A bill for an ordinance changing the zoning classification for 3900 Elati Street and 3958 Elati Street in Globeville. Approves an official map amendment to rezone properties from I-A UO-2 to C-RX-12 (industrial to urban center, residential mixed-use), located at 3900 and 3958 Elati Street in Council District 9. The Committee approved filing this item at its meeting on 8-27-19.
the zoning classification for four 2 to 5 LRT Street. So sorry if that threw anybody off right before the recess tonight. Speakers should begin their remarks by telling the council their names and cities of residents and if they feel comfortable doing so, their home addresses. If you you're here to answer questions only when your name is called, please come to the podium, state your name and note that you are available for questions of council. Speakers will have 3 minutes. There is no yielding of time on the presentation monitor. On the wall you will see your time counting down. Speakers must stay on the topic of the hearing and must direct their comments to the council members. Please refrain from profane or obscene speech. Direct your comments to council as a whole and please refrain from individual or personal attacks. Councilman Cashman, will you please vote Council Bill eight, seven, seven on the floor. Yes, Mr. President. I move that council bill 19 0877 be placed upon final consideration and do pass. It has been moved and second in the required public hearing for council bill 877 is open. May we have. The staff report. There you go. All right. I'm Alice, Stevie. And this is the proposed rezoning for 3930 958 LRT Street. So we are in Council District nine in the Globeville neighborhood. The and this is in the 41st and Fox station area. The subject property is approximately 7.4 acres and currently has residential housing in a225 story building with a 17 story tower. The proposed rezoning to see our X12 Urban Center Neighborhood Context residential mixed use up to 12 stories is to reflect the changing character of the area to a more urban transit oriented development. So the current zoning is AIA with the billboard overlay, which is also found nearby in all directions. Also to the north is see our x 12 and cm x 20. And then to the west is cm x 20. The current land use is multi-unit residential, which is also found to the north along with industrial and office uses. And then there's more industrial and vacant land in the west, and then I-25 is to the south and east. So the bottom right image shows the subject property as seen from above the interstate. And then the top image is residential development to the north, and the middle is a vacant property and some distant industrial buildings to the west. So the 41st and Fox next step study is an ongoing study that is a joint effort between CPD Public Works and the North Denver Cornerstone Collaborative to recommend major infrastructure improvements in the study area. The goals of this project are to identify key multimodal infrastructure and roadway improvements, support transit oriented development, the transit oriented development vision and address neighborhood connectivity and traffic congestion. So the Map Amendment application was recommended for approval by Planning Board in August. It was before Luti also in August and then is before city council today. The application includes a list of the outreach conducted by the applicant and staff have not received any comments regarding this rezoning application. So now for the review criteria, there are four plans to consider on this particular site. The proposed map amendment is consistent with several strategies from comprehensive plan. 2040 will enable mixed use infill development, including an increase in allowed housing density near the 41st and Fox station at an intensity that is consistent with the dense, walkable, mixed use neighborhoods around transit that are expressed in the plan. In Blueprint Denver The future neighborhood context is Urban Center, which is characterized by high intensity residential and significant employment, with a substantial mix of uses, street activation and connectivity. The future place of this area is called high residential, which is a high mix of uses, including many large scale multi-unit residential uses as well as commercial uses. LRT Street is classified as under and designated local, and Fox Street is a mixed use collector. 38th Avenue and Park AV, which are both just south of the scope of this map, are both mixed use arterials. So the street grid in this portion of the city is interrupted by I-25, I-70 and the railroad. But the site is close to the new station platform and there are additional bicycle and pedestrian connections in the area. So according to the Blueprint Growth strategy, the site is within a high and medium high residential area. These areas are anticipated to see 30% of new housing growth and 5% of new employment growth by 2040. The proposed MAP amendment to C.R. X12 will focus residential mixed use growth near a transit station in an appropriate context, which is intended for this kind of growth. Therefore, the proposed rezoning is consistent with Blueprint Denver. So the 41st and Fox station area plan was adopted in 2009 and it talks about development of a high intensity activity node on the east side of the station. The subject site is mapped as urban residential 2 to 12 storeys, which is