambers, 7500 West 29th Avenue, Wheat Ridge, Colorado. READ, ADOPTED AND ORDERED PUBLISHED on second and final reading by a vote of ___ to ___, this 12th day of May 2025. SIGNED by the Mayor on this _____ day of ____________, 2025. ATTEST: Margy Greer, Senior Deputy City Clerk Bud Starker, Mayor Approved as to Form: Gerald E. Dahl, City Attorney First Publication: April 29, 2025 Second Publication: May 13, 2025 Effective Date: May 12, 2025 Published: Jeffco Transcript and www.ci.wheatridge.co.us Exhibit A ITEM NUMBER:3 DATE: April 28, 2025 REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION COUNCIL BILL 08-2025 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 26 OF THE WHEAT RIDGE CODE OF LAWS REGARDING FREESTANDING EMERGENCY DEPARTMENTS ☐PUBLIC HEARING ☐BIDS/MOTIONS☐RESOLUTIONS ☒ORDINANCES FOR 1st READING ☐ORDINANCES FOR 2nd READING QUASI-JUDICIAL ☐YES ☒NO ISSUE: The City received a request from HCA HealthONE LLC and its affiliate HCA HealthONE Rose to amend the Wheat Ridge Code of Laws to allow for freestanding emergency departments (FSED) in the city and for the development of a medical campus at the northwest corner of 38th Avenue and Wadsworth Boulevard. PRIOR ACTION: City Council discussed the proposed code amendment at its March 3, 2025, study session and directed staff to proceed with preparing an ordinance for consideration. Planning Commission reviewed the ordinance at a public hearing held on April 17, 2025, and recommended approval by a vote of 5 to 1. The draft Planning Commission minutes will be included with the Council Action Form for the second reading. FINANCIAL IMPACT: There is no direct financial impact to the City in amending the Code to allow for FSED in the City. If the code is amended, future development could occur with these types of facilities which would generate development related fees and potential sales tax. HCA HealthONE has submitted a Letter of Intent to purchase the former Midas property from the City for the as-is appraised price of $422,500. BACKGROUND: HCA HealthONE (the operator of Rose hospital and other metro area facilities) is proposing a medical campus on property zoned MU-C at the northwest corner of West Council Action Form – Freestanding Emergency Departments April 28, 2025 Page 2 38th Avenue and Wadsworth Boulevard. The campus would include medical office uses as well as a freestanding emergency room facility (also known as a freestanding emergency department or FSED). HCA HealthONE is under contract to purchase the vacant Midas building from the City and the surrounding Wilmore Center. Current Code The property at W. 38th Avenue and Wadsworth Boulevard is zoned Mixed Use- Commercial (MU-C) which allows for medical office uses. Based on a prohibition that dates back to 2015, however, MU-C zoning does not allow for freestanding emergency rooms (ERs). With the Lutheran hospital’s move to the west side of the city, staff believe it is an appropriate time to reevaluate the prohibition. In 2015, the term “freestanding emergency room” did not appear in the municipal code. Related terms in the code included “medical office/clinic” and “hospital,” the latter of which is defined in the code: Hospital. An institution providing health services for patients suffering from illness, disease, injury, deformation and other abnormal physical or mental conditions, including as an integral part of the institution such related facilities as inpatient and outpatient care, laboratories, training facilities, central service facilities and staff offices. A code interpretation in 2015 determined that freestanding ERs were allowed only where hospitals were permitted based on ERs being more similar to hospitals than medical office buildings. This would have permitted a freestanding ER in the MU-C zone district where hospitals are permitted as conditional uses. Also in 2015, a zone change application was submitted for a property on Wadsworth south of 38th Avenue requesting a rezone to MU-C for the purpose of establishing a freestanding emergency department. The application was denied by the Planning Commission and withdrawn before going to the City Council. At the time, freestanding ERs were prevalent in local news because of their rapid proliferation throughout Colorado and a lack of transparency in billing practices. The Colorado Legislature was evaluating potential action to protect consumers, and City Council adopted a series of moratoriums from 2016 to 2018 allowing time to evaluate the land use and any potential state action. Council evaluated a range of regulatory approaches, and in 2018 ultimately decided to create code Section 26-643, defining and prohibiting freestanding emergency rooms throughout the city. That section reads: Sec. 26-643. - Freestanding emergency room facilities. A. For purposes of this section, freestanding emergency room facilities shall mean and include a medical facility that is not physically attached to a hospital facility Council Action Form – Freestanding Emergency Departments April 28, 2025 Page 3 that has the capability of providing medical care and services to patients with emergency medical conditions in a manner similar to emergency rooms located within hospitals. Features of a freestanding emergency room facility may include, but are not limited to, expanded hours of operation, drive-lanes or vehicle bays to accommodate ambulance arrivals and departures, board-certified emergency physicians, board-certified emergency nurses, on-site lab and imaging capabilities and similar equipment, services and treatments not commonly available in urgent-care facilities. B. The use of freestanding emergency room facilities, as defined in this section, is strictly prohibited in all zone districts within the city. This decision was based in part on the small size of Wheat Ridge and the centrally located Lutheran Hospital at the former medical campus at 8300 W. 38th Avenue. Medical uses in the City’s base zone districts are summarized in the table below. The former and current Lutheran Hospital were both part of planned development zone districts. Summary of Medical-Related Uses by Zone District (P = Permitted, C = Conditional, NP = Not Permitted) NC RC C-1 C-2 I-E MU-N MU-C MU-C TOD MU-C Int MU- LLC Medical Office P P P P P P P P P Varies by sub- district Hospital NP NP NP NP NP NP C C C NP Freestanding ER NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP Proposed Zoning Code Amendment With changes to state law, the move of Lutheran Hospital, and the request by Rose Medical; the attached ordinance proposes a new approach to freestanding ERs. They could be allowed and limited through this approach: allowing them as a conditional use in the MU-C zone district and requiring them to be part of a medical campus of at least 5 acres in size. This approach would limit proliferation of freestanding ERs. To that end, the attached ordinance makes the following changes: • Updates Section 26-643 (Freestanding Emergency Room Facilities). • Amends the Table of Uses by zone district to allow FSED as a conditional use within the MU-C zone district. • Updates language to the contemporary terminology of “freestanding emergency department.” This is the term established by the Colorado Legislature when they enacted mandatory licensure of freestanding ERs through HB19-1010. Council Action Form – Freestanding Emergency Departments April 28, 2025 Page 4 RECOMMENDED MOTION: Staff recommends approval of the ordinance. First reading in these cases is a procedural action that merely sets the date for the (second reading) public hearing. No testimony is taken on first reading. “I move to approve Council Bill No. 08-2025, an ordinance amending Chapter 26 of the Wheat Ridge Code of Laws regarding Freestanding Emergency Departments on first reading, order it published, the public hearing set for Monday, May 12, 2025, at 6:30 p.m. as a virtual meeting and in City Council Chambers, and that it take effect fifteen (15) days after final publication.” Or,  “I move to postpone indefinitely Council Bill No. 08-2025, an ordinance amending Chapter 26 of the Wheat Ridge Code of Laws regarding Freestanding Emergency Departments, for the following reason(s): _______________________________________.” REPORT PREPARED/REVIEWED BY: Jana Easley, Planning Manager Lauren Mikulak, Community Development Director Patrick Goff, City Manager ATTACHMENTS: 1. Council Bill No. 08-2025 CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE, COLORADO INTRODUCED BY COUNCIL MEMBER Council Bill No. 08 Ordinance No. 1821 Series of 2025 TITLE: AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 26 OF THE WHEAT RIDGE CODE OF LAWS REGARDING FREESTANDING EMERGENCY DEPARTMENTS WHEREAS, the City of Wheat Ridge is a home rule municipality having all powers conferred by Article XX of the Colorado Constitution; and WHEREAS, pursuant to its home rule authority and C.R.S. §§ 31-15-501 and 31-23- 301, et seq., the City, acting through its City Council (the “Council”), is authorized to adopt ordinances for the protection of the public health, safety or welfare; and WHEREAS, pursuant to this authority, the Council previously adopted regulations concerning freestanding emergency room facilities, codified within Chapter 26 of the Wheat Ridge Code of Laws (“Code”); and WHEREAS, City Staff have recommended certain amendments to code section 26- 643 and the table of uses in code section 26-1111 to conditionally allow freestanding emergency departments in the Mixed Use-Commercial (MU-C) zone district; and WHEREAS, the Council finds that these amendments are necessary to ensure the continued effective regulation of freestanding emergency departments within the City. NOW THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE, COLORADO: Section 1. Section 26-643 of the Code, regarding freestanding emergency departments is hereby amended as follows: Sec. 26-643. - Freestanding emergency room facilities departments. C. For purposes of this section, freestanding emergency room facilities departments shall mean and include a medical facility that is not physically attached to a hospital facility that has the capability of providing medical care and services to patients with emergency medical conditions in a manner similar to emergency rooms located within hospitals. Features of a freestanding emergency room facility department may include, but are not limited to, expanded hours of operation, drive-lanes or vehicle bays to accommodate ambulance arrivals and departures, board-certified emergency physicians, board-certified emergency nurses, on-site lab and imaging capabilities and similar equipment, services and treatments not commonly available in urgent-care facilities. D. The use of freestanding emergency room facilities, as defined in this section, is strictly prohibited in all zone districts within the city. Where permitted by the table of uses in sections 26-204 and 26-1111, freestanding emergency departments must be on a site of at least five (5) acres in size and co-located exclusively with other medical uses (such as office, clinic, and laboratory uses) to create a medical campus. Section 2. Subsection 26-204.C of the Code is hereby amended in the “Table of Uses—Commercial and Industrial Districts” by modifying the use name and leaving the remaining cells empty (meaning not permitted): Uses Notes NC RC C-1 C-2 I-E […] Freestanding emergency room facilities departments Section 3. Subsection 26-1111.B of the Code, regarding permitted uses in the mixed use zone districts, is hereby amended as follows: Use Group MU-C MU-C Interstate MU-C TOD MU-N […] Public, Civic, and Institutional Freestanding emergency room facilities departments (see § 26-643) NP C NP NP NP Section 17. Safety Clause. The City of Wheat Ridge hereby finds, determines, and declares that this ordinance is promulgated under the general police power of the City of Wheat Ridge, that it is promulgated for the health, safety, and welfare of the public and that this ordinance is necessary for the preservation of health and safety and for the protection of public convenience and welfare. The City Council further determines that the ordinance bears a rational relation to the proper legislative object sought to be attained. Section 18. Severability, Conflicting Ordinances Repealed. If any section, subsection, or clause of this Ordinance shall be deemed to be unconstitutional or otherwise invalid, the validity of the remaining sections, subsections and clauses shall not be affected thereby. All other ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict with the provisions of this Ordinance are hereby repealed. Section 19. