TOWN OF NEDERLAND PLANNING COMMISSION ...2015/10/28 · TOWN OF NEDERLAND PLANNING COMMISSION...

TOWN OF NEDERLAND

PLANNING COMMISSION

REGULAR BUSINESS MEETING

NEDERLAND COMMUNITY CENTER

750 Hwy 72 Nederland, CO 80466

October 28, 2015 - 7:00 P.M.

AGENDA _________________________________________________________________________________

A. CALL TO ORDER

B. ROLL CALL

C. APPROVAL OF MINUTES FROM September 23, 2015

D. PUBLIC COMMENT

E. INFORMATION ITEMS

1. Community Forum on the Definition of Affordable Housing in Nederland

F. ACTION ITEMS

1. Consideration of a Special Review Use (SRU) Home Occupation for

Marijuana Cultivation by Ashley Wright at 78 Barker Road.

G. DISCUSSION ITEMS

H. OTHER BUSINESS

I. ADJOURNMENT

*** DRAFT MINUTES – Not Yet Approved by the Planning Commission ***

TOWN OF NEDERLAND

PLANNING COMMISSION

REGULAR BUSINESS MEETING

NEDERLAND COMMUNITY CENTER


September 23, 2015 - 7:00 P.M.

MINUTES _________________________________________________________________________________

A. CALL TO ORDER

Vice Chairman Williams called the meeting to order at 7:06 pm.

B. ROLL CALL

Present: Vice Chairman Steven Williams and Commissioners Stephanie Herring,

Jesse Seavers, Greg Guevara and Wendy Williams.

Absent: Chairman Roger Cornell, Trustee Topher Donahue, and Commissioner

Timmy Duggan.

Also in attendance: Town Administrator Alisha Reis, Deputy Clerk Cynthia Bakke,

and Administrative Intern Alexander Armani-Munn.

C. APPROVAL OF MINUTES FROM July 22, 2015

Motion to approve the minutes made by Vice Chairman Williams, seconded by

Commissioner Herring, with 3 in favor, and abstention from Vice Chairman

Williams and Commissioner Guevara who were absent from this meeting.

D. PUBLIC COMMENT

There was no public in attendance.

E. INFORMATION ITEMS

Reis said the Peak to Peak Housing Subcommittee will hold a housing discussion at

6:30 pm on September 29 at the Nederland Presbyterian Church. This will include

elements of design and density to understand what is possible to achieve in Nederland,

she said. She said that the public panel discussion will include herself, Trustee Charles

Wood and representation by Boulder County Housing and Human Services.

Reis provided updates on the following projects which came before Planning

Commission review, except for 91 Big Springs, as marijuana cultivation is a use-by-

right in the General Commercial (GC) zoning district:

The multi-use Special Review Use (SRU) on 1st Street by Greg and Kate Miller


was approved by the Board of Trustees, with the applicants intending to begin

the process for construction of the new building.

Steven Karowe will begin the pre-manufactured building phase at 80 Big

Springs for a multi-use SRU, after completion of excavation and establishment of

utilities upon the site.

The NedPeds multimodal/drainage project is to commence in next 45 days. This

project will be put out to bid as of September 25.

The commercial marijuana cultivation facility at 91 Big Springs has been

completed having passed both Police and Fire Department inspections, with

impending final building inspection as well as Planning and Zoning inspection.

Reis indicated that permanent 2013 flood repairs will be ongoing at the Nederland

Community Center and Jefferson Street, with Navajo Trail to follow, and the final

phase for the Big Springs area, including Big Springs Drive, expected to take

approximately 60 days. She indicated need for traffic control upon Big Springs Drive,

some road closures, although one lane will likely be accessible at all times, as repairs

will mainly occur upon the dirt portions to include Doe Trail, Alpine, Peakview and Big

Springs Drives, along with cure-in-place repairs throughout town. She said updates

will be provided as the project continues, and responded to an inquiry regarding how

repairs align with the 30-year Community Center redevelopment plan.

F. ACTION ITEMS

There were no action items.

G. DISCUSSION ITEMS

1. EPA Final Next Steps Presentation by Alexander Armani-Munn

Administrative Intern Alexander Armani-Munn showed a slide presentation

summarizing the EPA Final Next Steps memorandum, to be presented to the Board of

Trustees on October 6. He highlighted items within the Planning Commission scope,

including update of the zoning code to align with the Comprehensive Plan, Vision 2020

and #NedZero, with Commission meetings potentially serving as a great venue for local

developers and property owners to broaden the discussion.

Armani-Munn noted demand for small scale residential and retail space development,

and allowance for home-based businesses. He said vacant lots in the downtown core

provide opportunities to partner with the Downtown Development Authority (DDA) for

redevelopment. To this end, he said next steps include zoning code revision, town staff

administration of #NedZero to track progress, and preparation of conceptual plans for

catalyst sites/facilities with a goal to build more attainable workforce housing. Armani-

Munn indicated that zoning code revisions can improve code enforcement, home

occupation allowances, and increase housing stock with accessory dwelling units, tiny

homes, and multi-family housing units.

In order to facilitate workforce housing, “affordable housing” must be defined, town

processes improved, with establishment of incentive policies, and review of the

annexation process, he explained. Of the latter, Reis noted that the Intergovernmental

Agreement (IGA) will expire in 7 years, and the decision to continue or decline


participation (as seen in many of the county’s eastern communities) will come before

the Commission.

Commission discussion included determination of median income for local jobs to

augment definition of affordable housing, the desire to maintain town character and

diversity, as well as the need for work sessions and public forums to further community

dialogue. Reis noted a forthcoming phone conference with EPA officials with

Commission request of sample policies for smaller communities.

Reis referenced the 2014 housing assessment that identified the greatest demand for

rental housing in the range of $750-$1500 to align with 30% income benchmark

(housing agencies commonly define the housing burdened as those who pay more than

30% of their income in housing costs). Commissioner Herring questioned whether the

30% benchmark spent toward housing is reasonable for the town compared to the

national/state averages. Reis said town staff will need to integrate a host of diverse

data tools geared toward Nederland-specific concerns.