primarily residential, but may include a noteworthy number of complimentary commercial uses. Some of the infrastructure recommendations that are in this plan have not yet been completed. So the city adopted rules and regulations last November that apply to any development in this area that requires a site development plan. These rules and regulations establish a vehicle trip capacity for the area and then allocate the remaining trips as projects are permitted and built. So then the Globeville neighborhood plan was adopted in 2014, and it includes a vision of a diverse transit supportive urban center at the station area. The subject site is mapped as urban residential in this plan, which is higher density and primarily residential. It's also mapped as an area of change and therefore is an area where it is desirable to channel growth. So the proposed rezoning will result in uniform application of zoned district building form, use and design regulations, and it will further public health, safety and welfare through implementation of adopted plans. And it facilitates increased housing density and a mix of uses which has been linked to several positive health impacts. The staff report details the physical changes in the area, including the 41st and Fox Station and Pedestrian Bridge, the Anchor Street Multi-Use Path and nearby development and redevelopment. This rezoning would recognize the changed character of the area as it transitions to a transit oriented development. And they requested cruises consistent with the neighborhood context, description, zone, district, purpose and intent. So based on finding all review criteria have been met. CPD recommends approval and the applicant is here for questions. They don't have a presentation, but they're happy to answer any questions. Thank you very much. We have two individuals signed up to speak this evening. First up is Mike Franken. Hello. I'm the. I represent Real Realty Regency Realty investors, and I'm really just here to answer any questions. Could you state your name for the record? Michael Franken. Thank you very much. Thank you. Next up, Jesse Pierce. Good evening. My name is Jesse Paris. I'm representing for Denver, home of Salau. Black Star Action Movement for Self-defense. Positive action coming in for Social Change, Universal African People's Organization, as well as the Unity Party of Colorado. And I was on top of the ballot for city council where last this past May election, I got almost 15,000 votes with no money. We're in favor of this, especially since the city keeps saying now we can do better. So more housing. Yes. My question is, what is the amount level for this housing? I want to know what the AMA level is, who is going to occupy this space, because this is in a rapidly gentrified area uptown like other parts of this city. But Globeville in particular has been gentrified and the people have not been treated well in this area. So I want to know what the AMA level is when development is going to begin on this project and who is going to occupy this space. Thank you. Thank you. That concludes our speakers. Are there any questions from members of council? All right, Councilman Ortega. Thank you, Mr. President. Let me first say that this particular parcel. Was one of the properties that was included in the 2010 rezoning. There's currently a 12 story building on this site, so it was inadvertently down zoned when it should have allowed to been allowed to keep the zoning that it had. This is the Regency House hotel site. My question, does it have specifically to do with the site as much as it is with the station area and the work that's going on over there? And just wanted to ask maybe Mr. Merritt, who I see sitting in the audience, if you can just give us a very brief because it has a direct correlation on any development in this entire FOX station area. No longer being called the name you gave it before. So can you just briefly talk number one about where we are with the drainage issue, because that's huge for this area. Any of you who have ever been through or tried to get through when it's raining, you cannot go on the 38th Avenue underpass. And that will be an access point for people trying to come off of Park Avenue to get into Fox area or into North Denver. So where are we with that? And then if you could just talk briefly about how many of the developments have already been allotted a trip generation. Assignments, if you will. Right. So my name is Chris Nevitt. I'm the city's top manager, transit oriented development. And I'll take the second question first, if I could. So we established the overall trip ceiling, which is about 25,000 trips. I use rough numbers here rather than precise ones, just for use of explanation. About half the trips are already used, so that leaves about 12,000 trips left. And of those 12,000 trips left. We have projects that have reserved to serve their project. About half of those trips. So we have about 5000 trips left. None of those projects has been constructed. Right. So the rules and regulations lay out a series of milestones that any project has to go through. They secure the trips in the concept phase, and then as they move through site development plan and multiple reviews of site development plan, they get to hang on to their trips and then ultimately build their projects. So no project has actually one project has moved to