meeting of the city council - salida, colorado · pdf filerent review man) own as the w k....

I

Agenda The ordeCity Coucontactinadvance.

The City to or duri

I. MEET

II. PLEDG

III. ROLL

IV. CITIZE

V. PRESE

1. Introd

2. Boys

VI. SCHED

1. Consea. b. c.

2. Firefl

(Audr

3. WoodOrdin

4. Wood

OrdinDistri

5. Amen

Code(MichOrdin

6. LowryOrdin

June 18, 201er of agenda iuncil. Indivng the City C

Council maying the meeti

ING CALLE

GE OF ALLE

CALL

EN PARTIC

ENTATION

duction of Ly

and Girls Clu

DULED ITE

ent Agenda (Approval oApproval oProperty RLicense Re

ly Restaurantrey Gilpin)

d Annexationnance 2013-14

d Annexationnance 2013-15ct.

ndment to Se 2nd Reading

hael K. Yermannance 2013-16

y Annexationnance 2013-17

013 items listed aividuals withClerk, 448 E.

M

y take action ting, and item

ED TO ORD

EGIANCE –

CIPATION –

ynda Travis –

ub of Chaffe

EMS

(Audrey Gilpinof Agenda of Minutes: Ju

Requests and Sequest June 29

t Beer and W

n 2nd Readin4 annexing to t

n Zoning 2nd 5 zoning certai

ection 16-8-20g and Public Hn)

6 amending Ch

n 1st Reading7 annexing to t

above are apph disabilities

1st Street, Ste

MEETING OCity C

448 East City of

Tuesday, Jn on any of thms necessary

DER

– Led by Mayo

– 3 minute tim

– Municipal

e County – D

n)

une 4, 2013 Special Event L9. (2) Riverside

Wine License

ng and Publicthe City of Sal

Reading andin real propert

0 Road, DriveHearing

hapter 16 of th

g (Michael K. Ythe City of Sal

proximate ans needing ate. 112, Salida

1

F THE CITYCouncil Cham

1st Street, Rof Salida, ColoJune 18, 2013

he following aor convenien

or Don Stephe

me limit

Court Clerk

Discourage T

Liquor License Fine Arts Fe

Application

c Hearing (Mlida certain rea

d Public Heaty known as th

eway and Sid

he Salida Mun

Yerman) lida certain rea

nd intended aauxiliary aida, CO 81201,

Y COUNCIL

mbers oom 190 orado 6:00 p.m.

agenda itemsnt to effectua

ens

Tobacco Use

se Request: (1)estival August

with Concur

Michael K. Yeral property kn

aring (Michaelhe Wood Ann

dewalk Stand

nicipal Code.

al property kn

as a guidelind(s) may req

719-530-2630

L

s as presenteate the agend

on Trails an

) KHEN Spect 14 and 15.

rrent Review

rman) nown as the W

l K. Yerman) nexation Com

dards of the S

nown as the L

ne for the quest assist

30 at least 48

ed or modifieda items.

nd in Parks

cial Event Liq

and Public H

Wood Annexat

mmercial (C01)

Salida Munic

Lowry Annexa

tance by hours in

ed prior

quor

Hearing

tion.

Zone

cipal

ation.

Agenda June 18, 2013 The order of agenda items listed above are approximate and intended as a guideline for the City Council. Individuals with disabilities needing auxiliary aid(s) may request assistance by contacting the City Clerk, 448 E. 1st Street, Ste. 112, Salida, CO 81201, 719-530-2630 at least 48 hours in advance.

2

7. Lowry Zoning 1st Reading (Michael K. Yerman) Ordinance 2013-18 zoning certain real property known as the Lowry Annexation C-1 Commercial and R-2 Medium Density Residential Zone Districts.

8. Amending Council Compensation 1st Reading (Dara MacDonald)

Ordinance 2013-19 establishing salaries for the Mayor and members of the City Council. 9. Ward One Council Seat Appointment Discussion (Audrey Gilpin)

10. Outdoor Vending Permit Fees (Audrey Gilpin)

Resolution 2013-38 adopting a revised 2013 fee schedule for outdoor vendor permits pursuant to Chapter 6 of the Salida Municipal Code.

11. Administrator/City Attorney/Deputy City Clerk

a. City Administrator Report – Dara MacDonald 1.) Mount Princeton Geothermal Tour 2.) Chaffee County Economic Development Corporation Dues 3.) Chamber Dumpster

b. City Attorney Report – Karp, Neu, Hanlon, PC c. Deputy City Clerk Report – Audrey Gilpin

1.) Deer Task Force

12. Elected Official Reports a. City Treasurer – Eileen Rogers b. Mayor – Don Stephens c. City Council- Keith Baker, Michael Bowers, Jay Moore, Steven Stewart, and Tom Yerkey

VII. EXECUTIVE SESSION – 1. For a conference with the City attorney for the purpose of receiving legal advice on specific legal

questions under C.R.S. Section 24-6-402(4)(b) and for the purpose of determining positions relative to matters that may be subject to negotiations, developing strategy for negotiations, and/or instructing negotiators, under C.R.S. Section 24-6-402(4)(a). AND THE FOLLOWING ADDITIONAL DETAILS ARE PROVIDED FOR IDENTIFICATION PURPOSES: 1) To discuss the Dominick Water Supply Case.

VIII. ADJOURN –

____________________________ [SEAL] Mayor

______________________________ City Clerk

I

I. MEET

II. PLED

III. ROLL

PresentMcCormDeputyAttorne

Absent

IV. CITIZE

Robert Loimprovem

Louise Fisknow Macdoesn’t alw

Billy Carliregarding handed co

Nancy Dopaid is an

Monika Gyear droug

Bob Engecause of m

Bill Hudso

Stephens s

Moore sai

Shawn Gilhave the bbike racks

TING CALL

GE OF ALL

CALL

t at roll call wmick, Keith B

y City Clerk Aey Karl Hanlo

was Councilm

EN PARTIC

oewe of Salidaments and Dar

sh of Salida sacDonald well bways agree, bu

sle of Salida sacost of legal s

ouncil a list of

ominick of Salembarrassmen

Griesenbeck ofght could be a

el of Salida saidmore urban de

on of Salida as

said council di

d when a deci

llis of Salida sbest interest of and pedestria

MEETIN

LED TO OR

LEGIANCE

ere Mayor DoBaker, and MiAudrey Gilpinon.

man Steven S

CIPATION –

a said the asseta MacDonald

aid she is tired but finds her ut she is certai

aid he appreciservices for thf questions.

lida said tumbnt.

f Salida said Saa factor driving

d in the early eer.

sked if counci

iscusses items

ision is made,

aid he would f the communan signs at cro

NG MINUTCity Co

448 East City of

Tuesday, J

RDER

E – Led by M

on Stephens ike Bowers. A, City Clerk B

Stewart.

– 3 minute tim

ts of Salida far.

of hearing thcompetent, cain employees d

iates and respee community

bleweeds are a

alida isn’t the g them into Sa

70s there were

il makes decisi

s, and council

council votes

like to thank cnity in mind. Hosswalks as im

Page 1 of 4

TES OF THouncil Cham1st Street, R

f Salida, ColJune 4, 2013

Mayor Don S

and Council MAlso present Betty Schwitz

me limit

r outweigh pro

e bashing, pararing, intelligedo what is bes

ects what city and how that

problem. She

only communalida. She mad

e no deer in to

ions during w

comes to a co

s, which happe

council and stHe mentioned

mprovements th

HE CITY CO

mbers Room 190 lorado 7:00 p.m.

Stephens

Members Towere City Ader, City Treas

oblems. He sa

rticularly of Ment and doing st for the com

y councilmen dt may be carry

e said the sewe

nity with urbande a suggestio

own. He said

work sessions.

onsensus in or

ens during reg

taff for their hd the SteamPlathat create com

OUNCIL

m Yerkey, Jaydministrator Dsurer Eileen R

aid council ne

MacDonald. Shwhat she thin

mmunity. She t

do. He said heying over to th

er plant smells

n deer problemn of making t

the eliminatio

rder to give st

gular meetings

hard work. Heant Bridge, twmmunity.

y Moore, JimDara MacDonRogers and C

eds to suppor

he said she donks is best. Shethanked counc

e has questionhe NRCDC. H

s and what co

ms. She said tthe does infert

on of predator

taff direction.

s.

e said he thinkwo new parking

m nald,

City

rt

esn’t e said she cil.

ns He

ouncil is

the 20 tile.

rs is the

ks they g lots,

June 18, 2013 of 122

of 4

Mike Sagaski of Salida spoke regarding the deer issue. He said he supports council and staff.

V. PRESENTATION

1. Introduction of Salida Police Officers Spencer Blades and Trevor Thonoff

Chief Clark introduced Salida Police Officers Spencer Blades and Trevor Thonoff.

2. Patty LaTaille – Executive Director, Full Circle Restorative Justice

LaTaille referenced a Power Point presented to council.

Baker made a motion to continue the meeting pass 8 p.m. and end no later than 9:30 p.m. Moore seconded the motion. With all in consensus, THE MOTION CARRIED.

3. Jim Aragon, Colorado Parks and Wildlife Area Wildlife Manager, Urban Deer Discussion

Jim Aragon discussed the urban deer population. He mentioned Buena Vista extended their doe license outside of town limits. Council gave direction to start a citizen task force to address the issue.

VI. SCHEDULED ITEMS

1. Consent Agenda (Audrey Gilpin) a. Approval of Agenda b. Approval of Minutes: May 21, 2013 c. Creative District Branding Bid Award – Michael Varnum

Baker motioned to combine and approve the consent agenda. Yerkey seconded the motion. With all in consensus, THE MOTION CARRIED.

2. Amendments to Chapter 13 of the Salida Municipal Code 2nd Reading and Public Hearing

(Bob Salmi) Ordinance 2013-13 amending sections 13-2-10, 13-2-240, 13-4-20 and 13-4-30 of the Salida Municipal Code.

Salmi referenced a memo provided in the city council packet for the record. Stephens opened the public hearing. Monika Griensenbeck asked if the water conservation plan is on the City of Salida’s website. Stephens closed the public hearing.

Moore motioned to approve Ordinance 2013-13, an ordinance of the City Council of the City of Salida, Colorado, amending Sections 13-2-10, 13-2-240, 13-4-20 and 13-4-30 of the Salida Municipal Code, and ordering the ordinance to be published by title only. Baker seconded the motion. With all in consensus, THE MOTION CARRIED.

3. Wood Annexation 1st Reading (Michael K. Yerman)

Ordinance 2013-14 annexing to the City of Salida certain real property known as the Wood Annexation. Yerman referenced a memo provided in the city council packet for the record.

Baker motioned to approve Ordinance 2013-14, an ordinance of the City Council of the City of Salida, Colorado, approving the annexation of .33 acres of the property located at 352 East Sackett Avenue into the City of Salida known as the Wood Annexation setting the public hearing for June 18, 2013, and ordering the ordinance to be published in full. Moore seconded the motion. With all in consensus, THE MOTION CARRIED.

4. Wood Annexation Zoning 1st Reading (Michael K. Yerman)

Ordinance 2013-15 zoning certain real property known as the Wood Annexation Commercial (C01) Zone District.