2. 2015 Planning Commission Work Plan Update

a. Short-term rentals – VRBO, Airbnb, Bed and Breakfast (B&B’s)

Reis introduced the item, stating that the current zoning code doesn’t anticipate short-

term rentals. She said town staff is aware of over 3 dozen short-term rentals in the

area. She referenced the Colorado Association of Ski Towns (CAST) study, which

analyzed impacts in other mountain communities, as a tool for further discussion on

short-term rentals, as well as a link to be sent providing access to the study’s base

materials. She noted Boulder County has established short-term rental regulations for

under and over 46 nights per year. She said there hasn’t been community or Board

input that such rentals are undesirable, and such rentals can allow increased capacity

without additional hotel development, and/or additional income as home occupation

businesses.

Reis reported a reduction of odor complaints from marijuana cultivation operations,

partly due to a market change on sales of homes that were formerly rental units. She

said that Special Review Use applications for residential cultivation are forthcoming.

Reis said that despite the Municipal Code defining B&B’s, it is not included within the

use group allowances for any zoning district. She indicated that impact fees or lodging

taxes can provide revenue for infrastructure improvements or to offset housing

assistance, and change of use inspections could assure safety. She said the discussion

will incorporate current code analysis and enforcement methods with involvement of

existing short-term rental providers’ input seen as beneficial to understand impacts.

Reis suggested a targeted work session for January 2016, with interim compilation of

tools and public input.

b. Prioritized housing items for consolidated code update

Reis introduced the item. She referenced the spreadsheet within the packet pertaining

to infill analysis and highest redevelopment potential. She said there are 4 housing

policy elements, several code update items, as well as creative housing concepts. Of the


latter, she noted that accessory dwelling units (ADU’s) have been discussed with some

challenging limitations, as most lots in the Big Springs subdivision have ample lot size,

but may require upgraded septic systems to accommodate additional usage.

Reis referenced the existing ability to increase density within the Neighborhood

Commercial (NC) zoning district via Planned Unit Development (PUD) to one unit per

2,000 square feet could be recommended for extension to the High Density Residential

(HDR) district. Commissioner Williams suggested inviting the Board of Zoning

Adjustment (BZA) into further housing discussions. Reis noted that focused effort

regarding housing policy could allow beneficial changes within the next year, as the

Commission’s primary focus.

Reis said that the Dark Sky Initiative is established within development policies, and

should be an easy item to attain. It was noted that the Caribou Village shopping center

lights are downcast, but not necessarily in keeping with the Dark Sky Initiative. She

said the town can retroactively encourage less impactful lighting, or the Commission

can recommend a compliance period, with county assistance upon rebates and

incentives for lowered energy usage.

Reis said that the Sustainability Advisory Board (SAB) is vital to develop measurable

criteria for sustainability in future development. Commissioner Seavers, who also

serves on the SAB, referenced the SAB scorecard for use in evaluating new

development, although Reis said subjectivity must be reduced as much as possible for

land use reviews, to avoid legal appeals.

Commissioner Herring suggested sustainability features be frontloaded for new

development and further assisted with adoption of the 2012 Energy Conservation Code

(IECC). Reis said the building code update, (along with the Dark Sky Initiative draft)

will come before the Commission for recommendation in February, with potential

adoption by the Board of Trustees in March, to be in place for the 2016 building season.

Reis said there will be an open house on October 19, held at the Community Center

multi-purpose room, to discuss the ballot question to accept DOLA grant funds for the

new Town Shop.

c. GIS suitability analysis for #NedZero items pertaining to housing and

commercial redevelopment and preservation potential.

Reis said funding was included in the 2016 budget request to provide quantifiable

analysis to expedite staff and board reviews. If approved, funds would be available as

of January 1, with GIS engineer Lex Ivey able to undertake the process quickly,

providing a useful tool to further the housing discussion, she said.

H. OTHER BUSINESS

Reis said the prioritized work plan will be updated to stay on track.

Commissioner Herring indicated she will be absent for the October meeting.


I. ADJOURNMENT

Motion to adjourn was made by Commissioner Herring, seconded by

Commissioner Williams, with all in favor (5). Meeting adjourned at 8:58 pm.

Approved by the Planning Commission,

___________________________________________

Roger Cornell, Chairman, Planning Commission

ATTEST: ___________________________________________

Cynthia Bakke, Deputy Clerk

AGENDA INFORMATION MEMORANDUM NEDERLAND PLANNING COMMISSION Meeting Date: October 28, 2015 Prepared By: Alisha Reis Dept: Planning & Zoning Consent ☐ Information ☒ Action ☐ Discussion ☐

______________________________________________________________________ AGENDA ITEM:

Community Forum on the Definition of Affordable Housing in Nederland SUMMARY:

The Commission expressed a desire at its September meeting to hold a community discussion to develop a Nederland definition for affordable housing, in order to guide our efforts in policy and incentives to create additional housing product in the community. This step in the Commission’s concentration on housing policy in 2015 and 2016 emerged from the July visit of the EPA team, cited in their final report presented to the Commission last month. Attached is a proposed agenda for the community forum, tentatively scheduled for Thursday, Dec. 3 at 6 p.m. This date allows coordination with the Housing Sub-committee of the Peak to Peak Housing and Human Services Task Force, which presented a panel on affordable housing design and density in September. The Commission also requested information about financial formulas and demographics related to the local population to assist in developing the definition of affordability for Nederland. That information is also attached and may be discussed further at the Commission’s meeting of Oct. 29. ATTACHMENTS:

1) Draft Agenda for Housing Forum 2) Sample Housing Goals (Virginia community) 3) Housing Needs Assessment Presentation (Oct. 2014) relevant slides 4) STAR Community Presentation (Oct. 2015) relevant slides 5) Boulder County Housing Stability Fact Sheet (2015) 6) View the Draft Boulder County Housing Action Plan (2014) at:

http://www.bouldercounty.org/doc/hhs/2014draftactionplan.pdf

#NEDZERO ALIGNMENT:

5X-01: Work with Planning Commission, Town Staff and Board of Trustees to study revisions to the municipal code, specifically the mixed use zoning requirements that may present a barrier to redevelopment or infill in the Downtown Core.