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall take effect fifteen (15) days after final publication, as provided by Section 5.11 of the Charter. INTRODUCED, READ, AND ADOPTED on first reading by a vote of __ to __ on this 28th day of April 2025, ordered published by title and in full on the City’s website as provided by the Home Rule Charter, and Public Hearing and consideration on final passage set for May 12, 2025 at 6:30 p.m., as a virtual meeting and in the Council Chambers, 7500 West 29th Avenue, Wheat Ridge, Colorado. READ, ADOPTED AND ORDERED PUBLISHED on second and final reading by a vote of ___ to ___, this __ day of ____, 2025. SIGNED by the Mayor on this _____ day of ____________, 2025. _______________________________ Bud Starker, Mayor ATTEST: ____________________________________ Margy Greer, Senior Deputy City Clerk Approved as to Form ______________________________ Gerald E. Dahl, City Attorney First Publication: April 29, 2025 Second Publication: May 13, 2025 Effective Date: May 28, 2025 Jeffco Transcript and www.ci.wheatridge.co.us ITEM NUMBER:4 DATE: April 28, 2025 REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION COUNCIL BILL 09-2025 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 26-646 OF THE WHEAT RIDGE CODE OF LAWS REGARDING ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS AND MAKING CONFORMING AMENDMENTS THEREWITH ☐PUBLIC HEARING ☐BIDS/MOTIONS☐RESOLUTIONS ☒ORDINANCES FOR 1st READING ☐ORDINANCES FOR 2nd READING QUASI-JUDICIAL ☐YES ☒NO ISSUE: This ordinance amends Chapter 26 of the Wheat Ridge Code of Laws to update Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) requirements to comply with state legislation and recent policy direction from City Council. PRIOR ACTION: City Council discussed the proposed code amendment at its March 17, 2025, study session and directed staff to proceed with preparing an ordinance for consideration. Planning Commission reviewed the ordinance at a public hearing held on April 17, 2025, and recommended approval by a vote of 6 to 0. The draft Planning Commission minutes will be included with the Council Action Form for the second reading. FINANCIAL IMPACT: The proposed ordinance is not anticipated to have a direct financial impact on the city. BACKGROUND: The State of Colorado Legislature passed several bills in the 2024 Legislative Session related to land use and housing. House Bill (HB) 24-1152, titled “Accessory Dwelling Units,” requires municipalities to allow ADUs on any property containing a single-unit home and requires an administrative approval process for ADUs. The bill also includes provisions ensuring communities are not being overly restrictive on ADUs including Council Action Form – ADU Updates April 28, 2025 Page 2 arbitrary restrictions on size, setbacks, and design. The bill takes effect on June 30, 2025, and requires cities to submit a report demonstrating compliance by that date. The city is largely in compliance with the requirements of HB24-1152, as the city adopted ADU regulations in August 2022 which allow ADUs as a use-by-right on any property containing a single-unit dwelling. There are only three provisions where the city regulations partially comply: size of ADU, owner occupancy, and planned developments. Size of ADU: The bill requires that ADUs are always allowed between 500 to 750 square feet in size, to ensure that an ADU is large enough to accommodate one bedroom and adequate kitchen and bathing facilities. The city’s ADU size restrictions are currently based directly on the size of the primary dwelling, so an ADU is limited to 50% of the square footage of the primary dwelling, or 1,000 square feet, whichever is less. Under this approach, if a primary dwelling is under 1,000 square feet (which exists in Wheat Ridge), the ADU allowance is less than 500 square feet. To comply with the state law, the ordinance proposes changes to allow an ADU of at least 500 to 750 square feet in size. Cities can still limit the maximum size of an ADU to be no larger than the size of the primary dwelling, which the ordinance includes. Owner Occupancy: The bill generally prohibits owner occupancy requirements for ADUs with the goal of removing barriers to ADU construction and financing. The code currently requires owner occupancy for all ADUs, meaning that the owner of the property must live in either the main house or the ADU, to be demonstrated by recording a deed restriction against the property stating the owner must live on site. However, HB24-1152 prevents that blanket approach to owner occupancy and instead presents three scenarios. • Scenario 1: For a new single-unit home being constructed concurrently with a new ADU, cities cannot require owner occupancy. The proposed ordinance will remove the requirement for owner occupancy in this scenario. • Scenario 2: For an ADU being used as a short-term rental, cities can enforce owner occupancy. The proposed ordinance will retain the owner occupancy requirements for STRs and clarify that ADUs are considered partial-home rentals which require the owner to be on site. • Scenario 3: For a new ADU being constructed/converted on a lot with an existing primary dwelling that is currently occupied, cities may require evidence of owner occupancy only at time of application for the ADU. The bill prevents a city from enforcing owner occupancy after the permit is issued and deed restrictions are not allowed. This category would also apply to existing nonconforming ADUs. The proposed ordinance will remove the requirement for owner occupancy in this scenario; see discussion in the next paragraph below. Based on Council consensus from the March 2025 study session, the ordinance will not require proof of owner occupancy at time of permit submittal because it is unenforceable after. Staff recognize the importance of requiring owner occupancy as Council Action Form – ADU Updates April 28, 2025 Page 3 part of the original 2022 ADU ordinance. However, after over 2.5 years of implementing the ADU ordinance and approving ADU applications with the required deed restrictions and demonstration of owner occupancy, there are some lessons learned about the efficacy of these requirements. ADUs have not proliferated to date, and staff believe that without an owner occupancy requirement, ADUs would still not widely proliferate due to other factors including construction and labor costs and tap fees for new ADUs. In practice, it is nearly impossible to enforce owner occupancy requirements particularly after a property is sold. Notably, state law prohibits the city from requiring a deed restriction that is recorded with the land or that requires owner occupancy in perpetuity. The question becomes whether the city wants to invoke the narrow state allowance to require owner occupancy at the moment in time when an ADU application is submitted, and Council consensus was not to go in that direction. Planned Developments: The bill requires ADUs to be allowed in all existing/approved Planned Developments (PD) where single-unit dwellings are allowed; in effect, this treats PDs the same as standard zoning districts. The city’s current regulations require ADUs to be allowed in new PDs where single-unit dwellings are allowed, but did not apply this retroactively to previously approved (i.e., existing PDs). ADUs in PDs would still be required to meet the development standards of the PD in which they are located, including setbacks, height restrictions, and reasonable design standards if applicable. Summary of Proposed Code Amendment The ordinance makes the following changes: • Updates Section 26-646 (ADUs): o Clarifies size restrictions of ADUs to allow ADUs within 500-750 square feet in all circumstances as long as they remain smaller than the main house, and clarifies maximum footprints of detached ADU structures o Removes owner occupancy requirements for ADUs (except those containing STRs) and deletes the sections on deed restrictions • Updates planned development regulations in Article III to allow ADUs in all planned developments where single-unit dwellings exist, not just planned developments approved after 2022 • Revises the development standards charts in Article II to add a footnote regarding size of ADUs RECOMMENDED MOTION: Staff recommends approval of the ordinance. First reading in these cases is a procedural action that merely sets the date for the (second reading) public hearing. No testimony is taken on first reading. “I move to approve Council Bill No. 09-2025, an ordinance amending Section 26-646 of the Wheat Ridge Code of Laws regarding Accessory Dwelling Units and making conforming amendments therewith, on first reading, order it published, the public hearing set for Monday, May 12, 2025, at 6:30 p.m. as a virtual meeting and in City Council Action Form – ADU Updates April 28, 2025 Page 4 Council Chambers, and that it takes effect fifteen (15) days after final publication.” Or, “I move to postpone indefinitely Council Bill No. 09-2025, an ordinance amending Section 26-646 of the Wheat Ridge Code of Laws regarding Accessory Dwelling Units and making conforming amendments therewith, for the following reason(s): _______________________________________.” REPORT PREPARED/REVIEWED BY: Scott Cutler, Senior Planner Jana Easley, Planning Manager Lauren Mikulak, Community Development Director Patrick Goff, City Manager ATTACHMENTS: 1. Council Bill No. 09-2025 CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE, COLORADO INTRODUCED BY COUNCIL MEMBER Council Bill No. 09 Ordinance No. 1822 Series of 2025 TITLE: AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 26-646 OF THE WHEAT RIDGE CODE OF LAWS REGARDING ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS AND MAKING CONFORMING AMENDMENTS THEREWITH WHEREAS, the City of Wheat Ridge (“City”) is a Colorado home rule municipality operating under a Charter approved by the electorate pursuant to Article XX of the Colorado Constitution and governed by its elected City Council (“Council”); and WHEREAS, the Council has authority pursuant to the Home Rule Charter and C.R.S. §31-16-101, et seq. to adopt and enforce all ordinances; and WHEREAS, pursuant to this authority, the Council previously adopted regulations for Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) in 2022 which allow ADUs as an accessory use to single-unit dwellings; and WHEREAS, the State of Colorado Legislature adopted House Bill 24-1152 which requires local governments to allow ADUs within specified parameters, effective June 30, 2025, and which contains other provisions pertaining to encouraging ADU construction; and WHEREAS, city staff have recommended certain amendments to the City’s ADU regulations contained in the Code of Laws based on the City’s actual experience in regulating ADUs for the past 2.5 years and on best practices to better align the City’s regulations with the state legislation; and