June 18, 2013 of 122

of 4

Yerman referenced a memo provided in the city council packet for the record.

Baker made a motion to approve Ordinance 2013-15, an ordinance of the City Council for the City of Salida, Colorado, approving rezoning of .33 acres of the property located at 352 East Sackett Avenue to Commercial (“C-1”) known as the Wood Annexation, setting the public hearing date for June 18, 2013 and ordering the ordinance to be published in full. Moore seconded the motion. With all in consensus, THE MOTION CARRIED.

5. Amendment to Section 16-8-20 Road, Driveway and Sidewalk Standards of the Salida Municipal Code 1st Reading (Michael K. Yerman) Ordinance 2013-16 amending Chapter 16 of the Salida Municipal Code.

Yerman referenced a memo provided in the city council packet for the record. Shannon Bevington of Salida spoke in favor of the amendment. Dwight Cocovinis applauded Yerman’s efforts and his coming up with text language.

Baker motioned to approve Ordinance 2013-16, an ordinance of the City Council of the City of Salida, Colorado, amending Chapter 16 of the Salida Municipal Code Section 16-8-20 road, driveway and sidewalk standards setting the public hearing date for June 18, 2013 and ordering the ordinance to be published in full. Moore seconded the motion. In a 4-1 vote, THE MOTION CARRIED. Yerkey had the dissenting vote.

6. CDOT Intergovernmental Agreement regarding Highway 50 (Bob Salmi)

Resolution 2013-35 approving an Intergovernmental Agreement between the City of Salida and the State of Colorado Department of Transportation for the Highway 50 Streetscape Project, Phase III.

Salmi referenced a memo provided in the city council packet for the record.

Moore motioned to approve Resolution 2013-35, a resolution of the City Council of the City of Salida, Colorado, supporting the IGA Option Letter and Contract for the U.S. 50 streetscape between the City of Salida and the State of Colorado Transportation and authorizing the Mayor to sign said documents. Baker seconded the motion. With all in consensus, THE MOTION CARRIED.

7. Red Cross Memorandum of Understanding (Dara MacDonald)

Resolution 2013-36 authorizing the City Administrator to enter into a Memorandum of Understanding with the American Red Cross.

MacDonald referenced a memo provided in the city council packet for the record.

Baker motioned to approve Resolution 2013-35, a resolution of the City Council of the City of Salida, Colorado, entering into a Memorandum of Understanding with the American Red Cross. Moore seconded the motion. With all in consensus, THE MOTION CARRIED.

8. Optimum/Cable Vision Franchise Agreement Extension (Dara MacDonald)

Resolution 2013-37 authorizing the temporary operating authority of Bresnan Communication, LLC and temporary extension of the cable franchise agreement.

MacDonald referenced a memo provided in the city council packet for the record.

Moore motioned to approve Resolution 2013-37, a resolution of the City Council of the City of Salida, Colorado, authorizing the temporary operating authority of Bresnan Communication, LLC and temporary extension of the cable franchise agreement. Yerkey seconded the motion. With all in consensus, THE MOTION CARRIED.

9. Administrator/City Attorney/Deputy City Clerk

a. City Administrator Report – Dara MacDonald 1.) Information on Fire Ops 101

MacDonald mentioned a meeting elected officials are invited to regarding fire operations. b. City Attorney Report – Karp, Neu, Hanlon, PC

June 18, 2013 of 122

of 4

Hanlon said late summer council needs to spend some time discussing Amendment 64. He said ballot language should be discussed by the July 2 meeting.

c. Deputy City Clerk Report – Audrey Gilpin – No Report

10. Elected Official Reports a. City Treasurer – Eileen Rogers b. Mayor – Don Stephens c. City Council- Keith Baker, Michael Bowers, Jim McCormick, Jay Moore, Steven Stewart, and

Tom Yerkey Yerkey motioned to schedule a special meeting at 5:30 p.m. Tuesday, June 18, 2013 to discuss the Wood Annexation and Lowry Annexation in executive session. Baker seconded the motion. With all in consensus, THE MOTION CARRIED.

Baker motioned to adjourn at 9:23 p.m. Moore seconded the motion. With all in consensus, THE MOTION CARRIED.

____________________________ [SEAL] Mayor

______________________________ Deputy City Clerk

June 18, 2013 of 122

June 18, 2013 of 122

_______ MEETIN AGEND

PRESEN AGEND CAN TH BACKGR The FireCO, has authorizepremises.on the pr The recei

A minimutestimony47-311.

_________

NG DATE:

DA ITEM T

NTED BY:

DA SECTIO

HIS ITEM B

ROUND RE

efly Restaurasubmitted a

es the sale of . Beer and wiremises durin

ipt of the app

This athe apreceipbe in oto beg

Followapplicfoundto the

The clapplic

By filicut ou

um of 30 dayy by any pers

CIT

__________

Jun

ITLE: AnTh

Au

ON: Sch

BE RESCH

EVIEW:

ant, LLC dban applicatimalt and vinine licensees

ng business h

plication is M

application wpplicant can pt of the appliorder, the apgin. wing local liqation, which

d the applicaticlerk.

lerk then issuant. ng an applica

ut of the appl

ys from the rson who wou

CITY O

TY COUNC__________

ne 18, 2013

n application he Firefly Res

udrey Gilpin,

heduled Item

HEDULED:

ba The Firefion for a Beenous liquors ashall have sa

hours, but nee

May 9, 2013.

was filed with pay an additioication, it is rplication will

quor authoritywill be faxedion in order,

ues a local lic

ation with colication proc

receipt of theuld aid the lo

1

OF SALIDACIL AGEN_________

for a Beer anstaurant, LLC

Deputy City

ms

No

fly Restauraer and Wineand fermenteandwiches aned not have m

a concurrenonal $100 to reviewed by l be sent to t

y approval, thd to the state the license w

cense and bot

oncurrent revess.

e application ocal authority

A NDA ITEM__________

nd Wine LiceC dba The Fi

y Clerk

ant at 142 We License (ced malt bevend light snackmeals availab

nt review; tothe State forthe Deputy C

the State Liqu

the City Adme the next daywill be issued

th State and

view, approxi

a public heay in consideri

_________

ense by irefly Restaur

West U.S. 50,city). A Beererages for conks available fble for consu

o expedite thr a concurrenCity Clerk. Iuor Authorit

ministrator sigy. Then, if thd and will be

City licenses

imately four

aring must being the applic

__________

rant

, Suite B, Sar & Wine licensumption ofor consumpumption.

he state procent review. OIf determinedty for proces

gns the he State has sent immedi

s are issued to

to six weeks

e held to allowcation C.R.S.

____

alida, ense on the ption

ess On d to sing

also iately

o the

s are

w . 12-

June 18, 2013 of 122

2

During this 30 day period, the public notice process begins. The applicant must petition the neighborhood, which in the City of Salida is the city limits, the property must be posted and a notice must be published in a local paper. The property was posted and the notice was published in the Mountain Mail on May 20, 2013. The hearing date is tonight Tuesday, June 18, 2013. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the City Council hold the public hearing and take public comments during the hearing. ACTION: If council feels the request is in order, a member would make a motion to approve Beer and Wine License with concurrent review for The Firefly Restaurant, LLC dba The Firefly Restaurant at 142 West U.S. 50, Suite B, Salida, CO. Followed by a second, and then a roll call.

June 18, 2013 of 122

June 18, 2013 of 122

__________________________CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM_____________________ MEETING DATE: June 18, 2013 AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Ordinance 2013-14 Wood Annexation 2nd Reading, an ordinance

of the City Council for the City of Salida, Colorado approving the annexation of .33 acres of the property located at 352 East Sackett Avenue into the City of Salida known as the Wood Annexation.

PRESENTED BY: Michael K. Yerman, Community Development Director

REQUEST: The request is to pass on second reading the ordinance annexing the Wood Annexation. APPLICANT: The applicant is Salida Investments, LLC, 1400 Folsom Street, Suite 102, Boulder, CO 80302. LOCATION: The subject property is located at 352 East Sackett Avenue and includes a portion of Sackett Avenue and the Arkansas River. The entire legal description is attached to the ordinance. BACKGROUND REVIEW: Below is a summary of the process for annexations, a brief background regarding the property and the Planning Commission’s recommendation for the annexation.

To annex a property, the City must follow the steps and procedures outlined in Colorado Revised Statutes. The final steps for annexation are passing an ordinance annexing the .33 acre portion of the lot into the City and then passing an ordinance zoning the property. A public hearing was set by Resolution 2013-28 for June 18, 2013 which found the petition in substantial compliance with state statute. The applicant is negotiating a trail and angler easement along the Arkansas River with the proposed annexation. A preliminary scoping meeting with Mike Harvey from River Engineering was conducted about the possible construction of a trail along this section of the river. Due to the steep topography, the trail was recommended to be constructed as a soft surface trail. This would connect to the Touber River Park. In exchange for the trail and angler easement, the applicant is asking that future open space fees be waived if the site is further developed. The applicant does not have any future development plans at this time; however the applicant could build 5 additional units if they maxed out density of the remaining site. Per the land use code river trails can also be considered “extraordinary” contributions for parks, trails and open space. The Planning Commission reviewed the annexation and the application for a zone district designation on May 28, 2013. The Commission made a recommendation to approve the annexation

June 18, 2013 of 122

petition during this meeting and made a recommendation to City Council to accept the proposed trail and angler easement as the land dedication for trails, parks and open space for any future development on the site. The applicant has requested that the annexation and zoning application be continued until July 2, 2013 to allow the applicant sufficient time to review the annexation agreement with the City. ACTION: A Council person should make a motion “to continue Ordinance No. 14, 2013 to the regularly scheduled Council meeting on July 2, 2013.”

June 18, 2013 of 122

June 18, 2013 of 122

EXHIBIT A to Annexation Petition Area Proposed for Annexation

Parcel 1 All that part of the Southwest Quarter (SW1/4) of Section 33, Township 50 North, Range 9 East of the New Mexico Principal Meridian, Chaffee County, Colorado, more particularly described as follows: Beginning at the intersection of the Southeasterly right‐of‐way of C Street and the Northeasterly right‐of‐way of Sackett Avenue, also being a point on the corporate limits of the City of Salida; Thence North 52°02’00” West along said Northeasterly right‐of‐way Sackett Avenue, a distance of 50.03 feet to the West line of said Section 33 and a point on the corporate limits of the City of Salida; Thence North 00°23’00” West along said West line of Section 33, a distance of 164 feet, more or less, to the center of the Arkansas River; hence Southeasterly along said center of the Arkansas River, a distance of 153 feet, more or less; Thence South 37°48’34” West, a distance of 120 feet, more or less, to the point of beginning. Together with Parcel 2 All that part of the Southwest Quarter (SW1/4) of Section 33, Township 50 North, Range 9 East of the New Mexico Principal Meridian, Chaffee County, Colorado and being within the right‐of‐way of Sackett Avenue and C Street, more particularly described as follows: Beginning at the intersection of the Southeasterly right‐of‐way of C Street and the Northeasterly right‐of‐way of Sackett Avenue, also being a point on the corporate limits of the City of Salida; Thence North 52°02’00” West along said Northeasterly right‐of‐way of Sackett Avenue, a distance of 50.03 feet to the West line of said Section 33 and a point on the corporate limits of the City of Salida; Thence South 00°23’00” East along said West line of Section 33 and said corporate limit, a distance of 80.92 feet to a point on said Southeasterly right‐of–way of C Street; Thence North 37°48’34” East along said Southeasterly right‐of‐way of C Street, a distance of 63.46 feet to the point of beginning.