2A-02: Meet regularly with County Housing and Human Services group to identify needs and resources for affordable housing in Nederland (Social Service)

7B-02: Update Town Municipal Code to encourage development and redevelopment of mixed-use and multifamily housing per Comp Plan

7B-03: Explore creative housing concepts to meet the community's affordable housing needs, including small-scale housing (e.g. cabin zoning concepts), accessory dwelling units, multi-generational development, etc. Review the Town zoning code to prepare for changes to allow for such concepts.

7B-04: Update Zoning and development regulations to align with Comp Plan

TOWN OF NEDERLAND PLANNING COMMISSION AND

HOUSING SUB-COMMITTEE OF THE PEAK TO PEAK HOUSING & HUMAN SERVICES TASK FORCE

NEDERLAND COMMUNITY CENTER MULTI-PURPOSE ROOM


COMMUNITY FORUM ON THE DEFINITION OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING

December 3, 2015, 6:00 to 8:00 P.M.

A. Defining what “affordable housing” means in Nederland

B. Average income and rents

C. Goals of the community regarding housing

D. Q&A

Rental ObjectiveProduce and preserve a sufficient supply of affordable rental housing to meet current and future needs.

Preserves the economic diversity of households

By 2040, 17.7% of the County’s housing stock will need to be affordable to households with incomes at or below 60% AMI.

22,800 units or 15,800 net new CAFS

Goal 1: Supply

1616

Ownership ObjectiveProduce and preserve a sufficient supply of affordable ownership housing to meet current and future needs.

28.4% of ownership housing stock added should be affordable for households below 120% AMI

2,700 units

Preserves the current economic diversity of households

Goal 1: Supply

17

Objectives

1. Fair Housing

2. Access for lower income households

3. Prevent and End Homelessness

4. Aging in Community

5. Independent Living (Disabilities)

Goal 2: Access

1818

All segments of the community have access to housing.

Objectives

1. Safe and Code Compliant

2. Proximity to Transit

3. Energy and Water Efficiency

4. Long-term Affordability/Feasibility

5. Integration with County Plans

Goal 3: Sustainability

19

Affordable housing efforts create a sustainable community.

Understanding Area Median Income

5

Income Group What type of household is this? How much can they afford to spend on housing? (30% of income)

0-30% AMIUp to $32K Up to $23K

People who are unable to work due to disability or age.Seniors on fixed income.Low-wage workers, including many retail, restaurant and social service workers.

$0 - $820

$0 - $575

30-60% AMI$32K to $66K

$23 to $46K

One person working as an administrative assistant, electrician, or bus driver.Two workers in the retail, restaurant, or social service fields.

$820 - $1,640

$575 - $1,150

60-80% AMI$66K to $87K $46K to $61K

One or two workers in entry-level professional service, non-profit, government or health professional jobs.

$1,640 - $2,185

$1,150 - $1,530

80-100% AMI$87K to $109K

$61K to $77K

One or two workers in entry- or mid-level professional service, non-profit, government, or health professional jobs.

$2,185 - $2,725

$1,530 - $1,915

Numbers are rounded

Demographic Highlights

Education

Tenure Size

PovertyEducational Attainment (2013)

0.0%

5.0%

10.0%

15.0%

20.0%

25.0%

30.0%

35.0%

No HighSchoolDiploma

High SchoolGraduate

SomeCollege, No

Degree

AssociateDegree

BachelorDegree

GraduateDegree

Education Level

Shar

e

PSA

SSA

Boulder County

Colorado

Population by Poverty Status (2006-2010)

7.1% 9.0% 12.8% 12.2%

91.0% 87.2% 87.8%92.9%

0.0%

10.0%

20.0%

30.0%

40.0%

50.0%

60.0%

70.0%

80.0%

90.0%

100.0%

PSA SSA Boulder County Colorado

Location

Shar

e Income at/above poverty

Income below poverty

Households by Tenure (2013)

57.1%74.2%

59.6% 62.4%

42.9%25.8%

40.4% 37.6%

0.0%

10.0%

20.0%

30.0%

40.0%

50.0%

60.0%

70.0%

80.0%

90.0%

100.0%


Location

Shar

e Renter-Occupied

Owner-Occupied

Persons per Renter Household (2013)

0.0%

5.0%

10.0%

15.0%

20.0%

25.0%

30.0%

35.0%

40.0%

45.0%

50.0%

55.0%

1-Person 2-Person 3-Person 4-Person 5-Person

Household Size

Shar

e

PSA

SSA

Boulder County

Colorado

Various Demographic Comparisons

Economic Highlights

• Retail Trade (19.8%) and Accommodation & Food Service (17.2%) represents largest shares of the PSA labor force.

• From 2008 to 2010, Boulder County employment base declined by 7,984 (4.7%)

• County employment base has grown each of past 4 years

• 2013 employment base surpassed pre-recession levels

Unemployment Rates Total Employment

Demographic HighlightsHousehold Income Trends

PSA has highestshare of high-income ($100K+) HHs, but

lowest share of moderate-income ($40k to $60k+) HHs in 2013

PSA has (2013) & will have (2018) the highest

median HH income compared with other

study areas

Households by Income (2013)

0.0%

5.0%

10.0%

15.0%

20.0%

25.0%

30.0%

35.0%

<$20K $20K - $40K $40K - $60K $60K - $100K $100K+

Household Income

Shar

e

PSA

SSA

Boulder County

Colorado

Median Household Income (2000-2018)

$0

$10,000

$20,000

$30,000

$40,000

$50,000

$60,000

$70,000


Location

Med

ian

Inco

me

2000

2010

2013

2018

Housing Supply – Existing ChallengesOvercrowded and Cost-Burdened Housing

Share (0.8%) PSA owner households live in overcrowded* housing

similar to region & county

*More than one person per room

One-third of all PSA renter-households are

cost burdened*

*Pay over 30% of income towards housing costs

(29.0% of owner-households)