WHEREAS, the Council finds that these amendments are necessary to ensure the continued effective regulation of ADUs within the City. NOW THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE, COLORADO: Section 1. Section 26-205.B (Residential-One District (R-1)) of the Wheat Ridge Code of Laws is amended by creating a new footnote (g) pertaining to the size of accessory dwelling units: ATTACHMENT 1 B. Development standards: Maximum Height (f) Maximum Building Coverage Minimum Lot Area Minimum Lot Width Minimum Front Yard Setback (a) Minimum Side Yard Setback (b) Minimum Rear Yard Setback (b) Principal Buildings Single detached dwelling 35' 25% 12,500 sf 100' 30' (c) 15' 15' Group home 35' 25% 12,500 sf 100' 30' (c) 15' 15' Churches, schools, government and quasi-government buildings, golf courses, small day care center, and nursing, elderly and congregate care homes 35' 25% 1 acre 200' 30' (c) 15' (e) 20' Accessory Buildings (d) Major 15' 1,000 sf N/A N/A 30' (c) 15' 15' Minor 10' 200 sf N/A N/A 30' (c) 5' 5' Accessory dwelling unit, detached 25’ Floor area limited to 50% of principal, or 1,000 sf, whichever is less (g) N/A N/A 30’ (c) 15’ 15’ All Other Uses 35' 25% 12,500 sf 100' 30' (c) 5' (e) 15' Notes: (a) Front setback reductions may be allowed in accordance with Section 26-611. (b) Any side or rear yard which abuts a public street shall have a minimum setback of thirty (30) feet for all structures, with the following exception: For corner lots that are sixty (60) feet or narrower in width, this requirement shall be reduced by half. (c) Front setbacks for structures on lots or portions of lots which abut cul-de-sacs may be reduced to ten (10) feet for those portions of lots which abut a cul-de-sac bulb. (See Figure 26-123.3 at the end of section 26-123) (d) See Section 26-625 for additional regulations pertaining to accessory buildings. (e) Fifteen-foot setback for the first story and five (5) feet for each additional story. (f) Bulk plane regulations shall apply in accordance with section 26-642, and may, when applied to a specific project, have the effect of reducing the maximum height permitted. (g) See Section 26-646.B.3 for additional regulations and exceptions pertaining to the size and footprint of ADUs. Section 2. Section 26-206.B (Residential-One A District (R-1A)) of the Wheat Ridge Code of Laws is amended by creating a new footnote (g) pertaining to the size of accessory dwelling units: B. Development standards: Maximum Height (f) Maximum Building Coverage Minimum Lot Area Minimum Lot Width Minimum Front Yard Setback (a) Minimum Side Yard Setback (b) Minimum Rear Yard Setback (b) Principal Buildings Single detached dwelling 35' 30% 9,000 sf 75' 25’ (c) 10' 15' Group home 35' 30% 9,000 sf 75' 25’ (c) 10' 15' Churches, schools, government and quasi-government buildings, golf courses, small day care center, and nursing, elderly and congregate care homes 35' 30% 1 acre 200' 25’ (c) 15' (e) 20' Accessory Buildings (d) Major 15' 1,000 sf N/A N/A 25’ (c) 5' if <= 10’ in height; 10' if > 10’ in height 5' if <= 10’ in height; 10' if > 10’ in height Minor 10' 400 sf N/A N/A 25’ (c) 5' 5' Accessory dwelling unit, detached 25’ Floor area limited to 50% of principal, or 1,000 sf, whichever is less (g) N/A N/A 25’ (c) 5’ if ≤ 10’ in height, 10’ if > 10’ in height 5’ if ≤ 10’ in height, 10’ if > 10’ in height All Other Uses 35' 30% 9,000 sf 75' 25’ (c) 10' 15' Notes: (a) Front setback reductions may be allowed in accordance with Section 26-611. (b) Any side or rear yard which abuts a public street shall have a minimum setback of twenty five (25) feet for all structures, with the following exception: For corner lots that are sixty (60) feet or narrower in width, this requirement shall be reduced by half. (c) Front setbacks for structures on lots or portions of lots which abut cul-de-sacs may be reduced to ten (10) feet for those portions of lots which abut a cul-de-sac bulb. (See Figure 26-123.3 at the end of section 26-123) (d) See Section 26-625 for additional regulations pertaining to accessory buildings. (e) Fifteen-foot setback for the first story and five (5) feet for each additional story. (f) Bulk plane regulations shall apply in accordance with section 26-642, and may, when applied to a specific project, have the effect of reducing the maximum height permitted. (g) See Section 26-646.B.3 for additional regulations and exceptions pertaining to the size and footprint of ADUs. Section 3. Section 26-207.B (Residential-One B District (R-1B)) of the Wheat Ridge Code of Laws is amended by creating a new footnote (i) pertaining to the size of accessory dwelling units: B. Development standards: Maximum Height (h) Maximum Building Coverage Minimum Lot Area Minimum Lot Width (a) Minimum Front Yard Setback (b) Minimum Side Yard Setback (c) Minimum Rear Yard Setback (c) Principal Buildings Single detached dwelling 35' 40% 7,500 sf 60' 25’ (d) 5' (e) 10' Group home 35' 40% 7,500 sf 60' 25’ (d) 5' (e) 10' Churches, schools, government and quasi-government buildings, golf courses, small day care center, and nursing, elderly and congregate care homes 35' 40% 1 acre 200' 25’ (d) 15' (g) 20' Accessory Buildings (f) Major 15' 600 sf N/A N/A 25’ (d) 5' 5' if <= 10’ in height; 10' if > 10’ in height Minor 10' 300 sf N/A N/A 25’ (d) 5' 5' Accessory dwelling unit, detached 25’ Floor area limited to 50% of principal, or 1,000 sf, whichever is less (i) N/A N/A 25’ (d) 5’ 5’ if ≤ 10’ in height, 10’ if > 10’ in height All Other Uses 35' 40% 9,000 sf 60' 25’ (d) 5' (e) 10' Notes: (a) Corner lots shall have a minimum lot width of eighty (80) feet for both street frontages. (b) Front setback reductions may be allowed in accordance with Section 26-611. (c) Any side or rear yard which abuts a public street shall have a minimum setback of twenty five (25) feet for all structures, with the following exception: For corner lots that are sixty (60) feet or narrower in width, this requirement shall be reduced by half. (d) Front setbacks for structures on lots or portions of lots which abut cul-de-sacs may be reduced to ten (10) feet for those portions of lots which abut a cul-de-sac bulb. (See Figure 26-123.3 at the end of section 26-123) (e) A total of fifteen (15) feet side yard setback for every individual lot with a minimum of five (5) feet on one (1) side. (f) See Section 26-625 for additional regulations pertaining to accessory buildings. (g) Fifteen-foot setback for the first story and five (5) feet for each additional story. (h) Bulk plane regulations shall apply in accordance with section 26-642, and may, when applied to a specific project, have the effect of reducing the maximum height permitted. (i) See Section 26-646.B.3 for additional regulations and exceptions pertaining to the size and footprint of ADUs. Section 4. Section 26-208.B (Residential-One C District (R-1C)) of the Wheat Ridge Code of Laws is amended by creating a new footnote (g) pertaining to the size of accessory dwelling units: B. Development standards: Maximum Height (f) Maximum Building Coverage Minimum Lot Area Minimum Lot Width (a) Minimum Front Yard Setback (b) Minimum Side Yard Setback (c) Minimum Rear Yard Setback (c) Principal Buildings Single detached dwelling 35' 40% 5,000 sf 50' 20’ (d) 5' 5’ Group home 35' 40% 5,000 sf 50' 20’ (d) 5' 5' Churches, schools, government and quasi-government buildings, golf courses, small day care center, and nursing, elderly and congregate care homes 35' 40% 1 acre 200' 20’ (d) 15' 20' Accessory Buildings (e) Major 15' 600 sf N/A N/A 20’ (d) 5' 5' Minor 10' 300 sf N/A N/A 20’ (d) 5' 5' Accessory dwelling unit, detached 25’ Floor area limited to 50% of principal, or 1,000 sf, whichever is less (g) N/A N/A 20’ (d) 5’ 5’ All Other Uses 35' 40% 9,000 sf 60' 20’ (d) 5' (e) 10' Notes: (a) Corner lots shall have a minimum lot width of eighty (80) feet for both street frontages. (b) Front setback reductions may be allowed in accordance with Section 26-611. (c) Any side or rear yard which abuts a public street shall have a minimum setback of twenty (20) feet for all structures, with the following exception: For corner lots that are sixty (60) feet or narrower in width, this requirement shall be reduced by half. (d) Front setbacks for structures on lots or portions of lots which abut cul-de-sacs may be reduced to ten (10) feet for those portions of lots which abut a cul-de-sac bulb. (See Figure 26-123.3 at the end of section 26-123) (e) See Section 26-625 for additional regulations pertaining to accessory buildings. (f) Bulk plane regulations shall apply in accordance with Section 26-642, and may, when applied to a specific project, have the effect of reducing the maximum height permitted. (g) See Section 26-646.B.3 for additional regulations and exceptions pertaining to the size and footprint of ADUs. Section 5. Section 26-209.B (Residential-Two District (R-2)) of the Wheat Ridge Code of Laws is amended by creating a new footnote (i) pertaining to the size of accessory dwelling units: B. Development standards: Maximu m Height (h) Maximum Building Coverage Minimum Lot Area Minimum Lot Width (a) Minimum Front Yard Setback (b) Minimum Side Yard Setback (c) Minimum Rear Yard Setback (c) Principal Buildings Single detached dwelling 35' 40% 9,000 sf 75' 25’ (d) 5' (e) 10' Duplex dwelling 35' 40% 12,500 sf 100' 25’ (d) 5' per story (e) 10' Group home 35' 40% 9,000 sf 75' 25’ (d) 5' per story (e) 10' Churches, schools, government and quasi-government buildings, golf courses, small day care center, and nursing, elderly and congregate care homes 35' 40% 1 acre 200' 25’ (d) 15' (g) 20' Accessory Buildings (f) Major 15' 1,000 sf per unit N/A N/A 25’ (d) 5' 5' if <= 10’ in height; 10' if > 10’ in height Minor 10' 400 sf N/A N/A 25’ (d) 5' 5' Accessory dwelling unit, detached 25’ Floor area limited to 50% of principal, or 1,000 sf, whichever is less (i) N/A N/A 25’ (d) 5’ 5’ if ≤ 10’ in height; 10’ if > 10’ in height All Other Uses 35' 40% 9,000 sf 75' 25’ (d) 5' (e) 10' Notes: (a) Corner lots shall have a minimum lot width of eighty (80) feet for both street frontages. (b) Front setback reductions may be allowed in accordance with Section 26-611. (c) Any side or rear yard which abuts a public street shall have a minimum setback of twenty five (25) feet for all structures, with the following exception: For corner lots that are sixty (60) feet or narrower in width, this requirement shall be reduced by half. (d) Front setbacks for structures on lots or portions of lots which abut cul-de-sacs may be reduced to ten (10) feet for those portions of lots which abut a cul-de-sac bulb. (See Figure 26-123.3 at the end of section 26-123) (e) A total of fifteen (15) feet side yard setback for every individual lot with a minimum of five (5) feet on one (1) side. (f) See Section 26-625 for additional regulations pertaining to accessory buildings. (g) Fifteen-foot setback for the first story and five (5) feet for each additional story. (h) Bulk plane regulations shall apply in accordance with section 26-642, and may, when applied to a specific project, have the effect of reducing the maximum height permitted. (i) See Section 26-646.B.3 for additional regulations and exceptions pertaining to the size and footprint of ADUs. Section 6. Section 26-210.B (Residential-Two A District (R-2A)) of the Wheat Ridge Code of Laws is amended by creating a new footnote (j) pertaining to the size of accessory dwelling units: B. Development standards: Maximum Height (i) Maximum Building Coverage Minimum Lot Area Minimum Lot Width (a) Minimum Front Yard Setback (b) Minimum Side Yard Setback (c) Minimum Rear Yard Setback (c) Principal Buildings Single detached dwelling 35' 40% 7,500 sf 60’ 25’ (d) 5' (d) 10' Duplex dwelling 35' 40% 9,000 sf 75' 25’ (d) 5' per story 