June 18, 2013 of 122

Public Hearing Agenda Item 7, Page 1 of 4

STAFF REPORT

MEETING DATE: May 28, 2013 AGENDA ITEM TITLE: 352 E. Sackett Ave. – Wood Annexation AGENDA SECTION: Public Hearing REQUEST: The request is to annex .33 acres of the property located at 352 East Sackett Avenue into the City of Salida. APPLICANT: The applicant is Salida Investments, LLC, 1400 Folsom Street, Suite 102, Boulder, CO 80302. LOCATION: The subject property is located at 352 East Sackett Avenue and is described as located within the Southwest quarter section 33, Township 50 North, Range 9 East of the New Mexico Principal Meridian, City of Salida, Chaffee County, Colorado, being more particularly described as follows. Parcel 1 All that part of the Southwest Quarter (SW1/4) of Section 33, Township 50 North, Range 9 East of the New Mexico Principal Meridian, Chaffee County, Colorado, more particularly described as follows: Beginning at the intersection of the Southeasterly right-of-way of C Street and the Northeasterly right-of-way of Sackett Avenue, also being a point on the corporate limits of the City of Salida;

June 18, 2013 of 122


Thence North 52°02’00” West along said Northeasterly right-of-way Sackett Avenue, a distance of 50.03 feet to the West line of said Section 33 and a point on the corporate limits of the City of Salida; Thence North 00°23’00” West along said West line of Section 33, a distance of 164 feet, more or less, to the center of the Arkansas River; hence Southeasterly along said center of the Arkansas River, a distance of 153 feet, more or less; Thence South 37°48’34” West, a distance of 120 feet, more or less, to the point of beginning. Together with Parcel 2 All that part of the Southwest Quarter (SW1/4) of Section 33, Township 50 North, Range 9 East of the New Mexico Principal Meridian, Chaffee County, Colorado and being within the right-of-way of Sackett Avenue and C Street, more particularly described as follows: Beginning at the intersection of the Southeasterly right-of-way of C Street and the Northeasterly right-of-way of Sackett Avenue, also being a point on the corporate limits of the City of Salida; Thence North 52°02’00” West along said Northeasterly right-of-way of Sackett Avenue, a distance of 50.03 feet to the West line of said Section 33 and a point on the corporate limits of the City of Salida; Thence South 00°23’00” East along said West line of Section 33 and said corporate limit, a distance of 80.92 feet to a point on said Southeasterly right-of–way of C Street; Thence North 37°48’34” East along said Southeasterly right-of-way of C Street, a distance of 63.46 feet to the point of beginning. PROCESS: An application for annexation is a multi-step process. The application has been accepted by the City Council and scheduled for a public hearing on December 18, 2012. The request is reviewed by the Commission through a public hearing process. The Commission shall review the annexation map and all required supportive information and shall submit a written recommendation to the City Council. In its review of the application, the Commission shall focus on the review standards for annexation contained in Section 16-16-50 of the Municipal Code. Council has final decision-making authority in such applications. OBSERVATIONS:

1. Annexation of the subject property is underway, with a public hearing scheduled before the City Council on June 18, 2013. The majority of adjacent properties within the municipality are zoned Commercial (C-1).

2. The applicant has submitted his application to annex this portion of the property because half of the parcel is within the municipal boundary and the other half is not.

3. The annexation also includes a small portion of Sackett Avenue.

4. The duplex on the property is within the boundary that will be annexed. The City’s zoning map and the Chaffee County Assessor has this property listed as 354 East Sackett Avenue and the applicant has the duplex as 352 East Sackett Avenue.

June 18, 2013 of 122


5. The applicant is negotiating a trail and angler easement along the Arkansas River with the proposed annexation. A preliminary scoping meeting with Mike Harvey from River Engineering was conducted about the possible construction of a trail along this section of the river. Due to the steep topography the trail will be a soft surface trail that will connect to the Touber River Park. In exchange for the trail and angler easement, the applicant is asking that future open space fees be waived if the site is further developed. The applicant does not have any future development plans at this time; however the applicant could build 5 additional units if they maxed out density of the remaining site. Per the land use code River Trails can also be consider “extraordinary” contributions for parks, trails and open space.

REVIEW AGENCY COMMENTS Chaffee County – Don Reimer – No concerns, please inform us via email once completed so we can update our maps. Police Chief – Terry Clark – I have no issues at this time with the annexation Fire Chief – Doug Bess – I have reviewed the plans as submitted for 352 East Sackett Ave. and I have no concerns or comments. Finance Director- Jan Schmidt – The utility billing system shows a duplex on the property being charged in city rates. Expanded use or change in use needs to be disclosed and tap fees may apply. Public Works Director – Bob Salmi – No concerns Xcel Energy – Ken Plewes – I have no concerns RECOMMENDED FINDINGS:

1. That the application is in compliance for annexations because there is no cost to the City and a majority of the property is already located in the City limits.

2. That the annexation provides for orderly development of the City because the annexation is

an area that is immediately adjacent to the municipal boundary.

3. The applicant is proposing a river trail and angler easement with the proposed annexation.

RECOMMENDED ACTION: Based upon the observations, review standards, and findings outlined above, staff recommends the following: The Commission recommends APPROVAL of the application to annex .33 acres of the portion of the lot located at 352 East Sackett Avenue into the City of Salida to the City Council with the following condition;

1. That the address is verified prior to recording of the annexation

June 18, 2013 of 122


2. That the applicant provides a trail and angler easement dedication on the annexation plat which will satisfy the future parks, trails and open space requirement for future development.

RECOMMENDED MOTION: That the recommended findings be made and the recommended action be taken. Attachments: Application Annexation Map

June 18, 2013 of 122

June 18, 2013 of 122

__________________________CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM_____________________ MEETING DATE: June 18, 2013 AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Ordinance 2013-15 Wood Zoning 2nd Reading, an ordinance of

the City Council for the City of Salida, Colorado approving the rezoning of .33 acres of the property located at 352 East Sackett Avenue to Commercial (“C-1”) also known as the Wood Annexation.


REQUEST: The request is to pass on second reading the rezoning of the Wood Annexation. APPLICANT: The applicant is Salida Investments, LLC, 1400 Folsom Street, Suite 102, Boulder, CO 80302. LOCATION: The subject property is located at 352 East Sackett Avenue and includes a portion of Sackett Avenue and the Arkansas River. The entire legal description is attached to the ordinance. BACKGROUND REVIEW: Zoning of the property is the second step in the annexation process for Wood Annexation. The applicant has requested to rezone the portion of the property currently located in the county Commercial (“C-1”). The portion of the property located in the City is zoned C-1. The nearby properties in the neighborhood and along Sackett Avenue are also zoned C-1. The applicant’s request is consistent with the neighboring properties. The Planning Commission reviewed the rezoning request for the C-1 zone district designation for this property on May 28, 2013. The Commission made a recommendation to approve the rezoning application during this meeting. The applicant has requested this item be continued until July 2, 2013. ACTION: A Council person should make a motion “to continue Ordinance No. 15, 2013 to the regularly scheduled Council meeting on July 2, 2013.”

June 18, 2013 of 122

June 18, 2013 of 122

EXHIBIT A to Annexation Petition Area Proposed for Annexation

Parcel 1 All that part of the Southwest Quarter (SW1/4) of Section 33, Township 50 North, Range 9 East of the New Mexico Principal Meridian, Chaffee County, Colorado, more particularly described as follows: Beginning at the intersection of the Southeasterly right‐of‐way of C Street and the Northeasterly right‐of‐way of Sackett Avenue, also being a point on the corporate limits of the City of Salida; Thence North 52°02’00” West along said Northeasterly right‐of‐way Sackett Avenue, a distance of 50.03 feet to the West line of said Section 33 and a point on the corporate limits of the City of Salida; Thence North 00°23’00” West along said West line of Section 33, a distance of 164 feet, more or less, to the center of the Arkansas River; hence Southeasterly along said center of the Arkansas River, a distance of 153 feet, more or less; Thence South 37°48’34” West, a distance of 120 feet, more or less, to the point of beginning. Together with Parcel 2 All that part of the Southwest Quarter (SW1/4) of Section 33, Township 50 North, Range 9 East of the New Mexico Principal Meridian, Chaffee County, Colorado and being within the right‐of‐way of Sackett Avenue and C Street, more particularly described as follows: Beginning at the intersection of the Southeasterly right‐of‐way of C Street and the Northeasterly right‐of‐way of Sackett Avenue, also being a point on the corporate limits of the City of Salida; Thence North 52°02’00” West along said Northeasterly right‐of‐way of Sackett Avenue, a distance of 50.03 feet to the West line of said Section 33 and a point on the corporate limits of the City of Salida; Thence South 00°23’00” East along said West line of Section 33 and said corporate limit, a distance of 80.92 feet to a point on said Southeasterly right‐of–way of C Street; Thence North 37°48’34” East along said Southeasterly right‐of‐way of C Street, a distance of 63.46 feet to the point of beginning.

June 18, 2013 of 122


STAFF REPORT

MEETING DATE: May 28, 2013 AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Wood - Zoning Review AGENDA SECTION: Public Hearing REQUEST: The request is to designate the newly annexed property at 352 East Sackett Avenue as Commercial (C-1). The property is also known as the Wood Annexation. APPLICANT: The applicant is Salida Investments, LLC, 1400 Folsom Street, Suite 102, Boulder, CO 80302. LOCATION: The subject property is located at 352 East Sackett Avenue and is described as located within the Southwest quarter section 33, Township 50 North, Range 9 East of the New Mexico Principal Meridian, City of Salida, Chaffee County, Colorado, being more particularly described as follows. Parcel 1 All that part of the Southwest Quarter (SW1/4) of Section 33, Township 50 North, Range 9 East of the New Mexico Principal Meridian, Chaffee County, Colorado, more particularly described as follows: Beginning at the intersection of the Southeasterly right-of-way of C Street and the Northeasterly right-of-way of Sackett Avenue, also being a point on the corporate limits of the City of Salida; Thence North 52°02’00” West along said Northeasterly right-of-way Sackett Avenue, a distance of 50.03 feet to the West line of said Section 33 and a point on the corporate limits of the City of Salida; Thence North 00°23’00” West along said West line of Section 33, a distance of 164 feet, more or less, to the center of the Arkansas River;

June 18, 2013 of 122


hence Southeasterly along said center of the Arkansas River, a distance of 153 feet, more or less; Thence South 37°48’34” West, a distance of 120 feet, more or less, to the point of beginning. Together with Parcel 2 All that part of the Southwest Quarter (SW1/4) of Section 33, Township 50 North, Range 9 East of the New Mexico Principal Meridian, Chaffee County, Colorado and being within the right-of-way of Sackett Avenue and C Street, more particularly described as follows: Beginning at the intersection of the Southeasterly right-of-way of C Street and the Northeasterly right-of-way of Sackett Avenue, also being a point on the corporate limits of the City of Salida; Thence North 52°02’00” West along said Northeasterly right-of-way of Sackett Avenue, a distance of 50.03 feet to the West line of said Section 33 and a point on the corporate limits of the City of Salida; Thence South 00°23’00” East along said West line of Section 33 and said corporate limit, a distance of 80.92 feet to a point on said Southeasterly right-of–way of C Street; Thence North 37°48’34” East along said Southeasterly right-of-way of C Street, a distance of 63.46 feet to the point of beginning. PROCESS: An application for zoning consists of a two-step process. The request is addressed by the Commission through a public hearing process. The Commission makes a recommendation of approval, approval with conditions, or denial of the zoning application to City Council. The Commission may also remand the application back to the applicant for further information or amendments. Council has final decision-making authority in such applications. In its review of the application, the Commission shall focus on the long term use of the property within the context of the City’s Comprehensive Plan and current zoning for the property, as well as the surrounding area. Once the property is zoned, all of the uses permitted within the new zoning district are permitted as uses by right, not just what is proposed at the present time. OBSERVATIONS:

1. Annexation of the subject property is underway, with a public hearing scheduled before the City Council on June 18, 2013.