Renter-Occupied Housing by Percent of Income Paid Towards Rent (2006-2010)

20.4% 19.5% 21.8%

32.7%

16.6%20.1% 24.0%

15.0%

48.0%

55.9%

34.5%

55.5%

6.2%4.5%

7.5%

17.7%

0.0%

10.0%

20.0%

30.0%

40.0%

50.0%

60.0%


Location

Perc

ent o

f Hou

seho

lds

<20% 20%-30% 30%+ Unknown

Percent of Overcrowded Owner Households (2006-2010)

0.8%

1.1%

0.8%0.7%

0.0%

0.2%

0.4%

0.6%

0.8%

1.0%

1.2%


Location

Perc

ent

Housing Supply – Rental (Apartments)

Surveyed Rental Housing Inventory By Bedroom Type

Bedrooms Units VacantOccup.

RateRent

RangeAverage

Rent

Studio 12 0 100.0% $510-$610 $538

One-Bedroom 29 1 96.6% $400-$1,395 $783

Two-Bedroom 46 1 97.8% $400-$1,395 $944

Three-Bedroom 11 0 100.0% $610-$1,900 $1,255

Four-Bedroom 1 1 0.0% $2,500 $2,500

Totals 99 3 97.0% - -

Nederland Average Rent by Bedroom Type

$538$783

$944

$1,255

$2,500

$0

$500

$1,000

$1,500

$2,000

$2,500

Studio One-Br. Two-Br. Three-Br. Four-Br.

Bedroom Type

Ave

rage

Ren

t

Nederland Rental Units by Bedroom Type

112

29

11

46

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

Studio One-Br. Two-Br. Three-Br. Four-Br.

Bedroom Type

Num

ber

of U

nits

FEW VACANT OPTIONS: PSA has 3 vacancies

MISMATCH:Majority of Supply not

Affordable to Most Renters


Rental Housing Inventory By Year Built

Year Built Units VacantOccup.

RateRent

Range

Pre-1970 32 2 93.7% $510-$1,750

1970-1979 30 0 100.0% $400-$1,100

1980-1989 29 0 100.0% $460-$1,900

1990-1999 6 1 83.4% $1,100-$2,500

2000-2009 2 0 100.0% N/A

2010-2014 0 0 - -

Totals 99 3 97.0%Nederland Rental Units by Year Built

026

293032

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

Pre-1970 1970-1979 1980-1989 1990-1999 2000-2009 2010-2014

Year Built

Num

ber

of U

nits

MOSTLY OLDER PRODUCT: Nearly 2/3 of

identified rentals were built prior to 1980;

highest share built prior to 1970


Nederland, Colorado Surveyed Rental Housing Inventory By Quality Level

QualityLevel Units Vacant

OccupancyRate

RentRange

A 0 0 - -

B 18 0 100.0% $460-$1,900

C 58 3 94.8% $515-$2,500

D 23 0 100.0% $400-$850

F 0 0 - -

Totals 99 3 97.0%Nederland Rental Units by Quality Level

0 0

1823

58

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

A B C D F

Quality Level

Num

ber

of U

nits

LIMITED AMOUNT OF GOOD QUALITY

PRODUCT: Half of the product “Fair” and one-

fourth “Poor”

Housing Gap Estimates - Rental

• Methodology considered household growth, units for balanced market, substandard housing, and demolitions; conducted by income level

• Rental housing demand for at least 60 new PSA units by 2018• Note: Demand estimates represent potential units by 2018 (would

assume all product types, prices and locations developed)

2013 - 2018 Rental Demand Potential by Income Level & RentNederland, Colorado Primary Study Area

Household Income RangeLess Than

$30,000$30,000-$60,000 $60,000+

Rent AffordabilityLess Than

$750 $750-$1,500 $1,500+

New Income-Qualified Renter Household -14 20 27

Units Needed for Balanced Market 10 8 8

Total Replacement Housing Needed by 2018 176 62 3

Less Residential Units in the Development Pipeline 0 0 0

Overall Region (SSA) Units of Potential Support by 2018 172 90 38

Total Units of Potential Support in Nederland (PSA) 26-34 14-18 6-8

Housing Supply – For-sale (Historical)

For-Sale/Sold Housing Supply

TypePSA

NederlandSSA

RegionAvailable 13 85

Sold 108 337

Total 121 422

FOR-SALE HOUSING BY YEAR SOLD

YearSold

PSA (Nederland) SSA (Region)

UnitsSold Change

MedianPrice Change

UnitsSold Change

MedianPrice Change

2010 23 - $345,000 - 58 - $345,000 -

2011 20 -13.0% $253,550 -26.5% 66 13.8% $277,500 -19.6%

2012 29 45.0% $305,000 20.3% 83 25.8% $296,500 6.8%

2013 29 0.0% $310,500 1.8% 99 19.3% $315,000 6.2%

2014* 7 -75.9% $331,000 6.6% 31 -68.7% $321,500 2.1%

PSA & SSA median

home prices have

increased in each of the

past three years.

*Through June 2014


• Nearly 45% of homes sold since 2010 in PSA were built after 1990 (39.8% in SSA)

• One-fifth of homes sold since 2010 in PSA were built before 1960 (14.5% in SSA)

Sales History by Year Built

0.0%

5.0%

10.0%

15.0%

20.0%

25.0%

30.0%

1939 orearlier

1940 -1950

1951 -1960

1961 -1970

1971 -1980

1981 -1990

1991 -2000

2001 -2010

2011 topresent

Year Built

Shar

e of

Sal

es

PSA

SSA


• The largest shares of housing sold by price point are at $350,000 and up

• Very few homes sold that are priced under $250,000

Home Sales by Price

0.0%

5.0%

10.0%

15.0%

20.0%

25.0%

<$99,999

$100K

-$124

,999

$125K

-$149

,999

$150K

-$174

,999

$175K

-$199

,999

$200K

-$224

,999

$225K

-$249

,999

$250K

-$274

,999

$275K

-$299

,999

$300K

-$324

,999

$325K

-$349

,999

$350K

-$374

,999

$375K

-$399

,999

$400,0

00+

Price Range

Shar

e of

Sal

es

PSA SSA

Housing Supply – For-sale (Available)

PSA – TOWN OF NEDERLAND

Summary of Active For-Sale Housing Supply by Bedrooms (As of June 16, 2014)

HomesListed

Avg. Baths

Avg.Square

Feet

Avg.Year Built

PriceRange

MedianList

Price

MedianPrice

Sq. Ft.