10' Multi-unit dwelling (3/more dwelling units) (h) 35' 40% 13,050 sf (e) 100' 25’ (d) 5' per story 10' for one or two story buildings; 15' for three story Group home 35' 40% 9,000 sf 75' 25’ (d) 5' per story 10' Churches, schools, government and quasi-government buildings, golf courses, small day care center, and nursing, elderly and congregate care homes 35' 40% 1 acre 200' 25’ (d) 15' (f) 20' Accessory Buildings (g) Major 15' 600 sf (per unit) N/A N/A 25’ (d) 5' 5' if <= 10’ in height; 10' if > 10’ in height Minor 10' 400 sf/4 d.u. N/A N/A 25’ (d) 5' 5' Accessory dwelling unit, detached 25’ Floor area limited to 50% of principal, or 1,000 sf, whichever is less (j) N/A N/A 25’ (d) 5’ 5’ if ≤ 10’ in height; 10’ if > 10’ in height All Other Uses 35' 40% 9,000 sf 75' 25’ (d) 5' 10' Notes: (a) Corner lots shall have a minimum lot width of eighty (80) feet for both street frontages. (b) Front setback reductions may be allowed in accordance with Section 26-611. (c) Any side or rear yard which abuts a public street shall have a minimum setback of twenty five (25) feet for all structures, with the following exception: For Corner lots that are sixty (60) feet or narrower in width, this requirement shall be reduced by half. (d) Front setbacks for one-or two-unit dwelling structures on lots or portions of lots which abut cul-de-sacs may be reduced to ten (10) feet for those portions of lots which abut a cul-de-sac bulb. (See Figure 26-123.3.) (e) A minimum of four thousand three hundred fifty (4,350) square feet of land area shall be required for each dwelling unit for multi-unit buildings. (f) Fifteen-foot setback for the first story and five (5) feet for each additional story. (g) See Section 26-625 for additional regulations pertaining to accessory buildings. (h) Individual townhouse lots shall be exempt from minimum lot size, lot width, and interior side yard setback requirements, so long as the development parcel for the entire multi-unit townhouse building meets all standards of this section. See section 26-411.C regarding the required plat note for townhouse lots. (i) Bulk plane regulations shall apply in accordance with section 26-642, and may, when applied to a specific project, have the effect of reducing the maximum height permitted. (j) See Section 26-646.B.3 for additional regulations and exceptions pertaining to the size and footprint of ADUs. […] Section 7. Section 26-211.B (Residential-Three District (R-3)) of the Wheat Ridge Code of Laws is amended by creating a new footnote (j) pertaining to the size of accessory dwelling units: B. Development standards: Maximum Height (i) Maximum Building Coverage Minimum Lot Area Minimum Lot Width (a) Minimum Front Yard Setback (b) Minimum Side Yard Setback (d) Minimum Rear Yard Setback (d) Principal Buildings Single detached dwelling 35' 40% 7,500 sf 60' 25’ (e) 5' 10' Duplex dwelling 35' 40% 9,000 sf 75' 25’ (e) 5' per story 10' Multi-unit dwelling (3/more dwelling units) 35' 40% 12,500 sf (f) 100' 25’ (e) 15' (c) 15' (c) Group home 35' 40% 9,000 sf 75' 25’ (e) 5' per story 10' Churches, schools, government and quasi-government buildings, golf courses, small day care center, and nursing, elderly and congregate care homes 35' 40% 1 acre 200' 25’ (e) 15' (c) 20' Accessory Buildings (g) Major 15' 600 sf (per unit) N/A N/A 25’ (e) 5' 5' if <= 10’ in height; 10' if > 10’ in height Minor 10' 400 sf/4 d.u. N/A N/A 25’ (e) 5' 5' Accessory dwelling unit, detached 25’ Floor area limited to 50% of principal, or 1,000 sf, whichever is less (j) N/A N/A 25’ (e) 5’ 5’ if ≤ 10’ in height; 10’ if > 10’ in height All Other Uses 35' 40% 7,500 sf 60' 25’ (e) 5’ per story 10' Notes: (a) Corner lots shall have a minimum lot width of eighty (80) feet for both street frontages. (b) Front setback reductions may be allowed in accordance with Section 26-611. (c) Side and rear yard setback shall be fifteen (15) feet for the first two (2) stories and an additional five (5) feet for each additional story over two (2) stories. (d) Any side or rear yard which abuts a public street shall have a minimum setback of twenty-five (25) feet for all structures, with the following exception: For corner lots that are sixty (60) feet or narrower in width, this requirement shall be reduced by half. (e) Front setbacks for one-or two-unit dwelling structures on lots or portions of lots which abut cul-de-sacs may be reduced to ten (10) feet for those portions of lots which abut a cul-de-sac bulb. (See Figure 26-123.3.) (f) A minimum of three thousand six hundred thirty (3,630) square feet of land area shall be required for each dwelling unit for multi-unit buildings. (g) See Section 26-625 for additional regulations pertaining to accessory buildings. (h) Individual townhouse lots shall be exempt from minimum lot size, lot width, and interior side yard setback requirements, so long as the development parcel for the entire multi-unit townhouse building meets all standards of this section. See section 26-411.C regarding the required plat note for townhouse lots. (i) Bulk plane regulations shall apply in accordance with section 26-642, and may, when applied to a specific project, have the effect of reducing the maximum height permitted. (j) See Section 26-646.B.3 for additional regulations and exceptions pertaining to the size and footprint of ADUs. […] Section 8. Section 26-212.B (Residential-Three A District (R-3 A)) of the Wheat Ridge Code of Laws is amended by creating a new footnote (j) pertaining to the size of accessory dwelling units: B. Development standards: Maximum Height (i) Maximum Building Coverage Minimum Lot Area Minimum Lot Width (a) Minimum Front Yard Setback (b) Minimum Side Yard Setback (d) Minimum Rear Yard Setback (d) Principal Buildings Single detached dwelling 35' 40% 7,500 sf 60' 25’ (e) 5' 10' Duplex dwelling 35' 40% 9,000 sf 75' 25’ (e) 5' per story 10' Multi-unit dwelling (3/more dwelling units) (h) 35' 40% 12,500 sf (f) 100' 25’ (e) 15' (c) 15' (c) Group home 35' 40% 9,000 sf 75' 25’ (e) 5' per story 10' Churches, schools, government and quasi-government buildings, golf courses, small day care center, and nursing, elderly and congregate care homes 35' 40% 1 acre 200' 25’ 15' (c) 20' Accessory Buildings (g) Major 15' 600 sf (per unit) N/A N/A 25’ (e) 5' 5' if <= 10’ in height; 10' if > 10’ in height Minor 10' 400 sf/4 d.u. N/A N/A 25’ (e) 5' 5' Accessory dwelling unit, detached 25’ Floor area limited to 50% of principal, or 1,000 sf, N/A N/A 25’ (e) 5’ 5’ if ≤ 10’ in height; 10’ if > 10’ in height Maximum Height (i) Maximum Building Coverage Minimum Lot Area Minimum Lot Width (a) Minimum Front Yard Setback (b) Minimum Side Yard Setback (d) Minimum Rear Yard Setback (d) whichever is less (j) All Other Uses 35' 40% 7,500 sf 60' 25’ (e) 5’ per story 10' Notes: (a) Corner lots shall have a minimum lot width of eighty (80) feet for both street frontages. (b) Front setback reductions may be allowed in accordance with Section 26-611. (c) Side and rear yard setback shall be fifteen (15) feet for the first two (2) stories and an additional five (5) feet for each additional story over two (2) stories. (d) Any side or rear yard which abuts a public street shall have a minimum setback of twenty five (25) feet for all structures, with the following exception: For corner lots that are sixty (60) feet or narrower in width, this requirement shall be reduced by half. (e) Front setbacks for one-or two-unit dwelling structures on lots or portions of lots which abut cul-de-sacs may be reduced to ten (10) feet for those portions of lots which abut a cul-de-sac bulb. (See Figure 26-123.3.) (f) A minimum of three thousand nine hundred sixty (3,960) square feet of land area shall be required for each dwelling unit for multi-unit buildings. (g) See Section 26-625 for additional regulations pertaining to accessory buildings. (h) Individual townhouse lots shall be exempt from minimum lot size, lot width, and interior side yard setback requirements, so long as the development parcel for the entire multi-unit townhouse building meets all standards of this section. See section 26-411.C regarding the required plat note for townhouse lots. (i) Bulk plane regulations shall apply in accordance with section 26-642, and may, when applied to a specific project, have the effect of reducing the maximum height permitted. (j) See Section 26-646.B.3 for additional regulations and exceptions pertaining to the size and footprint of ADUs. […] Section 9. Section 26-213.B (Agricultural-One District (A-1)) of the Wheat Ridge Code of Laws is amended by creating a new footnote (f) pertaining to the size of accessory dwelling units: B. Development standards: Maximum Height Maximum Building Coverage Minimum Lot Area (d) Minimum Lot Width Minimum Front Yard Setback Minimum Side Yard Setback (a) Minimum Rear Yard Setback (b) Principal Buildings Single detached dwelling 35' 25% 1 acre 140' 30’ (c) 15' 15' Group home 35' 25% 1 acre 140’ 30’ (c) 15’ 15’ Churches, schools, government and quasi-government buildings, golf courses, small day care center, and nursing, elderly and congregate care homes 35' 25% 1 acre 200' 30’ (c) 15' 20' Major 35' 25% N/A N/A 30’ (c) 15' 5' Minor 35' 25% N/A N/A 30’ (c) 15’ 5' Maximum Height Maximum Building Coverage Minimum Lot Area (d) Minimum Lot Width Minimum Front Yard Setback Minimum Side Yard Setback (a) Minimum Rear Yard Setback (b) Accessory Buildings (e) Accessory dwelling unit, detached 25’ Floor area limited to 50% of principal, or 1,000 sf, whichever is less (f) N/A N/A 30’ (c) 15’ 5’ All Other Uses 35' 25% 1 acre 140’ 30’ 15’ 15’ Notes: (a) Any side yard which abuts a public street shall have a minimum setback of thirty (30) feet for all structures. (b) Any rear yard which abuts a public street shall have a minimum setback of thirty (30) feet for all structures, except where greater setbacks are specifically required. (c) Front setbacks for single-unit dwelling structures on lots or portions of lots which abut cul-de-sacs may be reduced to ten (10) feet for those portions of lots which abut a cul-de-sac bulb. (See figure 26-123.3) (d) Lots smaller than one (1) acre may be used only for residential purposes. (e) See Section 26-625 for additional regulations pertaining to accessory buildings. (f) See Section 26-646.B.3 for additional regulations and exceptions pertaining to the size and footprint of ADUs. Section 10. Section 26-214.B (Agricultural-Two District (A-2)) of the Wheat Ridge Code of Laws is amended by removing the existing footnote (d) which contains an error conflicting with the table and other Code requirements, appropriate re-lettering of remaining sections, and the addition of a new footnote (f) pertaining to the size of accessory dwelling units: B. Development standards: Maximum Height Maximum Building Coverage Minimum Lot Area (e)(d) Minimum Lot Width Minimum Front Yard Setback Minimum Side Yard Setback (a) Minimum Rear Yard Setback (b) Principal Buildings Single detached dwelling 35' 25% 1 acre 140' 30’ (c) 15' 15' Group home 35' 25% 1 acre 140’ 30’ (c) 15’ 15’ Churches, schools, government and quasi-government buildings, golf courses, small day care center, and nursing, elderly and congregate care homes 35' 25% 1 acre 200' 30’ (c) 15' 20' Accessory Buildings (f) (e) Major 35' 25% N/A N/A 30’ (c) 15' 5' Minor 35' 25% N/A N/A 30’ (d) 15’ 5' Accessory dwelling unit, detached 25’ Floor area limited to 50% of N/A N/A 30’ (c) 15’ 5’ Maximum Height Maximum Building Coverage Minimum Lot Area (e)(d) Minimum Lot Width Minimum Front Yard Setback Minimum Side Yard Setback (a) Minimum Rear Yard Setback (b) principal, or 1,000 sf, whichever is less (f) All Other Uses 35' 25% 1 acre 140’ 30’ 15’ 15’ Notes: (a) Any side yard which abuts a public street shall have a minimum setback of thirty (30) feet