2. Currently the portion of the property located in city limits is zoned Commercial (C-1) and the surrounding properties are also zoned Commercial (C-1).

3. Current use of the property is residential with a duplex residence located on the site. Current uses surrounding the property are single-family and multi-family residential units.

4. Most of the lot is currently within the City’s boundaries but the easternmost part of the lot is outside the City’s boundary.

REVIEW STANDARDS FOR MAP AMENDMENTS (Section 16-4-120): 1. Consistent with Comprehensive Plan. The proposed amendment shall be consistent with the

Comprehensive Plan.

June 18, 2013 of 122


The purpose of the Land Use Plan within the Comprehensive Plan is to specify locations in and around Salida where various land uses and intensities of use will be encouraged. The Plan indicates the subject property to be Medium Density Residential. The proposed C-1 zoning for this property is not consistent with the Comprehensive Plan but is consistent with the surrounding zoning.

Currently half of the property is already zoned Commercial (C-1) 2. Consistency with Purpose of Zone District. The proposed amendment shall be consistent

with the purpose of the zone district to which the property is to be designated.

The applicant is requesting a zone district designation of the subject property of Commercial District (C-1). The purpose of the C-1 zone district is to provide for commercial and service businesses in a pattern that allows ease of access by both vehicles and pedestrians. Designation of the subject property as C-1 would be consistent with the purpose of the district.

3. Compatibility with Surrounding Zone Districts and Uses. The development permitted by

the proposed amendment shall be compatible with surrounding zone districts, land uses and neighborhood character.

The zoning classification of C-1 is consistent with the zoning of other surrounding properties along Sackett Avenue. Uses of adjacent properties within the municipal boundary are primarily residential in nature. This zoning classification is compatible with surrounding zoning and land uses.

4. Changed Conditions or Errors. The applicant shall demonstrate that conditions affecting the

subject parcel or the surrounding neighborhood have changed, or that due to incorrect assumptions or conclusions about the property, one (1) or more errors in the boundaries shown on the Official Zoning Map have occurred.

This application is a result of the need for zoning due to annexation, not due to a map error or change in uses in the neighborhood.

RECOMMENDED FINDINGS:

1. That the application is in compliance with the review standards for map amendments because the C-1 zone district designation for this parcel is consistent with the comprehensive plan and is compatible with the zoning of neighboring properties.

RECOMMENDED ACTION: Based upon the observations, review standards, and findings outlined above, staff recommends the following: The Commission recommend APPROVAL of the application to designate the existing parcel in City limits and newly annexed property at 352 East Sackett Avenue as Commercial (C-1). RECOMMENDED MOTION: That the recommended findings be made and the recommended action be taken.

June 18, 2013 of 122

of 1

________________CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM_______________ MEETING DATE: June 18, 2013 AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Amendment to Section 16-8-20 Road, driveway and sidewalk

standards of Chapter 16 of the Salida Municipal Code PRESENTED BY: Michael K. Yerman, Community Development Director AGENDA SECTION: Public Hearings

PROJECT BACKGROUND: During the April 22, 2013 Planning Commission hearing, the Commission heard an appeal from an applicant that was denied access to a street instead of using the alley as required per the code. The Planning Commission up held the administrator’s determination because the Land Use Code clearly states that access must be from the alley. After hearing this appeal, the Planning Commission directed staff to prepare a local text amendment for their consideration at the next regular meeting on May 28, 2103 to create an exception for corner lots to be permitted access to the street. During the meeting several citizens spoke in favor of the local text amendment. A petition and two letters of support were also entered into the public record. These are attached to this memo. After taking public comment, the Commission proposed the exception below for driveway access to corner lots. PROPOSED CODE AMENDMENT: (2) Driveway access must be located from the alley where alley access is available.

(i) Exception: A single-family corner lot having frontage to local streets on two sides and alley access, may have driveway access from a detached accessory structure from the street closest to the alley provided there is a maximum 10’ rear setback from the rear lot line.

ACTION: A Council person should make a motion “to approve Ordinance No. 16, 2013 an ordinance of the City Council for the City of Salida, Colorado amending Chapter 16 of the Salida Municipal Code Section 16-8-20 Road, driveway and sidewalk standards setting the public hearing date for June 18, 2013 and ordering the ordinance to be published by title only.” Followed by a roll call vote

June 18, 2013 of 122

June 18, 2013 of 122

of 2

Date: June 18, 2013 To: Salida City Council From: Shannon Bevington, Salida Resident, 18 years Re: Chapter 16 Land Use Code Revision – Article VIII Design Standards – Section 16-8-20 Road, driveway and

sidewalk standards Proposal: To allow for an exception to this code to allow corner-lot properties continued street access on side lot line. 16-8-20 (e) (2)-Driveway access must be from the alley where alley access is available. Amended Language: (1) Exception – A single-family corner lot having frontage to local streets on two sides and alley access may have driveway access from a detached accessory building from the street closest to the alley provided there is a maximum 10’ rear setback from the rear lot line. We are seeking a text amendment to this code to allow corner-lot properties side street driveway access; we are not requesting to abolish the code, only to amend it. This new code the way it is currently written sounds good, even helpful, but in fact when you attempt to build a garage in the same fashion as the majority of corner-lot garages and where precedence has been set, you will be denied. Out of 310 corner-lot properties observed in Salida, 273 corner-lot properties have street access, 12 have alley facing garage, 23 vacant (no structure/driveway). The goal of keeping driveways off the front of homes will still be achieved, even with this amendment. Apart from the need of a new garage or not, we need to revise codes that arbitrarily cause grief than actually benefit our town and make sense. We have attended many Salida Planning and Zoning meetings and spent much time with the city staff. The planning and zoning committee has recognized a need to amend this code. Many residents have expressed the desire to have the code be revised allowing the four corner-lot houses at the end of each alley to have the garage doors/driveway face the street. We have garnered over 200 signatures in support of amending the text on this code. The biggest argument behind this code is safety backing out of garages. We are all in agreement that safety is a priority. I have spoken with Chief of Police, Terry Clark, and he explained that in his 28 years of police service in Salida he is not seeing accidents happening out of these existing scenarios of corner-lot driveways with side street access. There is no data supporting that this scenario is a safety issue. Short description of existing Salida design: If you drive down the side streets in Salida, you will see garages built on the back alley corner of the lot. In well over 90% of these lots, the garage doors face the streets. With this new code when you build a garage, the city is requiring property owners to have garage doors/driveway access the alley. You will also see that at all times of the day that these garage doors are closed, which provides a clear indicator that no one is backing out, deeming it safe.

Below are the arguments supporting this code. The benefits stated carry little weight and don’t outweigh the benefits of allowing corner-lot property owners to have street access for their garages. Here is the city’s argument for the existence of this code: This provision has reduced curb cuts across sidewalks throughout town and has helped to eliminate backing out of garages directly onto streets. This provision has help define the city’s urban form by removing garage doors from the city’s streetscape. Here is a rebuttal to city staff:

1) Reduced curb cuts

Backing out of garages occurs less often than one would think. Many residents don’t use their

garages as a daily parking space; garages are more often used as storage.

More than 90% of the time garage doors are closed, thus no car will be backing out. It is clearly safe

to walk down a sidewalk with an adjacent closed garage door. Residents deserve credit that we can

safely navigate our streets and sidewalks; both driver and pedestrian are aware of one another.

The closed garage door serves as an indicator, and a barrier, that no traffic will be coming out onto

the streets and sidewalks.

2) Eliminate backing out of garages directly onto city streets

With current property setbacks, new garages are 23 feet off the street traffic – exits from newly built

garages will not be backed directly out onto the street (nor directly onto a sidewalk).

June 18, 2013 of 122

of 2

Salida city streets are not heavily used “big-city” streets; backing out onto them is not dangerous.

According to CDOT, the probability of an accident is extremely low due to the low-volume of our side

streets combined with the infrequency of garage exits. Accidents happen while driving forward; do

we now eliminate driving forward?

Again, many garages are not used as actual daily parking, so backing out is already minimal.

3) Defines city’s urban form by removing garage doors from city streetscape

Why have the garage doors been deemed as unsightly? This is Salida with it’s character already

established, this is not urban sprawl. Is the side of a garage that much more attractive, or an entire

corner fence? Modern garage doors have been constructed quite aesthetically.

No matter which way a garage faces, the doors will still be seen from the streetscape, just from a

different angle.

The urban design goal to remove garage doors from side streets is not plausible; short of a bulldozer

to the existing hundreds and hundreds corner-lot street facing garages. If this code is written to

keep garage doors off the front of a home it will still be effective, even with this amendment that

will provide an exception for corner-lot side-street access only.

The position used to enforce this code, as it currently reads, does not carry actual weight in real-world Salida; it simply sounds good on paper. There are no newspaper headlines where accident after accident is occurring with side street driveway access. There are literally just a few handfuls of properties remaining that will be forced to have alley access. And what was hoped to be achieved with this code as written is not plausible; as forcing these few remaining corner-lot properties to have alley access cannot accomplish the goal that gives this code purpose. What actually is being achieved with the way this code is currently written is that property owners are being alienated and the code without revision is expending unnecessary time with the request and denial process. The design of Salida with it’s corner-lot garages facing the street has defined the urban form. These corner-lot garage doors are not unsightly; they are part of the streetscape and you cannot hide them. These scenarios of corner-lot driveways/garage with street access are not unsafe. People don’t back out of their garages in an unruly fashion, nor do pedestrians and drivers travel down the streets and sidewalks totally unaware of their surroundings. Points supporting a text amendment:

1. Having garage doors/driveways access the numbered side streets is a reasonable request.

2. The corner-lot street scenario already exists, and accidents are not occurring. These are low volume side-

streets and the probability of driver backing out at the same time as foot/bike/driving traffic is low.