Avg. Days on Market

3 1.0 888 1946 $245,900 - $350,000 $349,900 $394.03 109

8 2.5 2,418 1983 $149,900 - $429,000 $379,950 $157.13 183

1 2.0 2,334 1993 $412,000 $412,000 $176.52 42

1 2.0 2,400 1945 $335,000 $335,000 $139.58 11

13 2.0 2,057 1972 $149,900 - $429,000 $357,000 $173.55 142Source: Multiple Listing Services, Boulder County Assessor’s Office, and Bowen National Research

LIMITED SUPPLY:Few For-sale Housing Options Available in

PSA

SSA - REGION

Summary of Active For-Sale Housing Supply by Bedrooms (As of June 16, 2014)

BedroomsHomesListed

Avg. Baths

Avg.Square

Feet

Avg.Year Built

PriceRange

MedianList

Price

MedianPrice

Sq. Ft.

Average Days on Market

One-Br. 5 1.0 777 1940 $108,000-$429,000 $135,000 $173.75 39

Two-Br. 19 1.0 1,393 1957 $100,000-$393,750 $255,900 $183.70 68

Three-Br. 47 3.0 2,477 1985 $149,900-$699,000 $389,000 $157.04 76

Four-Br. 11 3.0 2,927 1988 $275,000-$550,000 $424,500 $145.03 45

Five-Br. 3 3.0 3,367 1983 $299,900-$690,000 $335,000 $99.50 295

Total 85 2.0 2,224 1976 $100,000-$699,000 $350,000 $157.37 76Source: Multiple Listing Services, Boulder County Assessor’s Office, and Bowen National Research


MISMATCH: Majorityof Supply not

Affordable to Most PSA Residents


Active For-Sale Housing by Price

0.0%

5.0%

10.0%

15.0%

20.0%

25.0%

<$99,999

$100K

-$124

,999

$125K

-$149

,999

$150K

-$174

,999

$175K

-$199

,999

$200K

-$224

,999

$225K

-$249

,999

$250K

-$274

,999

$275K

-$299

,999

$300K

-$324

,999

$325K

-$349

,999

$350K

-$374

,999

$375K

-$399

,999

$400,0

00+

Price Range

Shar

e of

Hom

es

PSA SSA

Virtually no product available for purchase priced under $325,000 in PSA (Nederland) & few affordable options in the entire SSA (Region)

Housing Gap Estimates – For-Sale

• Methodology considered HH growth, units for balanced market, substandard housing, and demolitions; conducted by income level

• Overall housing demand for up to 49 new units by 2018

• Note: Demand estimates represent potential units by 2018 (would assume all product types, prices and locations developed)

2013-2018 For-Sale Housing Demand by Income Level & Price PointNederland, Colorado Primary Study Area

Household Income Range < $30,000$30,000-$59,999

$60,000-$99,999

$100,000+

Housing Price Affordability<

$100,000$100,000-$200,000

$200,000-$300,000

$300,000+

New Owner-Occupied Household Growth 42 36 37 49

Housing Units Needed for Balanced Market 20 30 24 -3

Total Replacement Housing Needed by 2018 10 6 0 0

Less Product in Development Pipeline 0 0 0 0

Overall Market (SSA) Units of Potential Support 72 72 61 46

Total Units of Potential Support in Nederland 11-14 11-14 9-12 7-9

• Identified 49 available properties that represent potential sites for residential development in the Nederland– 4,900,000 square feet (113 acres) of land and 28,700

square feet of existing structures– Likely buildable space has an estimated capacity to

develop approximately 138 residential units vs. need of 109 residential units

• Limited base of available land and buildings in PSA requires town to be selective in housing products, physical locations and project sizes

Housing Development Opportunities/Capacity

Nederland‘s Residential Development Capacity

Housing Development Opportunities/Locations

Notable FindingsHousing & Transportation:

1. Average cars/household= 2.52. Average annual transportation costs/household= $15,3453. Average Monthly Housing Cost: $1,4124. Median Selected Monthly Owner Costs: $1,8455. Median Gross Monthly Rent: $9846. Average % of income spent on housing and transportation: 487. Average household vehicle miles traveled annually: 27,801

a) 54 percent of Nederland workers commute alone by car8. Average annual household GHG emissions generated through

vehicular transportation: 11.21 tons9. On a scale of 1-10, Nederland scores:

a) 1.6 in “Job Access”b) 3.1 in “Transit Access”c) 2.1 “Compact Neighborhoods”

10. 0 “Location Efficient Neighborhoods”.Places that are compact, close to jobs and services, with a variety of transportation choices, allow people to spend less time, energy, and money on transportation.