for all structures. (b) Any rear yard which abuts a public street shall have a minimum setback of thirty (30) feet for all structures, except where greater setbacks are specifically required. (c) Front setbacks for single-unit dwelling structures on lots or portions of lots which abut cul-de-sacs may be reduced to ten (10) feet for those portions of lots which abut a cul-de-sac bulb. (See figure 26-123.3) (d) Accessory buildings housing livestock (including poultry, kennels and rabbits) shall be set back one hundred (100) feet from the front property line. All other accessory buildings not listed shall have a minimum front setback of seventy-five (75) feet. (e) (d) Lots smaller than one (1) acre may be used only for residential purposes. (f) (e) See Section 26-625 for additional regulations pertaining to accessory buildings. (f) See Section 26-646.B.3 for additional regulations and exceptions pertaining to the size and footprint of ADUs. Section 11. Section 26-312.L of the Wheat Ridge Code of Laws, concerning planned residential development (PRD) district regulations, is hereby amended as follows: L. Any planned residential development approved on and after August 1, 2022, which allows single detached dwelling units as a primary use shall allow accessory dwelling units as an accessory use. Section 12. Section 26-316.B of the Wheat Ridge Code of Laws, concerning planned mixed use development (PMUD) district regulations, is hereby amended as follows: B. Permitted uses. Permitted uses shall be a mixture of residential and commercial uses governed by approval of the outline development plan. Extended stay lodging shall be permitted only in planned mixed use districts and planned commercial districts, and only as a special use subject to the standards in chapter 11, article XVI. Any planned mixed use development approved on and after August 1, 2022 which allows single detached dwelling units as a primary use shall allow accessory dwelling units as an accessory use. Section 13. Section 26-646.A of the Wheat Ridge Code of Laws concerning eligible zone districts for Accessory Dwelling Units is hereby amended as follows: A. Eligible zone districts: An accessory dwelling unit (ADU) shall be permitted as an accessory use to single detached dwellings in all residential and agricultural zone districts, the mixed use-neighborhood (MU-N) zone district, and portions of the mixed use-lutheran legacy campus (MU-LLC) zone district per the table of permitted uses (Table 5) in section 26-1410.B. Planned residential developments and planned mixed use developments that are approved on and after August 15, 2022 and that allow single detached dwelling units as a primary use shall also allow ADUs as an accessory use. Section 14. Section 26-646.B of the Wheat Ridge Code of Laws concerning development standards for Accessory Dwelling Units is hereby amended as follows: B. Development standards: … 3. Size: The floor area of an accessory dwelling unit shall not exceed fifty (50) percent of the gross floor area of the primary dwelling unit, or one thousand (1,000) square feet, whichever is more restrictive. As an exception to this rule, an attached accessory dwelling unit in a basement or second floor may exceed this allowance, provided the area does not exceed the area of the first floor of the same structure. a. The floor area of an accessory dwelling unit shall not exceed fifty (50) percent of the gross floor area of the primary dwelling unit, or one thousand (1,000) square feet, whichever is more restrictive. Regardless of this limit, ADUs shall always be permitted between five hundred (500) and seven hundred fifty (750) square feet in size, so long as the gross floor area of the ADU does not exceed that of the primary dwelling unit. b. As an exception, an attached accessory dwelling unit in a basement or second floor may exceed the size limitations, provided the area does not exceed the area of the first floor of the same structure. c. The maximum footprint of a detached ADU structure shall be one thousand (1,000) square feet. This footprint shall include the allotted floor area of the ADU, plus any other spaces attached to the ADU, such as a garage, carport, porch, or deck. … Section 15. Section 26-646.E of the Wheat Ridge Code of Laws concerning owner occupancy requirements for Accessory Dwelling Units is hereby amended as follows: E. Owner occupancyOccupancy and sale restrictions: 1. If the ADU is to be operated as a “partial-home” short-term rental as described in section 26-645, then Tthe property owner, as reflected in title records and evidenced by voter registration, vehicle registration or other similar means, must occupy either the primary dwelling unit or the ADU. 2.Deed restriction: As a condition of and prior to approval of an ADU, or issuance of building permit for the ADU (or at a later time if determined by the director as appropriate for the proposed initial or later use of the property), the property owner shall be required to execute a declaration of restrictions, binding upon successors and assigns, in a form approved by the city attorney, to be recorded by the city with the Jefferson County Clerk and Recorder, which requires that: a. The ADU shall not be sold separately from the primary dwelling unit, nor shall the lot on which it is situated be subdivided unless such subdivision can be accomplished in accordance with all provisions of this Code; b. The primary dwelling unit or the ADU shall be occupied by the property owner; and c. Failure to continuously comply with deed restrictions may subject the owner of the property to penalties provided for in this Code, including the revocation of the certificate of occupancy or completion. 2. The ADU shall not be sold separately from the primary dwelling unit, nor shall the lot on which it is situated be subdivided unless such subdivision can be accomplished in accordance with all provisions of this Code. 3. Removal of deed restriction: In the event the ADU is demolished or modified such that it no longer functions as an ADU, the community development director shall record appropriate documentation releasing such encumbrance upon written request of the property owner. Section 16. Section 26-646.F of the Wheat Ridge Code of Laws concerning nonconforming Accessory Dwelling Units is hereby amended as follows including the removal of 26.646.F.4 and renumbering the remaining subsection accordingly: A. Nonconforming properties: 1. Owners of property currently containing structures which may fall within the definition of ADU under section 26-123, are hereby granted the right to apply to the city for approval of the same until August 15, 2026. Following that date, and in absence of city approval of an ADU under this section, unapproved or unpermitted ADUs shall be subject to enforcement as provided by law. Upon review and approval of such applications by the city, the deed restriction requirement of subsection E. shall apply. Development standards of subsection B. do not apply. 2. A building permit shall be required for any construction or modification of the ADU to bring the structure into compliance with applicable building codes, to the extent practical, as determined by the community development director, in consultation with the chief building official. A building permit is not required to the extent the ADU is determined to be legally nonconforming pursuant to section 26-120 as documented by proof provided by the owner and to the satisfaction of the community development director. 3. If a property contains more than one (1) ADU, deemed lawful pursuant to subsections F.1. and F.2. by August 15, 2026, those ADUs shall be allowed to remain until voluntarily demolished or converted to other uses, consistent with the provisions of Code subsection 26-120.C. 4. The owner occupancy requirement of this section shall not apply to properties which, on August 15, 2022 (as documented by proof provided by the owner and to the satisfaction of the community development director), contain a primary dwelling and ADU, neither of which are occupied by the owner. In the event the property is sold or the owner commences occupancy of either the primary dwelling or ADU, this exemption from the application of the owner occupancy requirements of this section shall expire. 5. 4. Properties containing existing nonconforming accessory structures may be eligible for conversion of those structures to an ADU only to the extent a variance to address nonconforming elements is first obtained pursuant to section 26-115. Section 17. Safety Clause. The City of Wheat Ridge hereby finds, determines, and declares that this ordinance is promulgated under the general police power of the City of Wheat Ridge, that it is promulgated for the health, safety, and welfare of the public and that this ordinance is necessary for the preservation of health and safety and for the protection of public convenience and welfare. The City Council further determines that the ordinance bears a rational relation to the proper legislative object sought to be attained. Section 18. Severability, Conflicting Ordinances Repealed. If any section, subsection, or clause of this Ordinance shall be deemed to be unconstitutional or otherwise invalid, the validity of the remaining sections, subsections and clauses shall not be affected thereby. All other ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict with the provisions of this Ordinance are hereby repealed. Section 19. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall take effect fifteen (15) days after final publication, as provided by Section 5.11 of the Charter. INTRODUCED, READ, AND ADOPTED on first reading by a vote of __ to __ on this 28th day of April 2025, ordered published by title and in full on the City’s website as provided by the Home Rule Charter, and Public Hearing and consideration on final passage set for May 12, 2025 at 6:30 p.m., as a virtual meeting and in the Council Chambers, 7500 West 29th Avenue, Wheat Ridge, Colorado. READ, ADOPTED AND ORDERED PUBLISHED on second and final reading by a vote of ___ to ___, this __ day of ____, 2025. SIGNED by the Mayor on this _____ day of ____________, 2025. _______________________________ Bud Starker, Mayor ATTEST: _______________________________ Margy Greer, Senior Deputy City Clerk Approved as to Form _________________________ Gerald E. Dahl, City Attorney First Publication: April 29, 2025 Second Publication: May 13, 2025 Effective Date: May 28, 2025 Jeffco Transcript and www.ci.wheatridge.co.us ITEM NUMBER:5 DATE: April 28, 2025 REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION COUNCIL BILL 10-2025 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 26 OF THE WHEAT RIDGE CODE OF LAWS REGARDING RESIDENTIAL OCCUPANCY LIMITS AND MAKING CONFORMING AMENDMENTS THEREWITH ☐PUBLIC HEARING ☐BIDS/MOTIONS ☐RESOLUTIONS ☒ORDINANCES FOR 1st READING ☐ORDINANCES FOR 2nd READING QUASI-JUDICIAL ☐YES ☒NO ISSUE: This ordinance amends Chapter 26 of the Wheat Ridge Code of Laws to update residential occupancy limits to comply with a recent update to the City Charter and state legislation. PRIOR ACTION: The City Council discussed the proposed code amendment at their March 17, 2025, study session, and directed staff to proceed with preparing an ordinance for consideration. Planning Commission reviewed the ordinance at a public hearing held on April 17, 2025, and recommended approval by a vote of 6 to 0. The draft Planning Commission minutes will be included with the Council Action Form for the second reading. FINANCIAL IMPACT: The proposed ordinance is not anticipated to have a direct financial impact on the city. BACKGROUND: The State of Colorado Legislature passed several bills in the 2024 Legislative Session related to