Precedence has been set; out of 310 corner-lot properties observed in Salida, 273 corner-lot properties have

street access, 12 have alley facing garage, 23 vacant (no structure/driveway). (* see statistics below)

3. Having the four corner-lot garage doors face the side street reduces congestion in the frequently used narrow

alleyways. Exiting a garage into an alley can often be a 5-point turn. (**see statistics below)

4. The atmosphere of the city Salida is largely recreational. Many residents own outdoor equipment (campers,

boats, OHV’s, snowmobiles etc.) requiring trailers to pull. Initiating a trailer entry/exit into alleyway garage can

prove difficult. Allowing the four corner-lot garages street access allows easier trailer access and again

reduces congestion in alleyways.

5. The existence and enforcement of this code is a basic restriction of private property.

6. The city staff receives frequent requests for property owners to build new garages accessing the street,

almost more than any other request. This says something about the erroneous nature of this code. * Re: Street observed O,N, M, L, K , J 5th, 6th, 7th, 8th , 9th, 10th, 11th, 12th 13th, 14th, 15th, Blake, palmer, Caldwell, Maxwell, Chilcott area. ** Re: A resident of Salida, James Haarmeyer, at 725 “F” Street generally is required to make a 5-point turn to drive his vehicle out of his alley facing garage.

June 18, 2013 of 122

of 2

Date: May 28, 2013 To: Planning Commission From: Shannon Bevington, Salida Resident, 18 years Re: Chapter 16 Land Use Code Revision – Article VIII Design Standards – Section 16-8-20 Road, driveway and

sidewalk standards Amendment Proposal: To allow for an exception to this code to allow corner-lot properties street access on side lot

line. We are seeking a text amendment to this code to allow corner-lot properties side street driveway access. This new code the way it is currently written sounds harmless, even helpful, but in fact when you attempt to build a garage in the same fashion as the majority of other corner-lot garages and where precedence has been set, you will be denied. We are not asking to abolish the code, only to amend it. Apart from the need of a new garage or not, we need to revise codes that arbitrarily cause grief than actually benefit our town and make sense. We have attended many Salida Planning and Zoning meetings and spent much time with the city staff. The planning and zoning committee is recognizing a need to amend this code. Many residents have expressed the desire to have the code be revised allowing the four corner-lot houses at the end of each alley to have the garage doors/driveway face the street. We have garnered over 200 signatures in support of amending the text on this code. We are recommending the text amendment to read as follows: 16-8-20 (e) (2)-Driveway access must be from the alley where alley access is available. Exception – Corner-lot driveways may have side street access. The biggest argument behind this code is safety backing out of garages. We are all in agreement that safety is a priority. I have spoken with Chief of Police, Terry Clark, and he explained that in his 28 years of police service in Salida he is not seeing accidents happening out of these existing scenarios of corner-lot driveways with side street access. There is not any data supporting that this scenario is a safety issue. Short description of existing Salida design: If you drive down the side streets in Salida, you will see garages built on the back alley corner of the lot. In well over 90% of these lots, the garage doors face the streets. With this new code when you build a garage, the city is forcing property owners to have garage doors/driveway access the alley. You will also see that at all times of the day that these garage doors are closed, which provides a clear indicator that no one is backing out, deeming it safe.

Below are the arguments supporting this code. The benefits stated carry little weight and don’t outweigh the benefits of allowing corner-lot property owners to have street access for their garages. Here is the city’s argument for the existence of this code: This provision has reduced curb cuts across sidewalks throughout town and has helped to eliminate backing out of garages directly onto streets. This provision has help define the city’s urban form by removing garage doors from the city’s streetscape. Here is a rebuttal to city staff:

1) Reduced curb cuts

Backing out of garages occurs less often than one would think. Many residents don’t use their

garages as a daily parking space; garages are more often used as storage.

More than 90% of the time garage doors are closed, thus no car will be backing out. It is not risky

business to walk down a sidewalk with an adjacent closed garage door. Residents deserve credit

that we can safely navigate our streets and sidewalks; both driver and pedestrian are aware of one

another. The closed garage door serves as an indicator, and a barrier, that no traffic will be coming

out onto the streets and sidewalks.

2) Eliminate backing out of garages directly onto city streets

With current property setbacks, new garages are 23 feet off the street traffic – exits from newly built

garages will NOT be backed directly out onto the street (nor directly onto a sidewalk)

Salida city streets are not heavily used “big-city” streets; backing out onto them is not dangerous.

According to CDOT, the probability of an accident is extremely low due to the low-volume of our side

June 18, 2013 of 122

of 2

streets combined with the infrequency of garage exits. Accidents happen while driving forward, do

we now eliminate driving forward.

Again, many garages are not used as actual daily parking, so backing out is already minimal.

3) Defines city’s urban form by removing garage doors from city streetscape

Why have the garage doors be deemed as unsightly? This is Salida with it’s character already

established, this is not urban sprawl. Is the side of a garage that much more attractive?

No matter which way a garage faces, the doors will still be seen from the streetscape, just from a

different angle.

The urban design goal to remove garage doors from side streets is not plausible; short of a bulldozer

to the existing hundreds and hundreds corner-lot street facing garages. If this code is written to

keep garage doors off the front of a home it will still be effective, even with an amendment that will

provide an exception for corner-lot side-street access only.

The position used to enforce this code, as it currently reads, does not carry any actual weight in real-world Salida; it simply sounds good on paper. There are no newspaper headlines where accident after accident is occurring with side street driveway access. There are literally just a few handfuls of properties that will be forced to have alley access. And what was hoped to be achieved with this code as written is not plausible; as forcing these remaining few corner-lot properties to have alley access cannot accomplish the lofty goal that gives this code purpose. What actually is being achieved with the way this code is currently written is that property owners are being alienated and the code without revision is expending unnecessary time with the request and denial process. The design of Salida with it’s corner-lot garages facing the street has defined the urban form. These corner-lot garage doors are not unsightly; they are part of the streetscape and you cannot hide them. These scenarios of corner-lot driveways/garage with street access are not unsafe. People don’t back out of their garages in an unruly fashion, nor do pedestrians and drivers travel down the streets and sidewalks totally unaware of their surroundings. Our recommendation for a text amendment reads as follows: 16-8-20 (e) (2)-Driveway access must be from the alley where alley access is available.

Exception – Corner-lot driveways may have side street access. Here are some points supporting a text amendment:

1. Having garage doors/driveways access the numbered side streets is a reasonable request.

2. The corner-lot street scenario already exists, and accidents are not occurring. These are low volume side-

streets and the probability of driver backing out at the same time as foot/bike/driving traffic is low.

Precedence has been set; out of 310 corner-lot properties observed in Salida, 273 corner-lot properties have

street access, 12 have alley facing garage, 23 vacant (no structure/driveway). (* see statistics below)

3. Having the four corner-lot garage doors face the side street reduces congestion in the frequently used narrow

alleyways. Exiting a garage into an alley can often be a 5-point turn. (**see statistics below)

4. The atmosphere of the city Salida is largely recreational. Many residents own outdoor equipment (campers,

boats, OHV’s, snowmobiles etc.) requiring trailers to pull. Initiating a trailer entry/exit into alleyway garage can

prove difficult. Allowing the four corner-lot garages street access allows easier trailer access and again

reduces congestion in alleyways.

5. The existence and enforcement of this code is a basic restriction of private property.

6. The city staff receives a request for property owners to build new garages accessing the street almost more

than any other request; this says something about the erroneous nature of this code.

* Re: Street observed O,N, M, L, K , J 5th

, 6th

, 7th

, 8th

, 9th

, 10th

, 11th

, 12th

13th

, 14th

, 15th

, Blake, palmer, Caldwell, Maxwell, Chilcott area. ** Re: A resident of Salida, James Haarmeyer, at 725 “F” Street generally is required to make a 5-point turn to drive his vehicle out of his alley facing garage.

June 18, 2013 of 122

Date: May 28, 2013 To: Planning Commission From: Shannon Bevington, Salida Resident, 18 years RE: Setback recommendation for text amendment language Code: Chapter 16 Land Use Code Revision – Article VIII Design Standards – Section 16-8-20 Road, driveway and sidewalk

standards. (e) (2)-Driveway access must be from the alley where alley access is available. Amended Language: Exception: A single-family corner-lot having frontage to local streets on two sides and alley access,

may have accessory dwelling access from the street on the side lot line, provided there is a 10’ minimum setback from the side lot line and a 10’ maximum setback from the rear lot line.

In regards to the recommended additional setbacks: 1. I agree with the wording in general (with the possible addition of highlighted suggestion above).

2. I agree the maximum set back from rear lot line at 10’

3. I challenge the 10’ minimum side lot line setback and propose a 3’-5’ minimum side lot setback

(see explanations below):

Challenge reasons are as follows: 1) While I recognize and agree that safety is the number one goal, it has been shown that the existing

scenario of street access on corner-lots has not been a cause for traffic accidents. This lack of

accidents is in direct relation to the low volume of Salida streets due to Salida’s smaller population.

Low volume combined with the infrequency of garage/driveway exits provides a low probability for

accidents. To say we need a 10’ larger than the standard 3’ setback is again saying there was a

historical safety problem with the driveway street access.

a. Research of backover incidents shows that the higher rates of incident are not on the

sidewalk and street, they are non-traffic (on private property). This is directly related to

the private property scenarios where an on-property driveway and an adjacent play area

(the front yard) are in close proximity to each other. Often times the on-property driveway

itself is deemed a play area. The perception of safety related to being on one’s own

property lends itself to the higher accident rate. Another leading scenario non-traffic

backovers is parking lots. (see sources below)

2) A downfall to requiring a larger setback is as follows: Requiring a minimum 10’ side lot line setback is

not enough space to park a car yet is just enough to encourage homeowners/renters to perceive this a

parking space, resulting in cars parked across the sidewalk. A smaller setback, like the 3’-5’, will not

mistakenly be perceived as parking space. (picture of 7-10’ setback problems below)

a. I have researched city codes and planning documents across Colorado, as well as the US, and

found it difficult to find a relative accessory dwelling setback larger than 5’.