Source: http://htaindex.cnt.org/

AlishaR

Text Box

STAR Presentation (Oct. 2015)

Employment & Income

1. According to 2013 Census data, Nederland has a median household income of $62,667 and a mean household income of $88,335

2. Nederland’s per capita income is $39,3453. Female workers (FT/YR) in Nederland have median earnings of $56,667 while their male counterparts have median

earnings of $52,0454. 23.6 percent of Nederland households make more than $100,000/year5. Nederland has 662 households, 342 “family households” (MI>90K) and 320 “non-family households” (MI<40K)6. 19.5 percent of Nederland residents work from home7. Out of 1,151 Nederland residents 16 years of age and older, 78.8 percent are active in the labor force. Only 4.8

percent of those actively engaged in the labor force are unemployed8. In 2013, 5.7 percent of Nederland residents received supplemental Social Security income, and 13.4 percent

earned some form of public assistance income (SNAP) 9. In 2013, 202 Nederland residents (13.6 percent) lived below the poverty level.10. The three most common industries among Nederland workers are:

i. Educational services, healthcare, and social assistance (27 percent)ii. Arts, entertainment, recreation and accommodation and food service (16.5 percent)iii. Professional, scientific, and management, and administrative and waste management services (12.4 percent)

Source: http://factfinder.census.gov/faces/tableservices/jsf/pages/productview.xhtml?pid=ACS_13_5YR_DP03&prodType=table

Conclusions…

1. Nederland residents enjoy a high quality of life, strong economic health, and easy access to parks, public lands, and outdoor recreation

2. With its proximity to Boulder, Nederland benefits from access to high quality healthcare services as well as access to the arts & cultural venues/events

3. Nederland’s high quality of life comes at the cost of having a greater overall impact on the environment

4. While most of Nederland’s residents benefit from good economic health, some residents continue to struggle financially

5. Nederland will have to continue to prioritize policies and programs that protect the environment and reduce human impacts.

6. Nederland will also need to prioritize policies and programs that support the roughly 1 in 10 residents that continue to live in poverty

AlishaR

Highlight

AGENDA INFORMATION MEMORANDUM

NEDERLAND PLANNING COMMISSION

Meeting Date: October 28, 2015

Prepared By: Alisha Reis

Dept: Planning & Zoning

Information _______ Action ____X____ Discussion _____

______________________________________________________________________

AGENDA ITEM:

Consideration of a Special Review Use application for a Home Occupation

business for retail marijuana cultivation by Ashley Wright (of Wright’s Kind

Collection, Ltd.) at 78 Barker (Lot 98 Big Springs 2 Subdivision) (the

“Property”). The Property is located in the Mountain Residential district (MR).

SUMMARY:

Wright outlined her business scope in the attached application and narrative for

residential cultivation space. The proposed cultivation footprint as indicated in

occupancy classification will encompass 652-square-feet of a 2601-square-foot

building (approximately 25% occupation) upon a 39,850 square foot lot.

The zoning for the Property is the Mountain Residential District (MR), thus, the

proposed Marijuana Cultivation Facility is permitted in residential districts as a

Home Occupation, under the Special Review Use permit process.

The applicant argues benefits to town of their proposal, to include:

encouragement of cottage industry and collaborative partnerships among local

businesses, increased availability of local product to Nederland’s recreational

marijuana businesses, thereby reducing carbon footprint.

The applicant has submitted a complete site plan and has met all application

requirements, including proper notice of the October 28 public hearing before the

Planning Commission to property owners within 300 feet of the Property, plus

an extended boundary of neighbors located along Big Springs Drive. Proper

public noticing has also been made in the newspaper and posted at the Property.

Wright will discuss the plans more in-depth on October 28.

ANALYSIS:

Nederland Municipal Code (NMC) Criteria and Conditions:

(1) Is eligible for a special review under Section 16-32

Pursuant to footnote 9 to the use group table set forth under NMC Section

16-32, “A marijuana cultivation facility is permitted in the residential

zoning areas as a home occupation, under the special review use permit

process.” The Property is zoned MR and the proposed use is therefore

permitted under the special review use permit process.

(2) Is generally compatible with adjacent land uses;

The Property is bordered to the north by Barker Reservoir, with

residences on all other sides. The proposed cultivation activities are not

consistent with the residential uses in the area. It is the applicant’s

burden to demonstrate how such activities may nonetheless be conducted

in a manner that is compatible with those adjacent residential land uses.

(3) Meets all requirements of Section 16-52, is in compliance with this

Chapter and minimizes potential adverse impact of the special review use

on adjacent properties and traffic flow;

All requirements of Section 16-52, concerning materials to be submitted

as part of an SRU application, have been met. Parking in the area has

been accounted for on site and addressed within the attached narrative, as

well as aspects of site security, traffic, waste disposal, ventilation noise

and light leakage reduction, and odor filtration.

Parking Requirements

The Municipal Code directs that parking requirements set via the SRU

process use the parking requirements table (NMC Sec. 16-202) as a guide.

Section 16-202 requires 2 off-street parking spaces per single-family

dwelling unit and an unspecified number of off-street parking spaces for

manufacturing, storage and wholesale uses, with the parking required for

such uses to be determined through the SRU or PUD process, as

applicable. It is therefore the applicant’s burden to demonstrate that the

proposed number of off-street parking spaces set forth in her application

are sufficient to meet the projected parking demands that that the

proposed new use will create.

The attached narrative notes a total of 4-5 parking spaces close to the

home, with no need for additional parking spaces or on-street parking due

to the limited traffic coming into the home. The applicant states that she

will be the business’s sole proprietor, with no visitation of customers to

the house. Pursuant to NMC 16-76(7): “home occupations shall not

generate traffic which significantly affects the residential character of an

area and shall not generate more trips per day (TPD) than the standard

for a single-family dwelling unit (SFDU) – ten (10) trips per day is the

average TPD for a SFDU.” The applicant must demonstrate that the

proposed new use will not generate more than 10 TPD.

Is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan; and

The proposed special use does conform to some of the policies of the

Comprehensive Plan, such as:

Economy

Endeavor to achieve a sustainable, diversified economy by exploring

alternative economic opportunities for the community.

Encourage the establishment of independent businesses of local

character and limited space requirements as opposed to businesses of

national orientation and/or large space requirements.

Encourage business owners to form collaborative partnerships that

may reduce the cost of doing business in Nederland and as well its

impact on the environment.

Generally, encourage cottage industry in town and ensure the

Municipal Code supports this encouragement.

Land Use Encourage a variety of land uses that meet the needs of a diverse

array of residents, including neighborhoods, goods and services, and

business and employment.

(4) The Town has the capacity to serve the proposed use with water, sewer,

and fire and police protection.

The Town does have the capacity to serve the proposed use with water

and police services, however the property is served by a septic system

permitted by Boulder County.