actual construction documents and that is 50 trips. All the other trips, roughly 6500 trips, are simply in a reserved state, awaiting for future submissions of site development plan to refine that number and actually construct the project. So just the one project is actually in construction. So this particular property is considered within the current baseline? Yes, ma'am. Okay. And of those that have been reserved, is does that include the 43 acre site at the far north end? Yes. Okay. So now talk about the. Weight the the the the the Fox North site that 40 plus acres has has not yet reserved trips. They are part of the system, though. They have not yet reserved trips. But they will have to reserve within the 5000 or so that's remaining. Correct. Correct. Okay. All right. I'm not going to go to my next question because I think it's not as relevant to tonight's conversation, but it will be to further conversations that we will have positive. We will have further coverage. Yes. So talk to us about where we're at with the drainage study for this area and how that folds into the next step. Discussion with the property owners. Sure. I want to bring my colleague up here, Karen. Good. Those two, the next step study and the drainage study have been happening in parallel, but in conversation with each other. But I think Karen Good is better equipped to tell you how that conversation. Is, right? I hope so. Karen Good, Denver Public Works. And as Chris mentioned, we are working with our our next step study for forty-firsts and Fox station area that is actually being completed by the same consultant who is working on the Globeville drainage plan. And as the councilwoman mentioned, we do have a flooding area, flooding issue, and that's the 30th underpass. So you can still easily get into FOX, the FOX station area from downtown in extreme flooding situations, which happen probably about once every 3 to 5 years where the underpass floods and it's highly advisable not to go through the underpass . So it's hard to get to that Fox station area from if you're coming from the West, from Highlands, Sunnyside, etc.. And we've had multiple studies looking at what it takes to fix that underpass. It is rather extensive because it is a major regional drainage problem, not a site specific drainage problem. Basically, a majority of the water coming from the west gets held up by the railroad tracks. They they kind of serve as a little bit of a dam and they pull the water into the underpass, which is less than ideal. So that's something we're looking at as part of the next step study, along with additional connections and looking at what the priorities and costs would be for those and what potential options there would be to address those. They're pretty significant infrastructure investments. Does that answer your question? It does. But the only other question I have is whether or not the final implementation of how that gets resolved is to then look at the creation of some kind of improvement district that would ask for participation from all of the developments that are looking to develop in this area. That certainly is something that we're looking at. We, as part of the scope for a study, have brought on experts that are helping us look at the different opportunities for districts. There is already one metro district district in the area, and that's for the Denver Post site. But you can layer metro districts with other district options. So we're looking at those opportunities. And we did have a meeting with all the major property owners in the area to discuss their feelings on what they might want to participate in. Because we we don't just lay those out. They have to everyone has to agree to participate. And folks are definitely thinking about it. But I don't we didn't get a oh, absolutely. We want to move forward with this district. In this district. And we're all in. As Chris mentioned, we don't have a lot of developments that we don't have any developments on a large scale that have broken ground. And so that plays into the factor of that funding and financing and how they're going to move forward. But this study will recommend a couple of different options. It may say this is the preferred option. Here are some other alternatives. It will depend how much feedback we get from those property owners as to how much we can say, Oh, this option is the one way to go. We're not going to say that unless everyone jumps on board in a fairly short time period. But we will have a variety of opportunities and options and pros and cons for different districts and district combinations, so that we can all be informed about what the potential funding and financing mechanisms are and as well as the general public and the private developers. Thank you, Karen. I appreciate the work that's going on over here because this will be one of the higher density areas in a small concentrated area that's going to for sure add more traffic to the area, even though we have created this trip generation cap, if you will, for the area and unless we get additional infrastructure access to the site. I think what I heard is that then potentially frees up more trips to the area, but I appreciate the work that's going on here. So thank you. And the people. Can also change their travel patterns. Yes. Thanks. Thank you, Councilman. Councilman CdeBaca. Thank you, Mr. President. Real