I recommend keeping the current minimum side setback at 3’, again as we have not historically experienced safety problems with these existing scenarios, and this setback has not encouraged pseudo parking spaces. At most I suggest a 5’ side lot line setback. This mimics the current 5’ minimum setback from rear lot line for detached accessory building. The current 5’ minimum setback from rear lot line has been deemed sufficient for alleyway traffic flow. Sources: New Zealand Medical Journal – Paediatric driveway run-over injuries: time to redesign? http://www.kidsandcars.org/userfiles/dangers/backovers/studies/2009-07-03-paediatric-driveway-runover-study.pdf http://www.kidsandcars.org/ Insurance Institute for Highway Safety http://www.iihs.org/research/qanda/backover.aspx The US Department of Transportation – Fatalities and Injuries in Motor Vehicle Backing Crashes http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/Pubs/811144.pdf

June 18, 2013 of 122

http://www.kidsandcars.org/userfiles/dangers/backovers/studies/2009-07-03-paediatric-driveway-runover-study.pdf

http://www.kidsandcars.org/userfiles/dangers/backovers/studies/2009-07-03-paediatric-driveway-runover-study.pdf

http://www.kidsandcars.org/

http://www.iihs.org/research/qanda/backover.aspx

http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/Pubs/811144.pdf

June 18, 2013 of 122

Name City State Zip Code Country Signed On

http://www.change.org/pet

itions/salida-colorado-

planning-committee-allow-

street-access-for-driveways-

garages-for-properties-with-

alley-

access?utm_campaign=peti

tion_invitation&utm_mediu

m=email&utm_source=shar

e_petition

67 Signatures

Shannon Bevington Salida Colorado 81201 United States 5/5/2013

Rebecca Eggleston Buena Vista Colorado 81211 United States 5/5/2013

Hank Bevington Salida Colorado 81201 United States 5/5/2013

Janine Frazee Salida Colorado 81201 United States 5/5/2013

Rebecca Capozza Salida Colorado 81201 United States 5/5/2013

Stephanie Glaser Salida Colorado 81201-1522United States 5/5/2013

Susan Bevington Salida Colorado 81201 United States 5/5/2013

Susie miller salida Colorado 81201 United States 5/5/2013

Tambra Sheppard Salida Colorado 81201 United States 5/5/2013

Kelly Ordaz Salida Colorado 81201 United States 5/5/2013

michael potts salida Colorado 81201 United States 5/5/2013

Mary Dunay Salida Colorado 81201 United States 5/5/2013

Suzi Mishmash Salida Colorado 81201 United States 5/5/2013

Gayle Dudley Nathrop Colorado 81236 United States 5/5/2013

Farrrah Lapp Fine Salida Colorado 81201 United States 5/5/2013

Diana Porter Salida Colorado 81201 United States 5/5/2013

Nancy Powers Salida Colorado 81201 United States 5/6/2013

Laura Saxon morriston Florida 32668 United States 5/6/2013

Lauren Giusti Salida Colorado 81201 United States 5/6/2013

Stacy Follet Salida Colorado 81201 United States 5/6/2013

Kylee Hadley Poncha Springs Colorado 81242 United States 5/6/2013

James Eggleston Buena Vista Colorado 81211 United States 5/6/2013

Karen Adamson Salida Colorado 81201 United States 5/6/2013

Lee Hart Salida Colorado 81201 United States 5/6/2013

Joshua Visitacion Salida Colorado 81201 United States 5/6/2013

Josh Hadley Poncha Springs Colorado 81242 United States 5/6/2013

Beth Pack Salida Colorado 81201 United States 5/6/2013

Nicole Balaun Salida Colorado 81201 United States 5/6/2013

Gina Clark salida Colorado 81201 United States 5/7/2013

Joe Judd Salida Colorado 81201 United States 5/7/2013

La Sal Miller Salida Colorado 81201 United States 5/7/2013

Valerie Sites Salida Colorado 81201 United States 5/7/2013

Torrey Lengerich Salida Colorado 81201 United States 5/7/2013

Charlotte Karls Salida Colorado 81201 United States 5/7/2013

Amanda Reed Salida Colorado 81201 United States 5/7/2013

June 18, 2013 of 122

http://www.change.org/petitions/salida-colorado-planning-committee-allow-street-access-for-driveways-garages-for-properties-with-alley-access?utm_campaign=petition_invitation&utm_medium=email&utm_source=share_petition










elizabeth sather salida Colorado 81201 United States 5/7/2013

John Kreski Salida Colorado 81201 United States 5/7/2013

Kathleen Graves Salida Colorado 81201 United States 5/7/2013

Laura Donavan Salida Colorado 81201 United States 5/7/2013

Jen Visitacion Salida Colorado 81201 United States 5/7/2013

paul byars Salida Colorado 81201 United States 5/7/2013

Dwight Cocovinis Salida Colorado 81201 United States 5/7/2013

Brandy Coscarella Salida Colorado 81201 United States 5/7/2013

Andy Riemenschneider SALIDA Colorado 81201 United States 5/7/2013

Richard Longberg Salida Colorado 81201 United States 5/7/2013

Peter Bernard Salida Colorado 81201 United States 5/8/2013

Leanne Pressly Salida Colorado 81201 United States 5/8/2013

Judy Shuford Salida Colorado 81201 United States 5/8/2013

Tom Price Salida Colorado 81201 United States 5/8/2013

James Balaun Salida Colorado 81201 United States 5/8/2013

John Nahomenuk Salida Colorado 81201 United States 5/8/2013

Denise Morris Salida Colorado 81201 United States 5/9/2013

Andrea Mossman Salida Colorado 81201 United States 5/9/2013

Darlene Friedrichs Salida Colorado 81201 United States 5/9/2013

Alan Sulzenfuss Salida Colorado 81201 United States 5/9/2013

Anne Graf Salida Colorado 81201 United States 5/9/2013

christi delaney salida Colorado 81201 United States 5/13/2013

Craig NIelson Salida Colorado 81201 United States 5/15/2013

Fred Klein Salida Colorado 81201 United States 5/15/2013

Tom Bevington Salida Colorado 81201 United States 5/15/2013

Steven Stewart Salida Colorado 81201 United States 5/15/2013

Dave Potts Salida Colorado 81201 United States 5/16/2013

Randy Merchant salida Colorado 81201 United States 5/18/2013

Marla Breunich Salida Colorado 81201 United States 5/21/2013

Nikol Noll Salida Colorado 81201 United States 5/23/2013

Magdalena Rosa Salida Colorado 81201 United States 5/24/2013

Cris Thompson Salida Colorado 81201 United States 5/29/2013

June 18, 2013 of 122

__________________________CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM_____________________ MEETING DATE: June 18, 2013 AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Ordinance 2013-17 Lowry Annexation 1st Reading, an ordinance

of the City Council for the City of Salida, Colorado approving the annexation of 3.28 acres of the property located at 225 Grand Avenue into the City of Salida known as the Lowry Annexation.


REQUEST: The request is to pass on first reading the ordinance annexing the Lowry Annexation. APPLICANT: The applicants are Edgewater, LLC, PO Box 745 Salida, CO represented by Tom Pokorny and Dan Thomas of Natural Habitats. The applicants have the permission of the property owners to file the application for annexation. LOCATION: The subject property is located at 225 Grand Avenue. The entire legal description is attached to the ordinance. BACKGROUND REVIEW: Below is a summary of the process for annexations, a brief background regarding the property and the Planning Commission’s recommendation for the annexation.

To annex a property, the City must follow the steps and procedures outlined in Colorado Revised Statutes. The final steps for annexation are passing an ordinance annexing the 3.28 acres into the City and then passing an ordinance zoning the property. At the May 18, 2013 City Council meeting, a public hearing was set by Resolution 2013-29 for July 2, 2013 which found the petition in substantial compliance with state statute. The Planning Commission reviewed the annexation and the application for a zone district designation on May 28, 2013. During the public hearing on the annexation, there were 2 main issues the Commission considered with the annexation request. The first issue was the applicants’ proposal for the creation of 2 affordable housing units with the proposed development. After evaluating the options for the possible administration of affordable housing with the development, the Planning Commission recommended 4 conditions. The first condition was that the first sale of the lots or homes would be targeted towards buyers who make less than 100% of the Area Medium Income. The second condition was the lot or unit is resident occupied after the sale or construction of the unit. The third condition was that the affordable lots

June 18, 2013 of 122

be Lots 11 and 12 of the proposed subdivision. The final condition was the Commission agreed to the applicants’ request that if after two years the lots or units do not sell they return to market rate pricing. The Commission did not want to require a deed restriction on the land for two main reasons. First the Commission cited that at the current time there is no organization that could administer the deed restrictions on the lots and this could not be created in a timely enough fashion for the proposed development. The second reason is the Commission did not want to adversely impact a potential buyer ability to receive financing for a mortgage. The second issue the Commission considered was the dedication of parks, trails and open space with the proposed development. The applicants are proposing a river trial and angler easement dedication along the river frontage of the Arkansas River. They have also proposed to construct the crusher fine trail along applicants’ property to link to the properties to the east and west. The Commission recommended that City Council accepts the applicants’ proposal for the dedication of parks, trails and open space. The final issue the applicants have raised with their annexation petition is partnering with the City on a CDOT Access permit for Marvin Park. The applicants proposed access borders Marvin Park and CDOT has expressed concerns with the current state of the Marvin Park accesses. At this time Marvin Park has over 220’ of uncontrolled access along SH 291. The applicant has proposed supplying and installing a 4’ chain link fence to delineate a 30’ access on the east side of the existing parking lot. A new controlled access could have several possible benefits for the park including increased parking in the current lot, resolving drainage issues, and creating a safe access point for the ball fields. ACTION: A Council person should make a motion “to approve Ordinance No. 17, 2013 an ordinance of the City Council for the City of Salida, Colorado approving the annexation of 3.28 acres of the property located at 225 Grand Avenue into the City of Salida known as the Lowry Annexation setting the public hearing date for July 2, 2013 and ordering the ordinance to be published in full.” Followed by a roll call vote

June 18, 2013 of 122

June 18, 2013 of 122

__________________________CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM_____________________ MEETING DATE: June 18, 2013 AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Ordinance 2013-18 Lowry Salida Zoning 1st Reading, an

ordinance of the City Council for the City of Salida, Colorado approving the rezoning of 3.28 acres of the property located at 225 Grand Avenue to Commercial (“C-1”) and Medium Density Residential (“R-2”) also known as the Lowry Annexation.


REQUEST: The request is to pass on first reading the rezoning of the River West Salida. APPLICANT: The applicant is Edgewater, LLC, PO Box 745 Salida, CO represented by Tom Pokorny and Dan Thomas of Natural Habitats. The applicants have the permission of the property owners to file the application for zoning. LOCATION: The subject property is located at 225 Grand Avenue. The entire legal description is attached to the ordinance. BACKGROUND REVIEW: Zoning of the property is the second step in the annexation process for Lowry Annexation. The applicant has requested to rezone the property located along SH 291 Commercial (“C-1”) and the portion of the property located in the rear Medium Density Residential (“R-2”). The applicants’ request is consistent with the zoning of the neighboring properties. The C-1 zoned portion of the property will encompass two lots once the subdivision has been finalized. The existing house that is currently located on the site will be converted into a commercial structure. There will be another buildable commercial lot to the west of the existing house. For the area zoned R-2, the applicants are applying for a planned development overlay. Once the subdivision has been finalized, there will be 14 residential lots. This overlay will be considered on July 2, 2013 with the second reading of this ordinance. The overlay request will allow some deviations to the typical R-2 zoning requirements including setbacks, lot frontage, and minimum lot sizes. The Planning Commission reviewed the rezoning request for the C-1 and R-2 zone district designation for this property on May 28, 2013. The Commission made a recommendation to approve the rezoning application during this meeting.