HISTORY AND PREVIOUS BOARD ACTION:

There is no pertinent history or previous board action pertaining to the single

family residence at this location.

QUESTIONS BEFORE THE COMMISSION:

Is the proposed special use generally compatible with surrounding land uses?

Is the proposal consistent with the Comprehensive Plan?

Are there any concerns or possible conditions the Commission would like to

address?

Does the Commission wish to recommend approval of the SRU to the Board

of Trustees?

RECOMMENDATIONS:

Town staff has reviewed the application, determined it meets requirements of

the Municipal Code and the guidelines of the Comprehensive Plan. Based on the

review of the presented plan, and existing Municipal Code allowances, the staff

recommends approval of the SRU application. Please note this is the first

application of its kind to be reviewed for residential cultivation allowance.

ALTERNATIVES:

1. Approval of the Application as presented

2. Approval of the Application with conditions

3. Denial of the Application

ATTACHMENTS:

1. SRU application package with plans and narrative

2. Draft SRU Agreement

f9

SPECIAL REVIEW USE AGREEMENT

WRIGHT’S KIND COLLECTION, LTD.

78 Barker Road (Lot 98 Big Springs Subdivision 2)

THIS AGREEMENT is entered into this ______ day of December 2015, by and between the Town of Nederland, a Colorado municipal corporation (“the Town”) and Wright’s Kind Collection, Ltd. a Colorado limited liability company (“the ApplicantApplicant”).

WHEREAS, the Applicant rents property described as Lot 98 of The Big Springs Subdivision 2 subdivision, also known as 78 Barker Road and further described in Exhibit A, Town of Nederland, County of Boulder, State of Colorado, 80466 (“the Property”); and

WHEREAS, the Applicant has applied for permission to operate a marijuana cultivation as a residential home occupation on the Property as a Special Review Use; and

WHEREAS, the Property is located within the Mountain Residential zoning district; and

WHEREAS, Home Occupations that include the activity proposed by the Applicant are eligible as a special review use in all residential zoning districts, provided the criteria for a special review use are satisfied; and

WHEREAS, the Applicant acknowledges that the Town’s review and approval of plans for the proposed special review use has been done in furtherance of the general public’s health, safety and welfare and that no immunity is waived and no specific relation with, or duty of care to the Applicant or third parties is created or assumed by such review or approval; and

WHEREAS, the Nederland Planning Commission reviewed the proposed special use on October 28, 2015 and recommended [approval/approval subject to certain conditions/denial], and

WHEREAS, following proper notice, the Nederland Board of Trustees has considered the Applicant’s application to operate a residential marijuana cultivation home occupation use upon the Property as a special review use and has concluded that such use is proper under the terms and conditions set forth herein.

NOW THEREFORE, it is agreed as follows: 1. The Nederland Board of Trustees grants to the Applicant the right to operate a

f9

residential marijuana cultivation on the Property in conformance with the Applicant’s complete and approved Application for a Special Review Use, including but not limited to the Site Plan included therewith, said Application attached hereto as Exhibit B and incorporated herein by this reference (the “Application”), subject to the conditions set forth in Section 2, below.

2. The Applicant shall be entitled to continue to use the Property to operate a

residential marijuana cultivation as described herein, so long as the Applicant complies fully and completely with the following conditions:

a. Due to the nature of the manufacturing/industrial use in this residential

location, the Applicant shall provide regular operating hours during which the Police Department may have access to and enter the Property without a warrant for the purposes of investigating complaints or concerns about the special use.

b. There will be no customer traffic to and from the Property for purposes of selling or otherwise transferring marijuana. The Applicant will deliver product directly to marijuana dispensaries and/or Infused product manufacturers. The special use shall not generate more trips per day (TPD) than the standard for a single-family dwelling unit: ten (10) trips per day.

c. An off-street parking space must be provided for the sole employee of the special use.

d. Each off-street parking space shall comply with the Town’s requirements regarding size, marking and nature of parking spaces. Boulders will not be used for parking delineation.

e. Operations may begin upon issuance of license by the Local Licensing

Authority. f. The Applicant shall not expand or allow expansion of the special use of

the Property approved hereby or the area of the Property permitted hereunder, without the advance written consent of the Nederland Board of Trustees. The Town Zoning Administrator shall determine whether an expansion of use or area of use constitutes an “alteration” of the use approved by this Agreement, requiring an additional application and approval process in accordance with Code Section 16-57(a).

g. The Applicant must at all times meet all requirements related to noise,

sound and odor prescribed by the Nederland Municipal Code.

f9

h. The Applicant must conduct and maintain the special use authorized hereby in accordance with all applicable laws, rules and regulations governing such activities, including but not limited to the provisions of Chapter 6 of the NMC concerning cultivation activities, Chapter 7 of the NMC concerning nuisance activities, the Colorado Medical Marijuana Code, Article 43.3 of Title 12, C.R.S., and all state regulations promulgated thereunder.

i. The Applicant shall use downcast lighting on the property, designed to

minimize to the greatest extend reasonably practicable leakage of light beyond the property line. The Applicant shall make every reasonable effort to provide a night sky-friendly site, including use of lights only as needed for site and patron security.

j. The Special Review Use/Home Occupation Agreement is made with the

Applicant for this specific location and is not transferrable to another location. This Agreement may be transferred to another party to conduct the same use at the same location only upon the new party’s written agreement to assume all the rights, duties, obligations and covenants of the Applicant as set forth herein.

