City of Golden Zoning Code Update
General Zoning & Subdivision Code Update - Phase 3
After approving different types of buildings (such as homes, shops, and mixed-use spaces) in Chapter 18.29, City Council wants to review how land is used, parking rules, and the steps you take to get things approved.
Office Hours: Have questions for Staff? Drop in for office hours, virtually or in-person.
- Pending
Goal of Phase 3:
- Streamlining Processes: We're putting all the steps you need to follow into one easy-to-find chapter.
- Improving Approvals: We're changing some of the steps for getting big projects approved, like Planned Unit Developments (PUDs).
- Making Things Clear: We're tuning the rules about how land can be used into a simple table, so it's easier to understand.
- Listening to You: We're adding or changing rules based on what the community wants and needs, this includes expanding the mailed notice area.
- Align the use table with parking standards.
Phase 3: Process, Procedures, and Notice
The Draft Chapter 18.10 for Process, Procedures, and Notice is heading to City Council for 1st Reading on November 19 and 2nd Reading tentatively scheduled for December 3 with a recommendation of approval from Planning Commission.
Staff has prepared a change matrix to help identify what is changing for process and notice as things move to Chapter 18.10.
The COG Modifications Post Procedures Public Input Draft 2024-09-20.pdf version reflects Staff's updated recommendation based on public feedback and guidance provided by DOLA regarding the 123 Affordable Housing Go! process. The revised chapter has a change log to help track how and why the draft has changed. Staff has also added a process map to depict how a complete application follows the process to receive a final decision within 90 days.
Contact konsager@cityofgolden.net with questions, comments, or concerns regarding the draft regulations or the project or to schedule a meeting.
Phase 3: Land Use Definitions Matrix
The Draft Chapter 18.28 with tables, standards, and accessory standards along with the Land-Use Definitions Matrix and Draft Parking Standards is ready for public review.
The matrix lists the land-use, land-use definition, proposed zone-districts where the use is allowed. The matrix is being reformatted to be organized by land-use category for better comparative review. The matrix is the primary document for public feedback on definitions and the Draft Chapter 18.28 should be the primary document for feedback on land-uses and standards.
Contact konsager@cityofgolden.net with questions, comments, or concerns regarding the draft regulations or the project or to schedule a meeting.
Project Timeline:
- Drafting - April through July 2024: We're working with experts to organize the new rules, and plan to have a first draft ready.
- Draft Feedback – July through August 2024: Residents will have a chance to give your thoughts on the first drafts posted here.
- Targeted Feedback – Beginning July 2024: We'll talk with different groups and organizations to make sure we're making the right changes. We'll still be listening to you too. This will happen from July 2024 until we finish the public hearing process.
- State Legislation - The Colorado legislature is considering a number of bills that may impact various components of Phase 3. Topics include ADUs, parking, housing around transit, and land-use approval processes. Staff is prepared to pivot and incorporate any new state law as they are potentially passed over the summer.
- Public Hearing Process – October 2024: Public hearings will be held where Planning Commission will give their suggestions to the City Council for approval.
Group Homes:
Questions have come up regarding proposed changes regarding Group Homes in Phase 3.
Group Homes are licensed through the State and allow up to 8 persons. You can see Staff’s proposed definition in the Land Use Definition Matrix.
Group Homes are considered a residential use per C.R.S. 31-23-303 and must be allowed anywhere residential is allowed. Group Homes are generally a single-household residence that has been modified on the inside to accommodate the group living of certain individuals.
Group homes still have to meet all applicable zoning lot and development standards, building, and fire codes. Golden can regulate licensed Group Homes as long as those regulations do not result in a “tantamount prohibition of group homes.”
Group homes can be restricted by limiting the distance from another licensed group home. Locations can be further refined to located group homes with the availability of such services and facilities as convenience stores, commercial services, transportation, and public recreation facilities.
Groups homes are currently allowed “by-right” in some places and with a special use permit in others. There currently aren’t any additional standards for a group home. The City has not received an application for a group home in over 10 years. Staff is recommending Group Homes be allowed as a limited use which can be approved by the director administratively if they meet the following standards:
(a) No group home shall be located within 750 feet of another such Group Home as provided by C.R.S. 31-23-303.
(b) The Director may consider additional criteria allowed by C.R.S. 31-23-303 on an individual application basis.
(c) The Director may refer an application for final decision to the Planning Commission for consideration of any additional requirements permitted by C.R.S. 31-23-303. Such referral shall include evidence or findings with respect to such additional requirements and the public health, safety or welfare.
Mailed Notice:
Golden is expanding mailed notices for public hearings.
500 feet to 750 feet
- Notifying more people in Golden for public hearing items that may impact them, like rezonings, site development plans, and Special Use Permits.
- Extending the notice by 250 feet can include over 140% or more addresses
100 feet to 250 feet for variances and adjustments.
- Sometimes a public hearing item's impact is limited to more immediate neighbors. We are including more of those neighbors.
Track project status and comment here on Guiding Golden.