June 18, 2013 of 122

ACTION: A Council person should make a motion “to approve Ordinance No. 18, 2013 an ordinance of the City Council for the City of Salida, Colorado approving rezoning of 3.28 acres of the property located at 225 Grand Avenue to Commercial (“C-1”) and Medium Density Residential (“R-2”) known as the Lowry Annexation setting the public hearing date for July 2, 2013 and ordering the ordinance to be published in full.” Followed by a roll call vote

June 18, 2013 of 122

June 18, 2013 of 122


STAFF REPORT

MEETING DATE: May 28, 2013 AGENDA ITEM TITLE: River West Salida - Zoning Review AGENDA SECTION: Public Hearing REQUEST: The request is to designate the newly annexed property at 225 Grand Avenue as Commercial (“C-1”) and Medium Density Residential (“R-2”). The property is also known as the Lowry Annexation. APPLICANT: The applicant is Edgewater, LLC represented by Dan Thomas and Tom Pokorny of Natural Habitats, PO Box 745, Salida, CO 81201. The applicants have the permission of the property owners to file the application for annexation and zoning of the property. LOCATION: The subject property is known as 225 Grand Avenue, located immediately west of Marvin Park and is adjacent to the Arkansas River. The full legal description and maps are included with the application packet. PROCESS: An application for zoning consists of a two-step process. The request is addressed by the Commission through a public hearing process. The Commission makes a recommendation of approval, approval with conditions, or denial of the zoning application to City Council. The Commission may also remand the application back to the applicant for further information or amendments. Council has final decision-making authority in such applications. In its review of the application, the Commission shall focus on the long term use of the property within the context of the City’s Comprehensive Plan and current zoning for the property, as well as the surrounding area. Once the property is zoned, all of the uses permitted within the new zoning district are permitted as uses by right, not just what is proposed at the present time. OBSERVATIONS:

1. Annexation of the subject property is underway, with a public hearing scheduled before the City Council on July 2, 2013.

2. The subject property is located next to the Marvin Park Ball fields.

3. Current use of the property is residential with one house on the property. The applicants plan to develop the property into 16 lots.

June 18, 2013 of 122


4. The applicants are requesting the two lots along SH 291 to be zoned Commercial (“C-1”) and the large residential lot in the rear of the property to be zoned Medium Density residential (“R-2”). The applicants are applying of a planned development overlay for the R-2 parcel in conjunction with their development application.

REVIEW STANDARDS FOR MAP AMENDMENTS (Section 16-4-120): 1. Consistent with Comprehensive Plan. The proposed amendment shall be consistent with the

Comprehensive Plan.

This property is not designated in the Comprehensive Plan because it is located outside of City limits. However, the zoning request is consistent with Comprehensive Plan because it will establish commercial uses along the highway frontage and create residential infill opportunities in the area zoned R-2.

2. Consistency with Purpose of Zone District. The proposed amendment shall be consistent

with the purpose of the zone district to which the property is to be designated.

The applicant is requesting a zone district designation of the subject property of C-1 and R-2. Along the SH 291 corridor these properties are zoned C-1. The intended use of the remainder of the property is residential which is consistent with other uses in the neighborhood.

3. Compatibility with Surrounding Zone Districts and Uses. The development permitted by the proposed amendment shall be compatible with surrounding zone districts, land uses and neighborhood character.

The zoning classification of C-1 is consistent with the zoning of other surrounding properties along SH 291 and the R-2 zone designation is consistent with properties located off of SH 291.

4. Changed Conditions or Errors. The applicant shall demonstrate that conditions affecting the

subject parcel or the surrounding neighborhood have changed, or that due to incorrect assumptions or conclusions about the property, one (1) or more errors in the boundaries shown on the Official Zoning Map have occurred.

This application is a result of the need for zoning due to annexation, not due to a map error or change in uses in the neighborhood.

RECOMMENDED FINDINGS:

1. That the application is in compliance with the review standards for map amendments because the C-1 and R-2 zone district designation for this parcel is consistent with the comprehensive plan and is compatible with the zoning of neighboring properties.

RECOMMENDED ACTION: Based upon the observations, review standards, and findings outlined above, staff recommends the following: The Commission recommend APPROVAL of the application to designate the newly annexed property at 225 Grand Avenue as Commercial (“C-1”) and Medium Density Residential (“R-2”). RECOMMENDED MOTION:

June 18, 2013 of 122


That the recommended findings be made and the recommended action be taken.

June 18, 2013 of 122

Ordina

MEE AGE

PRE REQThe pof the BACDurinincreathe Mthe Cmont Theseelecti The mJanuacurrenMayo RECA Cothe Cmembordin Follo

ance 2013-19 –

ETING DAT

ENDA ITEM

SENTED B

QUEST: proposed orde City Counc

KGROUNDng the work sasing compen

Mayor is fromCouncil is fromthly compens

e changes woon.

most recent sary 1, 1998. Tnt rate of $1

or.

COMMENDouncil personCity Council obers of the C

nance to be p

wed by a sec

– Mayor/Counc

C

TE:

M TITLE:

BY:

dinance woulcil.

D: session on Junsation for th

m $250.00 to m $150.00 tosation.

ould only app

salary increasThat action w50 per month

DED MOTIn should makof the City ofCity Council, ublished in f

cond and the

cil Salaries

CITY COUN

June 18, 20

EstablishingCouncil – 1

Dara MacD

ld increase m

une 4, 2013, Che Mayor an$375.00 per o $225.00 per

ply to those w

se for the Mawas a result oh for membe

ON: ke a motion tof Salida, Colosetting the p

full.”

n a roll call v

NCIL AGE

13

g Salaries for1st reading

Donald, City A

monthly comp

City Councilnd Council mmonth. Ther month. Th

who begin te

ayor or membof Ordinanceers of the Co

o approve “Oorado, establipublic hearing

vote.

ENDA ITEM

r the Mayor a

Administrato

pensation for

l directed stamembers. Thee proposed inhis represents

erms after the

bers of the Ce 1997-14 whouncil and $2

Ordinance 20ishing salarieg for July 2, 2

M

and Member

or

r the Mayor

ff to draft ane suggested increase for ms a 50% incre

e November

Council took hich set the s250 per mont

013-19 an ores for the Ma2013 and ord

Page 1 of

rs of the City

and member

n ordinance increase for

members of ease in

5, 2013

effect on salaries at theth for the

rdinance of ayor and dering the

f 1

y

rs

eir

June 18, 2013 of 122

CITY OF SALIDA, COLORADO ORDINANCE NO 19.

(Series of 2013) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SALIDA, COLORADO, ESTABLISHING SALARIES FOR THE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL.

WHEREAS, the Mayor and Council members shall be paid monthly as provided by ordinance and amended from time to time.

WHEREAS, C.R.S. 31-4-109 authorizes the City Council to fix or amend the

compensation to be paid to the Mayor and/or councilmembers at least as early as the last monthly council meeting before a regular city election; and

WHEREAS, Section 2-2-50 of the Salida Municipal Code states the compensation paid

to any member of the City Council, including the Mayor, shall not be increased or diminished for the term of office for which he or she has been elected or appointed; and

WHEREAS, the compensation provided to the Mayor and members of City Council,

currently set at $250.00 and $150.00 per month respectively, was last adjusted in 1997; and WHEREAS, the Salida City Council finds and determines that it would be just to

reasonably increase the compensation provided to the Mayor and members of the council for services performed during their terms of office.

NOW, THEREFORE, THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SALIDA, COLORADO, ORDAINS THAT:

Starting with the term(s) of office commencing after the November 5, 2013 regular

municipal election, the Mayor shall receive a salary of $375.00 per month. Starting with the term(s) of office commencing after the November 5, 2013 regular

municipal election, members of the City Council shall receive a salary of 225.00 per month. INTRODUCED ON FIRST READING, ADOPTED and ORDERED PUBLISHED IN

FULL in a newspaper of general circulation in the City of Salida by the City Council on the 18th day of June, 2013 and set for second reading and public hearing on the 2nd day of July, 2013.

INTRODUCED ON SECOND READING, FINALLY ADOPTED and ORDERED PUBLISHED BY TITLE ONLY, by the City Council on the ____ day of ______ , 2013.

June 18, 2013 of 122

City of Salida, Colorado Ordinance No. 19 , Series of 2013 Page 2 of 2

CITY OF SALIDA, COLORADO

___________________________ Mayor

[SEAL] ATTEST: ___________________________ City Clerk/Deputy City Clerk

PUBLISHED IN FULL in the Mountain Mail after First Reading on the ____ day of ______, 2013, and BY TITLE ONLY, after final adoption on the _____day of _____, 2013.

___________________________ City Clerk/Deputy City Clerk

June 18, 2013 of 122

_____________________CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM_____________________ MEETING DATE: June 18, 2013 AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Ward One Council Seat Appointment Discussion PRESENTED BY: Audrey Gilpin, Deputy City Clerk AGENDA SECTION: Scheduled Items REQUEST: Discuss how to proceed in appointing the vacant Ward One Council

Seat BACKGROUND REVIEW: Jim McCormick resigned from his position as Salida City Councilman Ward One June 7. According to the Salida Municipal Code Chapter 2, Article 2, “All vacancies on the City Council created other than by the regular expiration of a term shall be filled by appointment made upon a majority vote of the membership of the City Council within sixty (60) days after the vacancy occurs. Persons appointed to fill a vacancy shall serve until the next regular municipal election, at which time a successor shall be elected to serve out the remainder of any uncompleted term.” The person appointed is required to be:

a United States Citizen at least 18 years old a qualified elector of the City of Salida a resident of Ward One for at least 12 months

McCormick’s term expires this November. Sixty days from June 7 is Monday, August 5. RECOMMENDATION: Provide direction on how council would like to proceed in appointing the vacant Ward One Council Seat. Attachments: Ward Map

June 18, 2013 of 122

Ward 1

Ward 3Ward 2

S outh Arkansas R iver

Arkansas River

South Arkan sas RiverSouth A rkansas River £¤US 50F S

tG St

E St

D St

US Hwy 50

H St

J St

J St

Co Rd 177

Co Rd 177

First St

Third St

Second St

Co Rd 120

Oak St

Oak S

t

Co Rd 105

Co Rd 160

Co Rd

107

Co Rd

110

Co Rd 110

L St

L St

Fifth St

Hillside Dr

Seventh St

I St

I St

I St

Hunt

St

Co Rd 111

Eighth St

Sixth St

Ninth St

Blake

St

Palm

er St

Palm

er St

Teller

St

Dodge St

B StHolm

an Av

e

Twelfth St

Co Rd

144

K St

K St

Tenth St

Jones Ave

Fourth St

M St

Thirteenth St

Eleventh StFourteenth St

Fifteenth St

State Hwy 291

Nichols AveGr

ant S

t

Ouray Ave

C St

C St

C St

Crestone Ave

Crestone AveCrestone Ave

Co Rd 107-A

Co Rd

141

State

St

N St

Maxwell St

Caldw

ell A

veCa

ldwell

Ave

Sackett Ave

Sixteenth St

Buck Run

Buck Run

Milfo

rd St

New

St

Co Rd 104

Co Rd 154

Park Ave

Park Ave

Co Rd 140Co Rd 140Co Rd 140 Co Rd 140

Sackett StPoncha Blvd

Poncha Blvd

Scott S

tSco

tt St

Scott S

t

Co Rd 176

Co Rd 176

Co Rd 176Co Rd 176

Co Rd 108

FS 173

Co Rd

109

Co Rd

109

Co Rd 102

Wood Ave

Co Rd 111-B

Shavano Ave

Spruc

e St Pit

kin St

Pitkin St

O St

Co Rd

111-A

Rex Cr

Co Rd 106-B

Co Rd 106-B

Chilcott StChilcott St

Indigo

Ln

Mesa Ln

Nicole Ln

Co Rd 141-D

Co Rd

141-D

Adriann

a Way

Mesa

Cir

Co Rd

141-B

Elm Dr

Vine S

tVin

e St

Vesta

Rd

Grand AveGrand Ave

Trailside Circle NorthChipeta Tr

Maple Dr

Illinois AveIllinois Ave

Co Rd

110-A

Co Rd 142

Adams Ave

Routt StRo

utt St

River

Dr

Eaton St

Park Pl

Trailside Circle South

Co Rd 106-A

Walnu

t St

Walnu

t St

Co Rd

153

Mesa CtMesa Ct

East Crestone Ave

Cotto

nwoo

d Circ

le

Fawn Run

Silver Spruce Cir

Starbuck Circle

Co Rd 111-C

County Road 121

Angel View Dr

Short St

Paradise Acres Rd

Davison Way

Bridge St

Mesa Dr

Co Rd 106-C

Future ROW

Trailside Court

Co Rd 173

Co Rd 1

06

City Council WardsCreated by the

Community Development DepartmentDec 2010

Map based on description of wardsin Section 2-1-40 of the SMC

/500 0 500 1,000 1,500250

Feet

June 18, 2013 of 122

_____________________CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM_____________________ MEETING DATE: June 18, 2013 AGENDA ITEM TITLE: 2013 Fee Schedule – Outdoor Vendor Permit Fees PRESENTED BY: Audrey Gilpin, Deputy City Clerk AGENDA SECTION: Scheduled Items REQUEST: Amend the 2013 Fee Schedule to Include Outdoor Vendor Permit