3. The Applicant shall comply with and shall ensure that the Property complies in all

material respects with all applicable local, state and federal governmental regulations and requirements, including but not limited to building, zoning, design standards, rights-of-way, sidewalk, nuisance, floodplain, floodway, health regulations, marijuana cultivation regulations or any other rules or regulations. When requested by the Town, reasonable proof of such compliance shall be provided by the Applicant. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Town and Applicant recognize and acknowledge that marijuana-related activities conducted on the Property pursuant to this Agreement may constitute a violation of federal law. The Town agrees that it shall not assert that such a violation of federal law constitutes a breach of this Agreement nor “cause” to terminate the special use pursuant to Section 6 hereof so long as such activity is and remains lawful under Colorado law. The Applicant agrees that the Town shall not be liable for any injuries, damages or losses of any kind that affect the validity of this Agreement or the special use authorized hereby that result from a federal agency’s enforcement of or attempt to enforce federal law and Applicant fully releases the Town from all such liabilities. Applicant further agrees to hold harmless, indemnify and defend the Town, its officers, elected officials, employees, attorneys, agents, insurers and self-insurance pool against all liability, claims and demands, on account of injury, loss or damage, including, without limitation, claims arising from bodily injury, personal injury, sickness, disease, death,

f9

property loss or damage or any other loss of any kind whatsoever, which arise out of or are in any manner connected with a federal agency’s enforcement of or attempt to enforce federal law in regards to marijuana-related activity conducted pursuant to this Agreement.

4. Violation. Allegations concerning a violation of one or more of the terms or conditions of this Agreement may give rise to a review of the special review use approved for the Property. Such review shall be conducted pursuant to Code Section 16-61. If, as a result of a hearing held pursuant to said Section, the Board determines that a violation exists, then the Board shall have the following options, in its discretion:

a) Following notice to the Applicant and a reasonable period of time to cure

the violation, terminate the Agreement, in which event the use of the Property under the special use permit shall cease.

b) Following notice to the Applicant and a reasonable period of time to cure

the violation, suspend the Special Review Use Permit until the breach is remedied. No use shall be made of the Property during such suspension.

c) Modify the Agreement on such terms and conditions as the Board deems

appropriate, including but not limited to, restricting the uses that may be made of the Property or the portions of the Property in which such uses may be made or adding additional terms or conditions to the Agreement.

5. Payment of other Town fees, taxes and charges. The Applicant shall stay

current with all taxes, fees, water bills and other charges or obligations owed to the Town. Should the Applicant be delinquent in any such payment for 90 days or more, unless the amount due and payable is disputed by the Applicant in good faith, such delinquency shall constitute a violation of this Agreement, subject to the terms of Section 4 above.

6. Termination. This Agreement and the corresponding Special Use Certificate

shall terminate upon the earliest of the following events:

a. Transfer of all or any portion of the Property or business by Applicant to a new Applicant who fails to agree to be bound by all provisions of this Agreement, as evidenced by a written instrument, as required by Nederland Municipal Code § 16-57(b).

b. Failure of the Applicant to comply with any term of this Agreement as determined through the process set forth in Section 4, above.

c. Operation of any business on the Property other than as specifically

f9

permitted in this Agreement unless reasonably ancillary thereto.

d. Termination of the operation of the permitted use for a period of 12 consecutive months or longer.

e. Voluntarily relinquishment of rights under this Agreement by the Applicant

submitted to the Town in writing. 7. Effect of termination. Upon the termination of this Agreement, the right to use the

Property for the use approved hereby shall immediately terminate and the Property may then be used and developed only pursuant to the Town of Nederland Municipal Code. In the event of termination, the Town shall record notice of such termination in the records of the Boulder County Clerk and Recorder’s Office.

8. Modification and Waiver. No modification of the terms of this Agreement shall be

valid unless in writing and executed with the same formality as this Agreement, and no waiver of the breach of any provision of this Agreement shall be construed as a waiver of any subsequent breach of the same or any other provision hereof. It is expressly agreed that, except as may otherwise be provided by applicable statute or ordinance, no official of the Town has the authority to waive or modify any provision of this Agreement without the approval of the Board of Trustees.

9. Title and Authority. The Applicant warrants to the Town that it is the record

Applicant of the Property. The undersigned further warrants to have full power and authority to enter into this Agreement.

10. Severability/Governing Law. This Agreement is to be governed and construed

according to the laws of the State of Colorado. In the event that any provision of this Agreement is held by a court of competent jurisdiction to be in violation of any local, state or federal law, and thereby rendered unenforceable, the remaining provisions shall remain in full force and effect as if the unenforceable provision had never been included in this Agreement.

11. Recordation. This Agreement shall be recorded with the Boulder County Clerk

and Recorder, with the Applicant to reimburse the Town for such costs of recording.

12. Issuance of Special Review Use Certificate. Upon execution of this Agreement

and compliance with all other conditions precedent as stated in this Agreement, the Town shall issue a Special Review Use Certificate to the Applicant. The Applicant shall take no action in reliance on this Agreement and shall have no

f9

rights under the Special Review Use process until such time as the Special Review Use Certificate is issued.

13. Other permits, licenses and approvals. Approval of this Agreement and issuance of a Special Review Use Certificate in accordance with Section 12 above does not eliminate the need of the Applicant to obtain any other license, permit, certificate or any other form of approval necessary to conduct the proposed special use activities on the Property.

ATTEST: TOWN OF NEDERLAND, COLORADO

a municipal corporation ________________________________By: ___________________________________ LauraJane Baur, Town Clerk Joe Gierlach, Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: ____________________________________ Carmen Beery, Town Attorney

APPLICANT:

f9

By:___________________________________

By:___________________________________

STATE OF ___________ ) ) ss. COUNTY OF ) Acknowledged before me this _____ day of ____________, 2015, by _____________________________________ _____________________________________as _____________________________________of Wright’s Kind Collection, Ltd. Notary My Commission Expires: _______________. [S E A L]

f9

EXHIBIT A

[LEGAL DESCRIPTION]

Lot 98 Big Springs Subdivision 2 located in the S ½ of the Section 13,

Township 1 South, Range 73 W of the 6th

P.M., County of Boulder.

f9

EXHIBIT B

[APPLICATION, AS APPROVED, INCLUDING SITE PLAN]

TOWN OF NEDERLAND PLANNING COMMISSION ...2015/10/28 · TOWN OF NEDERLAND PLANNING COMMISSION...

Documents

Transcript of TOWN OF NEDERLAND PLANNING COMMISSION ...2015/10/28 · TOWN OF NEDERLAND PLANNING COMMISSION...