- We are exploring ways to notify people of projects in their neighborhood through Guiding Golden
Email: Planning@CityofGolden.net
Check agendas and watch meetings at Cityofgolden.gov
Phase 2.5 Nonconformities
- Planning Commission | Oct. 18, 2023 Meeting: Reviewed draft regulations
- Planning Commission | Nov 15, 2023 Meeting: Recommendation hearing
- City Council adopted the Ordinance 2228 for the nonconforming section and Ordinance 2229 for revisions to 100% affordable housing projects.
- Email Konsager@cityofgolden.net with any questions or comments.
Phase 1 Residential Zoning Code-Approved May 24, 2022
Find all application materials on our Development Application Page. Want to check out projects in action? See the Planning Projects page for form zone site plans in process and approved.
Phase 2 Zoning Code drafts (March 2023)
The focus of this Phase 2 update was adding the Commercial and Mixed Use Form Zones to Chapter 18.29. However, there are also updates to the Residential Form Zones in 18.29 based on staff and Planning Commission’s use of this new zoning code over the past year.
In addition, there were a number of other updates to the code that were needed in other Chapters of the code that are impacted by the changes made to Chapter 18.29. A significant update to Title 17 (Subdivisions) was made to modernize the language and allow for form zone subdivisions. There were also significant updates to Chapters 18.40 and 18.28 to both incorporate the new form zone regulations and to delineate the legacy use zones that were not included in the form zone approach (AG, CO, RE, M1, M2 and PUD). Additional Chapters were updated to align procedures, add or update definitions, and add applicability statements. The Parking and Loading Requirements (Chapter 18.36) were updated to house nearly all of the parking regulations in one place in order to improve usability.
Commercial Form Type Case Studies
Since zoning codes are best described as reference books, and do not offer gripping narratives for cover to cover reading, Planning staff advises readers to first look at the Form Zone Map to determine which area of town you are interested in researching in order to find the corresponding “form zone” that applies to a given property or block. Once the form zone is noted, just click on Chapter 18.29 and go to the form zone table, found near the beginning of the chapter in 18.29.01.004 (page 4). With this table, you can use the form zone column to find all of the different “form types” available to be used there and where they are located within the code. Think of the form zone table as an index for what is found in the rest of this Chapter regarding development options. The form types are the types of buildings that can be constructed, and each form type has its own specific zoning restrictions for factors such as height, design requirements and even square footage allowances.
In order to see how zoning works, illustrating how a form zone might play out in a real scenario is often the best way to assess how development or redevelopment might come to life in Golden. Staff has chosen three form types in three form zones to test these outcomes:
Main Street B-Main Street Urban Wide Form Type
See how the code could potentially redevelop the northwestern corner of Ford and 13th Streets:
Main Street A-Main Street Wide Form Type
See how the code could potentially redevelop the southwestern corner of Arapahoe and 12th Streets:
Neighborhood Corridor-Mixed Use Building
See how the code could potentially redevelop the southeastern corner of Ford and 22nd Streets:
Phase 2 Planning Commission Hearing: April 5, 2023 6:30 p.m.
Recommendation of Approval to City Council.
- The Planning Commission packet and agenda is posted on the city website.
- Watch the Planning Commission meeting
City Council approved Phase 2 (Commercial Zoning) on June 6, 2023
1st Reading, May 9 | 2nd Reading, June 6
- May 9th City Council Packet link & Watch the May 9, 2023 Meeting Recording
- June 6th City Council Packet link & Watch the June 6, 2023 Meeting Recording
Don't Zone Out, Zone In!
Still can’t find what you need? Contact Karl Onsager at konsager@cityofgolden.net
Draft Comments
CLOSED: This discussion has concluded.
Understanding Phase 3 Proposed Updates
-
This video walks watchers through the proposed updates to the Golden Zoning Code during Phase 3 of the updating process. The changes involve revising the process and procedures in Golden Municipal Code Chapter 18.10 (Public Notice) and Chapter 18.28 (Use Regulations).
Phase 3 Draft Documents
-
Draft 18.10 - Procedures Public Input Draft 2024-07-10.pdf (408 KB) (pdf)
-
18.10 Process and Procedures Change Matrix.pdf (120 KB) (pdf)
-
Land Use Definition Matrix – Reformatted - Public Input Draft 2024-09-11.pdf (215 KB) (pdf)
-
COG Modifications Post Procedures Public Input Draft 2024-09-20.pdf (524 KB) (pdf)
-
Drafting Change Log - 2024-09-20.pdf (49 KB) (pdf)
-
123 Affordable Housing Go! Process (2).pdf (117 KB) (pdf)
-
Draft Parking Standards - COG - Public Input Draft 9-25-2024.pdf (132 KB) (pdf)
-
Draft Chapter 18.28 Public Input Draft v2 2024-10-30.pdf (652 KB) (pdf)
Engagement Level
- Inform: City provides timely information and updates to the community.
- Consult: Hear public feedback on relevant parts of a project, keep information updated so community can follow along.
In the 3rd draft, there are several Building Form Types on pages 23-25 that include "shops", particularly in Compounds, Clusters and, at the end of the page, there is an entire Building Form Type for "Shops". Will these shop building form types be required to follow any environmental emissions regulations? Any particular noise standards? How about hours of operation? It really seems inappropriate to include an industrial/commercial shop in a residential area, for the same reasons that these building types are generally found in industrial/commercial areas - not residential. Share with me your thoughts regarding these issues. Thank you!