Fees BACKGROUND REVIEW: Council approved Ordinance 2013-12 amending sections Sections 6-2-10 and 6-2-20 of the Salida Municipal Code last month to regulate and permit outdoor vendors on public property. The ordinance allows for permits to be granted for a period not to exceed more than 180 days in one calendar year and can be applied for in increments of 7, 30, 90 and 180 days. Proposed fees for the permits are 7 day = $25, 30 day = $50, 90 day = $75 and 180 = $100. Non-profits fundraising for less than two days are not required to pay a fee to apply for the permit. RECOMMENDATION: We recommend the Council approve amending the 2013 Fee Schedule to include Outdoor Vendor Permit Fees. ACTION: A council member should make a motion to adopt Resolution 2013-38, a resolution of the City Council of the City of Salida amending the 2013 Fee Schedule to include Outdoor Vendor Permit fees. Followed by a second and a roll call vote.

June 18, 2013 of 122

CITY OF SALIDA, COLORADO RESOLUTION NO. 38

(Series of 2013) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SALIDA, COLORADO ADOPTING A REVISED 2013 FEE SCHEDULE FOR OUTDOOR VENDOR PERMITS PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 6 OF THE SALIDA MUNICIPAL CODE.

WHEREAS, the Salida Municipal Code establishes rules and regulations for operations of the City and provides for the establishment of fees for various City services; and

WHEREAS, the Salida City Council approved 2013 fees on November 6, 2012 by Resolution 2012-63; and

WHEREAS, the Salida City Council wishes to adopt fees for outdoor vendor permits and adopt a revised 2013 Fee Schedule attached hereto as the official fee schedule for Business Licenses, Liquor, Marijuana, Event Vendors and Arborists pursuant to Chapter 6 of the Salida Municipal Code that addresses such operations. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SALIDA, COLORATO THAT:

1. The Salida City Council incorporates the foregoing recitals as its conclusions, facts, determinations, and findings.

2. The Salida City Council hereby approves fees for outdoor vendor

permits and adopts a revised 2013 Fee Schedule. 3. Effective immediately, the above referenced fee schedule replaces the

2013 fee schedule previously approved and a copy will be available for inspection by the public at City Hall during normal business hours.

RESOLVED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 18th day of June, 2013.

CITY OF SALIDA

By:___________________________ Mayor [SEAL] ATTEST: _______________________________ City Clerk

June 18, 2013 of 122

New Licen Concurrent Transfer of Change of H/R Optio Resort Com Manager R Corp/LLC Art Gallery Annual Ren Late Renew Local Fire I Hotel/Rest Hotel/Rest Tavern Racetrack Optional P Arts Club Drugstore Retail Liqu Beer and W Brew Pub 3.2% Perce

Special Eve Special Eve

Temporary

TY

L

nse

t Review

f Ownership

Location

onal Premises (e

mplex Permit (e

Registration (H/

CO Changer (pe

y

newal

wal

Inspection

taurant

taurant w/optio

Premises

or Store

Wine

ent Beer

ents Permit (Liq

ents Permit (3.2

y Permit

Fees anLiquor, M

Sali

YPE OF LIC

Liquor (SMC 6

each)

each)

/R and Tavern)

er person)

onal premises

quor)

2% Beer)

nd ChargeMarijuana, ida Munic

CENSE

6-1-40)

es for BusiEvent Veipal Code

ness Licenendors, Arb

Chapter 6

nses borists 6

FEE

$1,000

$1,000

$750.0

$750.0

$75.0

$ 100.

$75.0

$100.0

$100.0

$100.0

$500.0

$20.0

$75.0

$75.0

$75.0

$75.0

$75.0

$41.2

$41.2

$22.5

$22.5

$48.7

$75.0

$3.75

$100.0

$100.0

$100.0

E

0.00

0.00

00

00

00

.00

00

00

00

00

00

00

00

00

00

00

00

25

25

50

50

75

00

5

00

00

00

June 18, 2013 of 122

Bed & Breakfast Permit $25.00

Art Gallery Permit $3.75

Modification of Premises $100.00

Retail Warehouse Storage Permit $50.00

Change of Trade Name/Corp. Name $50.00

Tasting Permit $25.00 annual and $10 per event

Multiple Vendor Event (SMC 6-2-10(a))

Multiple Vendor Event Permit $75.00

Additional Fee Per Participating Vendor $20.00

Outdoor Vendor (SMC 6-2-10(b))

7 Day Permit $25.00

30 Day Permit $50.00



2 Day or Less Non-Profit Permit $0.00

Medical Marijuana (SMC 6-3-50)

Annual Application fee $1,000.00

Transfer of Ownership $750.00

Change of Location $750.00

Primary Contact/Manager Registration $75.00

Background Check (per person) $100.00

Corp/LLC Change (per person) $100.00

Local Fire Inspection Fee $20.00 (initial inspection)

Change of Primary Contact/Manager $75.00

Modification of Premises $100.00

Change of Trade Name/Corp. Name $100.00

Arborist License (SMC 6-4)

Arborist License $100.00

Penalty for Operating No License $100.00

June 18, 2013 of 122

MEE AGE PRE MounFred geothCounGilpin ChafLast yallowat thethe sa TrashThe sdumptravelit hasagain Staff statiothosewhich We hdump We arof the DonaThe Cfor thfire-fi

ETING DAT

ENDA ITEM

SENTED B

nt PrincetonHenderson a

hermal resourncil to attend.n if you plan

ffee County year the City

ws for 3 votese same level. ame level for

h Dumpstersummer is stapster at the Clling public w routinely be.

has taken steon and change who dump h has been du

have also updpster - $5 for

re also addine park where

ation of EquColorado Mohe purpose oighting, emer

A

C

TE:

M TITLE:

BY:

n Geothermand Hank Herces for Frida. The agenda

n to attend so

Economic DCouncil dec on CCEDC Unless there

r 2013.

r at the Chaarting off wit

Chamber/Muwho stop to ueen filled to o

eps to reduceging signage tillegally. Codumped in ou

dated the suggr small trailer

ng pet waste se we have rec

uipment to Counted Rangef lending assrgency medic

Administrator Re

CITY COUN

June 18, 20

City Admin

Dara MacD

mal Tour eld of Mt Priay, June 21st.a for the day

o we can mak

Developmenided to parti

C official mate is objection

mber/Museth the same puseum buildinuse the RV doverflowing b

e this impact to clarify the de enforcem

ur parks or th

gested donats, $10 for lar

stations by thceived recent

Colorado Mers is a statutistance to lawcal service, an

eport 06.18.13,

NCIL AGE

13

nistrator Repo

Donald, City A

inceton Geot They welco

y is attached. ke sure it is p

nt Corporatcipate in the ters. This fun from the C

eum problems of ng. The dum

dump station by local resid

by moving tintention of ent periodica

his dumpster

tion fee for urge campers a

he Chamber complaints a

Mounted Rantorily authoriw enforcemend search-an

, Page 1 of 2

ENDA ITEM

ort

Administrato

thermal haveome any inter Please cont

properly post

tion Dues CCEDC at

unding is inclCouncil we wi

locals dumpmpster is inte

in this locatidents. This a

the dumpsterf the service aally will sift tto find the p

use of the RVand $2 per b

entrance andabout pet wa

ngers ized all-volunent agencies, nd-rescue age

M

or

e planned a trested membact myself or

ted.

the $3,000 leluded in the 2ill proceed w

ing their trasended to servion, howeverappears to be

r closer to thand provide wthrough residperpetrator.

V dump statioag of trash.

d at the northaste accumul

nteer, unpaidemergency m

encies statewi

our of bers of r Audrey

evel which 2013 budget

with renewal a

sh in the ve the r in years pase happening

he dump warning to

dential trash

on and

h east cornerlating.

d auxiliary unmanagement,ide. Since

at

st

r

nit ,

June 18, 2013 of 122

Administrator Report 06.18.13, Page 2 of 2

2005 they have come to Salida to provide law enforcement assistance during FIBArk – at no cost to the City. Their assistance is invaluable during this event and is a great compliment to the City’s police department. They are a dedicated group each supplying their own equipment and paying for their own training. During their visit this year they asked what the police were planning to do with some old equipment they noticed in the department. Chief Clark had no further use for the equipment and there is little value for resale. We have given them 6 handheld radios (Pac Sets) and 10 Toughbook Laptops (minus the hard drives). While outdated for us and no longer used, these items can be used by the Colorado Mounted Rangers so the equipment was given to them in gratitude for their years of assistance to Salida.

June 18, 2013 of 122

_____________________CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM_____________________ MEETING DATE: June 18, 2013 AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Deer Task Force PRESENTED BY: Audrey Gilpin, Deputy City Clerk AGENDA SECTION: Scheduled Items REQUEST: Discuss whether council wants to form a special committee for a

deer task force. BACKGROUND REVIEW: At the June 4 regular city council meeting, council gave staff direction to look into forming a deer task force for the urban deer population issue. Mayor Don Stephens asked citizens to e-mail him if they were interested in being on a committee to discuss possible solutions. Stephens has received four e-mails from interested citizens. If council wishes to form a special committee, Chapter 2, Article 7 of the Salida Municipal Code states City Council may establish special committees for the purpose of advising the City Council, various departments and department heads by resolution. If council chooses, we can bring a resolution forming a special committee to address the urban deer population at the next council meeting, July 2. RECOMMENDATION: Provide direction on whether council would like to proceed in forming a special committee for a deer task force to address possibilities.

June 18, 2013 of 122

meeting of the city council - salida, colorado · pdf filerent review man) own as the w k....

Documents