land use and housing. House Bill (HB) 24-1007, titled “Prohibit Residential Occupancy Limits,” prohibits municipalities from limiting the number of people who may live together in a single dwelling unit based on familial relationships and whether or not persons are related. Occupancy can still be Council Action Form – Occupancy Limits April 28, 2025 Page 2 regulated based on health and safety standards, such as building codes or fire codes to prevent overcrowding, or any applicable affordable housing program guidelines. This bill took effect on July 1, 2024. As a response to this bill, the City Charter was modified by voters as part of ballot measure 2B in November 2024 to remove references to “family unit” within the Charter and to remove the limit on three (3) unrelated persons living together as a single housekeeping unit. The approval of 2B put the City Charter in compliance with the state law, but other portions of the code that reference family units were not updated at that time. Current Code References to “family” or “family unit” remain in Chapter 26, including a definition of “family” and a few definitions which rely on the term “family” to calculate a maximum number of residents. Additionally, the code has a section on Occupancy Limits (section 26-638) which includes a limit on three (3) unrelated persons living together. In order to be compliant with the state law and the Charter, these provisions must be removed. Proposed Zoning Code Amendment The proposed code amendment updates the occupancy limits to be based on the maximum permitted by the applicable adopted building codes or applicable state or federal regulations. This removes a specific, yet arbitrary, number from the code and instead bases the occupancy limit on health and safety standards to be compliant with state law. Section 26-638 will be significantly simplified as a result. Group homes are subject to a different standard including some occupancy limits as defined in Section 26-612; no standards for group homes are changing as part of this ordinance. The ordinance makes the following updates: • The definition of “family” will be removed from the zoning code as it contains the limit on three (3) unrelated persons and other restrictions not legal under state law. The definition can be removed because no other code provisions will rely on the term “family” after this code amendment, and it is not necessary to preserve in the zoning code. In 2022, a code amendment already removed many other references to family in favor of “dwelling unit.” • The definition of “congregate care home” will be modified to remove the reference to “family unit.” • The definition of “rooming/boarding” will be removed as it relies on a number of residents in a “family.” This term is not relevant anymore since the city adopted short-term rental (STR) regulations in 2021 which distinguishes between short- term rentals (less than 30 days) and long-term rentals (30 days or more). Council Action Form – Occupancy Limits April 28, 2025 Page 3 • Finally, the bed and breakfast requirements in Section 26-608 will be updated to remove a reference to family and rooming/boarding. Staff do not have concerns with these changes, notably because occupancy limits based on familial relation were challenging to enforce and difficult to prove. Additionally, placing an arbitrary limit on the number of unrelated individuals at three (3) may have the effect on not filling bedrooms in a larger home or limiting housing options. Further, the group home regulations will remain in effect which may limit the impacts of those types of living situations on neighborhoods. The proposed code changes put the code into compliance with the state law and the Charter; it is best practice that all parts of the city code and Charter match. RECOMMENDED MOTION: Staff recommends approval of the ordinance. First reading in these cases is a procedural action that merely sets the date for the (second reading) public hearing. No testimony is taken on first reading. “I move to approve Council Bill No. 10-2025, an ordinance amending Chapter 26 of the Wheat Ridge Code of Laws regarding residential occupancy limits and making conforming amendments therewith, on first reading, order it published, the public hearing set for Monday, May 12, 2025, at 6:30 p.m. as a virtual meeting and in City Council Chambers, and that it takes fifteen (15) days after final publication.” Or, “I move to postpone indefinitely Council Bill No. 10-2025, an ordinance amending Chapter 26 of the Wheat Ridge Code of Laws regarding residential occupancy limits and making conforming amendments therewith, for the following reason(s): _______________________________________.” REPORT PREPARED/REVIEWED BY: Scott Cutler, Senior Planner Jana Easley, Planning Manager Lauren Mikulak, Community Development Director Patrick Goff, City Manager ATTACHMENTS: 1. Council Bill No. 10-2025 ATTACHMENT 1 CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE, COLORADO INTRODUCED BY COUNCIL MEMBER Council Bill No. 10 Ordinance No. 1823 Series of 2025 TITLE: AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 26 OF THE WHEAT RIDGE CODE OF LAWS REGARDING RESIDENTIAL OCCUPANCY LIMITS AND MAKING CONFORMING AMENDMENTS THEREWITH WHEREAS, the City of Wheat Ridge (“City”) is a Colorado home rule municipality operating under a Charter approved by the electorate pursuant to Article XX of the Colorado Constitution and governed by its elected City Council (“Council”); and WHEREAS, the Council has authority pursuant to the Home Rule Charter and C.R.S. §31-16-101, et seq. to adopt and enforce all ordinances; and WHEREAS, the State of Colorado Legislature adopted House Bill 24-1007 which prohibits local governments from limiting the number of people who may live together in a single dwelling unit based on familial relationship, while preserving the authority to regulate occupancy based on health and safety standards in adopted building codes; and WHEREAS, in November 2024, Wheat Ridge voters approved an amendment to the Home Rule Charter, that, among other topics, removed residential occupancy limits from the Charter based on familial relation and number of unrelated individuals; and WHEREAS, the Council recognizes that from time to time the zoning Code needs to be updated to include modern terminology, update cross-references, remove conflicts within the Code, and provide clarity to city staff and the public; and WHEREAS, the Council finds this ordinance is necessary to conform the Code of Laws to the state legislation and the amended Home Rule Charter. NOW THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE, COLORADO: Section 1. Section 26-123 of the Wheat Ridge Code of Laws, defining certain terms applicable to Chapter 26 of the Code, is hereby amended as follows: Family. One (1) or more persons related by blood, marriage, adoption, or legal custody plus domestic servants employed for service on the premises, or a group of not more than three (3) persons who need not be so related living together as a single housekeeping unit. Four (4) or five (5) unrelated people sixty (60) years of age or over ATTACHMENT 1 sharing one (1) housekeeping unit shall also be deemed to be a family. A family shall not include more than one (1) person required to register as a sex offender pursuant to C.R.S. § 18-3-412.5, as amended, unless related by blood, marriage, adoption, or legal custody. Residential group homes. … (c) Congregate care home: A residential facility established for the exclusive use of elderly persons, sixty (60) years or older, where intermediate nursing care may or may not be available, and where living and sleeping quarters are provided for individuals or couples; where, however, kitchen facilities are not provided. Meals are prepared by a central kitchen and may be served in a central dining room or taken in the living quarters. For the purpose of meeting the residential density provisions of the Wheat Ridge Home Rule Charter, each three (3) persons, based upon maximum designed occupancy load, shall constitute one (1) family unit. Rooming/boarding. An accessory use to a dwelling, where in addition to a family, as defined herein, not more than two (2) persons not related to the family are provided lodging for compensation, with or without meals, either paid directly or indirectly, and on a contract basis for not less than thirty (30) days. Section 2. Subsection 26-204.C of the Code is hereby amended as follows in the “Table of Uses—Residential” Accessory Uses for Residential Districts, by removing the rooming/boarding use from the table: Accessory Uses For Residential Districts Notes Rooming and/or boarding of not more than 2 persons On a contract basis for not less than 7 days Section 3. Subsection 26-204.C of the Code is hereby amended as follows in the “Table of Uses—Agricultural and Public Facilities” Agricultural and Public Facilities Districts Accessory Uses, by removing the rooming/boarding use from the table: Agricultural and Public Facilities Districts Accessory Uses Notes Rooming and/or boarding for not more than 2 persons On a contract basis for not less than 7 days Section 4. Section 26-608 of the Wheat Ridge Code of Laws, regulating bed and breakfast rooms, is hereby amended as follows: ATTACHMENT 1 Bed and breakfast rooms are allowed as a special use as a subordinate use of a single detached dwelling subject to the following requirements: A. The dwelling must be occupied by the owner. B. In addition to the owner’s sleeping quarters and those of the family who also legally reside within the dwelling, uUp to a maximum of four (4) additional sleeping quarters for transient occupancy may be provided for rent based upon the following requirements: 1. …. …. 4. Additional rooming and boarding is excluded as an accessory use where a bed and breakfast use has been approved. Section 5. Section 26-638 of the Wheat Ridge Code of Laws, regulating occupancy limits of residential dwelling units, is hereby amended as follows: A. Except as provided in subsections B. and E. hereof, the maximum occupancy allowed per dwelling unit in a single-unit, two-unit, or multi-unit dwelling shall be either:shall not exceed the maximum permitted by the applicable building codes adopted or amended by the City of Wheat Ridge as set forth in chapter 5 of the Code, or by any applicable state or federal law or regulation, or by affordable housing guidelines applicable to the dwelling unit. 1. One (1) family, as defined by section 26-123 of this Code, and not more than one (1) additional person; or 2. Two (2) adults and their dependents, if any, and not more than one (1) additional person. B. Exceptions. The following shall be exempt from thesubject to different maximum occupancy limits than those established in subection A. above: 1. Residential group homes that conform to the requirements of section 26- 612 of this Code; and. 2. Dwellings owned and operated by a nonprofit organization incorporated under the laws of this state for the purpose of providing housing to victims of domestic violence as such is defined in C.R.S. § 18-6-800.03. C. A violation of this section shall be proven by a preponderance of the evidence as a civil matter for which imprisonment shall not be imposed. The owner and any other person responsible for the management or control of a dwelling unit shall be liable for allowing occupancy in excess of this section if he or she they knew, or through reasonable diligence should have known, that a violation of this section was occurring. D. Definitions. The following words, terms and phrases when used in this section, shall have the following meanings: 1. Adult shall mean any person eighteen (18) years of age or older who is not a dependent. ATTACHMENT 1 2. Dependent