800 characters is much too short for a thoughtful comment.
On page 3 of the Draft 3... LANDSCAPING, it says:
a) Plant material shall be selected from the species
approved by the Colorado State University (CSU)
Extension Guides.
There are numerous CSU extension service plant guides. Could you identify which one? Xeric, Native etc?
The Zoning Code Rewrite is touted as "affordable." It is: for Developers. Reduced parking standards may be applicable for areas where the environment is dense, highly developed, multi-use, and alternative transportation to the car is widely available and in use. Uh, that's not Golden. Let's get real.
Unless you, members of City Staff, Planning Commission and City Council, all have households where you are using mass transit, car pools, biking, walking, or using Uber on a daily basis, instead of your car; please don't force an anti-car/anti-parking theology on the rest of us.
The Coors Tek neighborhood meeting was very well attended. I think that can be attributed in part to the letters they mailed to the near by neighbors, the signs posted on highway 58 and at 9th and Washington, and the presentations they made to various boards. Please consider mailings, digital signs, the informer, a water bill insert and social media to advertise the neighborhood open houses.
Thank you for providing the simulation examples. In preparation for the neighborhood meetings, I think it would be very helpful to provide "real life photographs" of the building form types allowed in each neighborhood at the open house meetings. While I appreciate the simulation drawings, I think I would grasp it better if I could see a video simulation of each of the types allowed using an actual property in the zone.
There is a provision in the code for two city councilors to flag a project for review. The timeframe (2 weeks) and requirements (cite the specific part of code not followed) in addition to the fact that a city councilor is the only one who can do it (why not planning commission?) is a very high bar. This sounds like a process put in place so we can say it's there but to discourage the process from happening. Can we extend the timeframe, allow planning commission to flag a project, and not require the specific part of the code to be identified initially? It would obviously need to be identified at some point, but the code is complicated, and a full review takes time.
I want to support camerdb's comments about intention statements. They are often used to make decisions on whether an application meets the code requirements. Camerdb's proposed revisions to the intention statements are well thought out, and would improve the code language. Please consider including them.
I understand that many changes were made in response to community input, such as removing Beverly Heights from this zoning code and removing the option for dividing lots. It feels like a lost opportunity. Hopefully we can move forward, acknowledging that development will continue, and incorporate additional "smart growth" principles in the future so that as growth continues, we do it in a way that makes sense for us as a community.
Frustrated to see the general removal of detached multi-family dwellings sharing a current lot. This seemed like a nice innovation that provided flexibility and density without the giant--typically high end--apartment/condo buildings currently going up.
A key missing aspect is more explicit support affordable housing. We need teachers, police, and others to be able to live IN our community.
In the landscape standards there are callouts for the Director of Community and Economic Development to make decisions on sidewalks. I would again propose that the title and role be changed to Director of Planning and Neighborhood Preservation so as to drive decisions toward protecting the town's character which was a goal of this rewrite. Also, it is lazy, IMHO to show a picture of an urban type landscape from another town, "The character of the sidewalk and tree lawn varies by context. The image above of Wenatchee, WA shows a main street character." on page two of the document. An example can readily be found in town that can be a real life example.
I see that my property at 818 9th St has been included in the "Transition" remapping. I am not sure why this was done, and using the provided definition of Transition, it doesn't make sense at all. The half block (as defined in Rev. 2) east of Arapahoe to Washington contains properties in the 8th/9th st Historic District that don't fit the Transition model at all. Can you provide reasoning for this?
The code simulation is a good start on showing how the new code could result in better, more compatible buildings. The core area also allows a village duplex which is pretty big, bulky, and doesn't do as nice a job of fitting in as the other examples chosen for the simulation. I assume the simulation shows maximum projections allowed for the village duplex? If not, it should. What this whole simulation shows, and what I think is clear after diving in a little, is that there are still some large bulky forms allowed in some parts of the city and there are no carrots to drive people to smaller footprint buildings. We could create a path that no one takes. We need to discourage large structures in favor of for sale smaller structures.
Intention Statements are a way to address issues that have nuance. Here is a link to a proposed update to intention statements that will allow us to protect our character better and link to the comprehensive plan and neighborhood plans.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1xRJQ0juats7lGthMs81tjen5qE2p-Uj9/view?usp=sharing
The Mainstreet B and Mainstreet A changes in central neighborhood are also slipping in a height change from existing. MSB is 55feet versus CC2 at 50 feet. MSA is 38 feet versus CC1 of 30 feet. Both of these may be too intense for the area, but of the two, the MSB bothers me more, especially south of 19th street. I maintained when it was CMU, and still maintain today that 20th should be treated as NC or T or something less intense than MSB or CC2. Regardless of willingness to make that change, the height change, particularly in MSA is significant, over 20%. The setbacks also are much different than what was agreed to more recently, 20 feet or so in this area. The change to MSA/MSB will create more of an urban feel and that was not the plan, more of a mixed/integrated into existing.