shall mean the biological child of an adult occupying a dwelling unit, or a person related to an adult by reason of adoption, guardianship or other duly authorized custodial relationship, who receives financial support from the adult and who resides with the adult in the dwelling unit at least three (3) calendar months in a calendar year. 3. Occupancy or occupy shall mean the use of a dwelling unit or any portion thereof for living and sleeping purposes by a person acting in any of the following capacities: a. As an owner of the unit; b. As a tenant under an express or implied lease or sublease of the unit or of any portion thereof; c. As the dependent of such an owner or tenant; or d. As a guest or invitee of the owner, property manager, lessee or sublessee of the unit or of the dependent of any of the same, if such guest or invitee stays overnight at the unit a total of thirty (30) or more days within any twelve-month period. E. Nothing in this section shall operate to amend, abrogate or otherwise affect the validity of occupancy limitations as applied to building standards and regulations of the city, as set forth in Chapter 5 of this Code, including all technical codes adopted by reference therein. In the event of a conflict between two (2) applicable occupancy standards, the stricter (lower) occupancy limit shall apply. Section 6. Safety Clause. The City of Wheat Ridge hereby finds, determines, and declares that this ordinance is promulgated under the general police power of the City of Wheat Ridge, that it is promulgated for the health, safety, and welfare of the public and that this ordinance is necessary for the preservation of health and safety and for the protection of public convenience and welfare. The City Council further determines that the ordinance bears a rational relation to the proper legislative object sought to be attained. Section 7. Severability, Conflicting Ordinances Repealed. If any section, subsection, or clause of this Ordinance shall be deemed to be unconstitutional or otherwise invalid, the validity of the remaining sections, subsections and clauses shall not be affected thereby. All other ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict with the provisions of this Ordinance are hereby repealed. Section 8. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall take effect fifteen (15) days after final publication, as provided by Section 5.11 of the Charter. INTRODUCED, READ, AND ADOPTED on first reading by a vote of __ to __ on this 28th day of April 2025, ordered published by title and in full on the City’s website as provided by the Home Rule Charter, and Public Hearing and consideration on final ATTACHMENT 1 passage set for May 12, 2025 at 6:30 p.m., as a virtual meeting and in the Council Chambers, 7500 West 29th Avenue, Wheat Ridge, Colorado. READ, ADOPTED AND ORDERED PUBLISHED on second and final reading by a vote of ___ to ___, this __ day of ____, 2025. SIGNED by the Mayor on this _____ day of ____________, 2025. _______________________________ Bud Starker, Mayor ATTEST: _______________________________ Margy Greer, Senior Deputy City Clerk Approved as to Form _________________________ Gerald E. Dahl, City Attorney First Publication: April 29, 2025 Second Publication: May 13, 2025 Effective Date: May 28, 2025 Jeffco Transcript and www.ci.wheatridge.co.us ITEM NUMBER:6 DATE: April 28, 2025 REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION RESOLUTION 23-2025 TITLE: A RESOLUTION IN OPPOSITION OF HB25-1220 REGULATION OF MEDICAL NUTRITION THERAPY ☐PUBLIC HEARING ☐BIDS/MOTIONS ☒RESOLUTIONS ☐ORDINANCES FOR 1st READING ☐ORDINANCES FOR 2nd READING QUASI-JUDICIAL ☐YES ☒NO ISSUE: The Legislative Committee recommends that the City Council adopt a resolution in opposition of HB25-1220 Regulation of Medical Nutrition Therapy. PRIOR ACTION: None. FINANCIAL IMPACT: None. BACKGROUND: In 2025, the Wheat Ridge City Council launched a Legislative Advocacy Program. This initiative includes the adoption of the 2025 Legislative Agenda, the formation of a City Council subcommittee, the Legislative Committee, to review legislation affecting the City and recommend advocacy position resolutions, a process for the City Council to consider adopting those resolutions, and a plan for City Staff and the Legislative Committee to begin lobbying in alignment with the adopted positions. After reviewing multiple bills, the Legislative Committee recommends that the City Council consider adopting an advocacy position resolution in opposition of HB25-1220 Regulation of Medical Nutrition Therapy. HB25-1220 establishes licensing requirements for individuals providing medical nutrition therapy. The bill includes language that would prohibit unlicensed individuals, including staff at grocery stores and other retailers, from sharing information about the effects of nutritional supplements with customers. Council Action Form – A Resolution in Opposition of HB25-1220 April 28, 2025 Page 2 The City is concerned that such restrictions would limit consumer access to basic product information and negatively impact sales of nutritional supplements, leading to a reduction in local sales tax revenue. Since the City relies on this revenue to fund essential services and programs, the resolution urges the Colorado General Assembly to oppose HB25-1220 to ensure that retailers may continue providing general information about nutritional supplements without the need for a professional license. The resolution supports balanced regulation that protects public health without placing undue burdens on local businesses or restricting consumer access to nutritional information. RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends approving Resolution 23-2025, A Resolution in Opposition of HB25- 1220 Regulation of Medical Nutrition Therapy. RECOMMENDED MOTION: “I move to approve Resolution 23-2025, A Resolution in Opposition of HB25-1220 Regulation of Medical Nutrition Therapy.” Or, “I move to postpone indefinitely Resolution 23-2025, A Resolution in Opposition of HB25-1220 Regulation of Medical Nutrition Therapy for the following reason(s).” REPORT PREPARED/REVIEWED BY: Cole Haselip, Management Analyst Marianne Schilling, Assistant City Manager Patrick Goff, City Manager ATTACHMENTS: 1. Resolution 23-2025 CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE, COLORADO RESOLUTION NO. 23 SERIES OF 2025 TITLE: A RESOLUTION IN OPPOSITION OF HB25-1220 REGULATION OF MEDICAL NUTRITION THERAPY WHEREAS, the City of Wheat Ridge is committed to promoting public health and wellness by supporting community access to nutritional information and products; and WHEREAS, Colorado House Bill 25-1220 proposes the regulation and licensure of individuals providing medical nutrition therapy, and includes language that restricts unlicensed individuals, including grocery stores and other retailers, from sharing information about the effects of nutritional supplement products; and WHEREAS, grocery stores in Wheat Ridge play an important role in offering nutritional supplements and related information to the public as part of their retail services; and WHEREAS, the City of Wheat Ridge collects local sales tax revenue on the sale of nutritional supplements in grocery stores and other retail establishments; and WHEREAS, restricting communication about such nutritional products, will negatively impact retail sales and, consequently, the City’s sales tax revenues; and WHEREAS, such an outcome would directly affect the City’s ability to fund essential services and community programs supported by local sales tax revenue; and WHEREAS, the City of Wheat Ridge supports reasonable regulation that protects public health without unnecessarily burdening local businesses or reducing the availability of consumer information. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Wheat Ridge, Colorado, as follows: Section 1. The City of Wheat Ridge opposes HB25-1220, as it would prohibit grocery stores and other retailers from sharing information about nutritional supplements with customers. This restriction could lead to decreased sales and a corresponding loss of local sales tax revenue. The City urges the Colorado General Assembly to oppose the bill in order to preserve consumer access to information and protect vital municipal revenue and directs its staff to advocate accordingly. ATTACHMENT 1 DONE AND RESOLVED this 28th day of April 2025 [SEAL] ATTEST: _________________________________________ Margy Greer, Sr. Deputy City Clerk _________________________________________ Bud Starker, Mayor ITEM NUMBER:7 DATE: April 28, 2025 REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION RESOLUTION 24-2025 TITLE: A RESOLUTION IN OPPOSITION OF HB25-1300 WORKERS’ COMPENSATION BENEFITS PROOF OF ENTITLEMENT ☐PUBLIC HEARING ☐BIDS/MOTIONS ☒RESOLUTIONS ☐ORDINANCES FOR 1st READING ☐ORDINANCES FOR 2nd READING QUASI-JUDICIAL ☐YES ☒NO ISSUE: The Legislative Committee recommends that the City Council adopt a resolution in opposition of HB25-1300 Workers’ Compensation Benefits Proof of Entitlement. PRIOR ACTION: None. FINANCIAL IMPACT: None. BACKGROUND: In 2025, the Wheat Ridge City Council launched a Legislative Advocacy Program. This initiative includes the adoption of the 2025 Legislative Agenda, the formation of a City Council subcommittee, the Legislative Committee, to review legislation affecting the City and recommend advocacy position resolutions, a process for the City Council to consider adopting those resolutions, and a plan for City Staff and the Legislative Committee to begin lobbying in alignment with the adopted positions. After reviewing multiple bills, the Legislative Committee recommends that the City Council consider adopting an advocacy position resolution in opposition of HB25-1300 Workers’ Compensation Benefits Proof of Entitlement. This bill would require injured employees to select a treating physician from a broad directory maintained by the Division of Workers’ Compensation (DOWC), rather than from a panel of providers designated by their employer. This change would reduce employers' ability to proactively recommend physicians who are best suited to meet the Council Action Form – A Resolution in Opposition of HB25-1300 April 28, 2025 Page 2 specific needs of their workplace and employees. It may also hinder the employer’s ability to provide immediate guidance and support to injured workers. The bill does not currently include clear limitations on how often or how quickly an employee may change physicians, creating an open-ended process that could further complicate care coordination. These factors raise concerns related to care quality, administrative efficiency, and cost control. Data from Colorado’s largest workers’ compensation insurer, Pinnacol Assurance, suggests the current system is functioning well for most injured workers. Of the approximately 35,000 claims processed last year, only 165 injured workers, less than 0.05% requested a change of physician. Of those, 80% of the requests were approved. In addition, nearly 90% of all medical treatment requests were approved, further indicating overall satisfaction with the current model. The bill introduces risks that could undermine effective care for injured workers. Requiring them to choose from a much larger, non-curated directory may delay treatment due to confusion or uncertainty about provider qualifications. Occupational medicine physicians are specifically trained to manage work-related injuries, ensure appropriate referrals, and help workers return to their jobs as quickly and safely as possible. The state directory includes out-of-state providers and specialists who may not be qualified to serve as primary treating physicians, particularly if they lack comprehensive training in occupational medicine. Moreover, employers may be required to cover travel costs for care that could otherwise be provided locally. For instance, under the expanded geographic range proposed by the bill (up to 70 miles in urban areas and 100 miles in rural areas), an employee based in Wheat Ridge could select a provider in Colorado Springs, bypassing qualified local physicians. From a cost perspective, a similar bill proposed in 2021 was estimated to increase medical costs by more than 6.5% in the state’s program. The projected increase was primarily attributed to the use of non-network physicians, additional administrative appeals, and potential for litigation. Open-ended timelines and the potential for multiple physician changes may also extend the duration of temporary total disability (TTD) benefits, contributing to higher system-wide costs. In addition to these costs, HB25- 1300 will trigger an automatic 2.5% premium increase for all Pinnacol policyholders, including the City of Wheat Ridge, pursuant to Colorado Division of Insurance rule 5-1- 11(F). These structural changes could lead to longer recovery times, delays in accessing appropriate care, higher physician turnover, and inconsistent or duplicative treatment thereby increasing employer costs and potentially raising workers’ compensation premiums. Council Action Form – A Resolution in Opposition of HB25-1300 April 28, 2025 Page 3 Finally, the bill does not appear to be addressing a well-defined or urgent issue within the existing system. Employers today have the tools to offer tailored, high-quality care options for their employees, and the data suggests these systems are working effectively. RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends approving Resolution 24-2025, A Resolution in Opposition of HB25- 1300 Workers’ Compensation Benefits Proof of Entitlement. RECOMMENDED MOTION: “I move to approve Resolution 24-2025, A Resolution in Opposition of HB25-1300 Workers’ Compensation Benefits Proof of Entitlement.” Or, “I move to postpone indefinitely Resolution 24-2025, A Resolution in Opposition of HB25-1300 Workers’ Compensation Benefits Proof of Entitlement for the following reason(s).” REPORT PREPARED/REVIEWED BY: Cole Haselip, Management Analyst Marianne Schilling, Assistant City Manager Patrick Goff, City Manager ATTACHMENTS: 1. Resolution 24-2025 ATTACHMENT 1 CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE, COLORADO RESOLUTION NO. 24 SERIES OF 2025 TITLE: A RESOLUTION IN OPPOSITION OF HB25-1300 WORKERS’ COMPENSATION BENEFITS PROOF OF ENTITLEMENT WHEREAS, the City of Wheat Ridge is committed to protecting the health, safety, and well-being of its employees and ensuring timely, high-quality medical care and support for workers injured on the job; and WHEREAS, HB25-1300 would require injured employees to select a treating physician from a broad directory maintained by the Division of Workers’ Compensation (DOWC), rather than from a panel designated by their employer, potentially introducing confusion and delays in care; and WHEREAS, the state directory may include out-of-state physicians and specialists not suited for primary care, including those without training in occupational medicine, and may hinder employers' ability to recommend qualified local providers; and WHEREAS, HB25-1300 would expand the allowable geographic range for physician selection, potentially requiring employers to cover travel expenses for treatment despite the availability of local providers; and WHEREAS, the bill does not limit how frequently an employee can change physicians, leading to fragmented care, delays, and increased administrative complexity; and WHEREAS, data from Pinnacol Assurance demonstrates that the current system is effective, with minimal requests for physician changes, high approval rates for treatment requests, and fewer than 0.05% of claims needing physician changes in 2024; and WHEREAS, a similar bill proposed in 2021 was estimated to increase medical costs by more than 6.5%, and HB25-1300 would trigger a 2.5% premium increase for Pinnacol policyholders, including the City of Wheat Ridge, per DOI Rule 5-1-11(F); and WHEREAS, the proposed changes would likely increase the duration of temporary total disability (TTD) benefits, further raising costs for employers and workers’ compensation premiums; and WHEREAS, employers, including the City of Wheat Ridge, already provide effective medical resources that support timely recovery and high satisfaction with care. ATTACHMENT 1 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Wheat Ridge, Colorado, as follows: Section 1. The City of Wheat Ridge opposes HB25-1300, as it limits employers’ ability to guide injured workers to appropriate care, creates unnecessary complexity in the treatment process, and introduces unfunded cost burdens without a clear policy justification. The bill disrupts a system that is currently serving workers well and may lead to a delay in care, higher medical expenses, and longer recovery periods. The City urges the Colorado State Legislature to reject HB25-1300 and directs its staff to advocate accordingly. DONE AND RESOLVED this 28th day of April 2025 [SEAL] ATTEST: _________________________________________ Margy Greer, Sr. Deputy City Clerk _________________________________________ Bud Starker, Mayor ITEM NUMBER:8 DATE: April 28, 2025 REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION RESOLUTION 25-2025 TITLE: A RESOLUTION IN SUPPORT OF SB25-030 INCREASE TRANSPORTATION MODE CHOICE REDUCE EMISSIONS ☐PUBLIC HEARING ☐BIDS/MOTIONS ☒RESOLUTIONS ☐ORDINANCES FOR 1st READING ☐ORDINANCES FOR 2nd READING QUASI-JUDICIAL ☐YES ☒NO ISSUE: The Legislative Committee recommends that the City Council adopt a resolution in support of SB25-030 Increase Transportation Mode Choice Reduce Emissions. PRIOR ACTION: None. FINANCIAL IMPACT: None. BACKGROUND: In 2025, the Wheat Ridge City Council launched a Legislative Advocacy Program. This initiative includes the adoption of the 2025 Legislative Agenda, the formation of a City Council subcommittee, the Legislative Committee, to review legislation affecting the City and recommend advocacy position resolutions, a process for the City Council to consider adopting those resolutions, and a plan for City Staff and the Legislative Committee to begin lobbying in alignment with the adopted positions. After reviewing multiple bills, the Legislative Committee recommends that the City Council consider adopting an advocacy position resolution in support of SB25-030 Increase Transportation Mode Choice Reduce Emissions. SB25-030, establishes a voluntary and collaborative framework for local governments to work with the Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) and metropolitan planning organizations to set transportation mode choice targets. These targets aim to reduce reliance on single-occupancy vehicles and promote sustainable alternatives Council Action Form – A Resolution in Support of SB25-030 April 28, 2025 Page 2 such as walking, biking, public transit, and carpooling. This bill directly supports several goals identified in the City of Wheat Ridge Sustainability Action Plan, particularly: • Goal T1: Increase traveler safety and environmental quality, including efforts to improve air quality (T1.1) and enhance sidewalk and bike infrastructure (T1.3). • Goal T3: Increase access to multimodal transportation options, by encouraging investment in multimodal infrastructure (T3.1), collaborating with regional partners like DRCOG (T3.3), and promoting multimodal transportation resources (T3.6). SB25-030 does not impose mandates but instead offers participating communities access to data, technical assistance, and potential funding opportunities through programs like the Multimodal Transportation Options Fund and the Nonattainment Area Air Pollution Mitigation Enterprise. The bill aligns with the City’s values around sustainability, public health, and improving access to mobility options. By adopting this resolution, the City Council affirms its commitment to advancing cleaner, more efficient transportation choices and urges the Colorado General Assembly to pass SB25-030 and the Governor to sign it into law. RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends approving Resolution 25-2025, A Resolution in Support of SB25-030 Increase Transportation Mode Choice Reduce Emissions. RECOMMENDED MOTION: “I move to approve Resolution 25-2025, A Resolution in Support of SB25-030 Increase Transportation Mode Choice Reduce Emissions.” Or, “I move to postpone indefinitely Resolution 25-2025, A Resolution in Support of SB25- 030 Increase Transportation Mode Choice Reduce Emissions for the following reason(s).” REPORT PREPARED/REVIEWED BY: Cole Haselip, Management Analyst Marianne Schilling, Assistant City Manager Patrick Goff, City Manager ATTACHMENTS: 1. Resolution 25-2025 ATTACHMENT 1 CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE, COLORADO RESOLUTION NO. 25 SERIES OF 2025 TITLE: A RESOLUTION IN SUPPORT OF SB25-030 INCREASE TRANSPORTATION MODE CHOICE REDUCE EMISSIONS WHEREAS, the City of Wheat Ridge is committed to promoting sustainable transportation options, reducing greenhouse gas emissions, and enhancing the quality of life for its residents; and WHEREAS, Colorado Senate Bill 25-030 seeks to improve air quality, public health, and transportation efficiency by encouraging a shift away from single-occupancy vehicle trips toward more sustainable modes such as walking, biking, public transit, and carpooling; and WHEREAS, SB25-030 creates a collaborative, voluntary framework for local governments, such as Wheat Ridge, to work with the Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) and metropolitan planning organizations to establish mode choice targets that reflect local priorities and conditions; and WHEREAS, SB25-030 supports multiple goals outlined in the City of Wheat Ridge Sustainability Action Plan, including Goal T1: Increase traveler safety and environmental quality, by promoting regional collaboration to improve air quality (T1.1) and enhancing infrastructure for walking and biking (T1.3); and WHEREAS, SB25-030 also advances Goal T3: Increase access to multimodal transportation options, by encouraging investment in multimodal infrastructure (T3.1), fostering partnerships with regional entities such as DRCOG (T3.3), and supporting outreach and education on sustainable travel options (T3.6); and WHEREAS, the bill does not impose mandates, but rather supports participating local governments with data, technical assistance, and potential funding from programs such as the Multimodal Transportation Options Fund and the Nonattainment Area Air Pollution Mitigation Enterprise; and WHEREAS, this legislation aligns with the City of Wheat Ridge’s values around sustainability, public health, and improving access to transportation options for all community members. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Wheat Ridge, Colorado, as follows: ATTACHMENT 1 Section 1. The City of Wheat Ridge supports Colorado Senate Bill 25-030, which establishes a voluntary and collaborative framework for local governments to work with CDOT and regional planning agencies to set transportation mode choice targets. The City recognizes the bill’s potential to expand multimodal transportation options, reduce emissions, and improve air quality, all while preserving local control and flexibility. The City urges the Colorado General Assembly to pass the bill and the Governor to sign it into law, and directs its staff to advocate accordingly. DONE AND RESOLVED this 28th day of April 2025 [SEAL] ATTEST: _________________________________________ Margy Greer, Sr. Deputy City Clerk _________________________________________ Bud Starker, Mayor