quick. It's good if you can come back up and it may take both you and Mr. Nevett, but a question building on Councilwoman Ortega's. So we recognize we need infrastructure. We know we can't do it before the development. We're trying these creative trip management processes, and I'm wondering if there's a potential to attach those trips to fees, some similar to impact fees, where we can incentivize affordability in a different way. By waiving those fees, those trip fees, if they incorporate enough affordability. Is that possible to to use this trip pilot and attach fees to it? So we can build our infrastructure. I don't know offhand from a I know that the way the rules and regs are written currently, it doesn't have a fee structure associated with it. It's a set cap and it's on a first come, first serve basis. I would have to look at look into whether that would be something. And Chris, I don't know if you explored that with the rules and rec's creation. Chris was much more involved in in that rules and rec's creation. But I don't believe that we have any that have those linked. We could certainly look at. Best practices across the country. See if other folks are doing that. Chris, do you have anything to add? Just I mean, I don't want to wander too far off of the subject of the rezoning that's in front of you right now. But when we set up those rules and regulations, we were really addressing what we saw as a potential crisis and to make sure that development didn't get ahead of the infrastructure that we needed to serve it and to protect the neighborhood. So we wanted to put those rules and regs in place. I think some of the ideas that you've articulated about, you know, creating a fee and maybe being able to waive fees for affordable housing, I think that's all for conversation down the road once we've completed the next step study and then we're in a conversation with the community and with the property owners and with the developers about how we could construct this to produce the most the best outcome for the community at large. But I think all your your questions are right on the money. We don't have answers for them yet. Well, we've talked about this many times, and I know we have a habit of throwing things at the wall and seeing if they stick. And I think this is a good opportunity to make sure that we're doing it, addressing this potential crisis in a meaningful way. This property's currently in good hands. It is an it is a highly needed amenity for students trying to go to school in Denver. And for now, it's fine. But if this gets into the wrong hands, we're talking about a lot more development here throughout this property. And I want to make sure that we're building the infrastructure that we need to keep our community safe and accessible. And we're thinking about that before it's too late. So thank. You. And I think we might be able to add a little bit of that assessment and analysis into our next step study, just to look to see if there's anything that we can look at from a lease national standpoint. Thank you, Councilman. Councilman Flynn. Thank you, Mr. President. Just a couple questions. This one, you might not have an answer to either Ella or Karen or or Chris, but there's a parcel identified on the assessor's map in the middle of this, between the between the tower building and the back property on a lady that appears to be an old remnant of railroad , maybe, or something. Do you know, can you explain what that is? Because that's part of what's being resolved, but it's not owned by the applicant. Oh, is that right? I don't. There is a weird it sort. Of looks like a snake. Parcel. Yes. That belongs to I think it belongs to Metro Wastewater. Can you point that out? Is that part of the. Well, this one doesn't have the right. And I beg the president's indulgence, this is. Part of my map is towards 31st Street. I believe what what's being pointed out is not part of the rezoning and. It is not okay and it shows on the presentation just grossly is being encompassed by. Okay. The other. The other question I had is, Alan, maybe you can answer this. The, the C, r X12 is recommended for areas that are served by arterials. So maybe you could talk a little bit more about how we arrived at and I realize there's a 17 story building already on there, but see, our x eight or even five might have fit better with the street classifications that already exist in here. So what? Explain a little bit more the thinking that went into choosing 12. The well, in terms of choosing 12, I would have to defer that to the applicant. But in terms of our analysis of 12, there, there is that language in the intent statement about being served by specific types, primarily by arterials. Right. Exactly. And there is no arterial here. No, no. I mean, there's there are. The area is served by them. But that the language doesn't say that it has to be adjacent to. And so we try and think about it in a more holistic transportation context in this case, because it is close to the turn of the station. First and five. Exactly. And so the combination of of considering other non automobile transportation infrastructure, in considering the appropriate intensity and then also because the the station area plan called this parcel out for 12 storeys. So just kind of it's there's a bit of finesse in terms of balancing different things. And, you know, you don't always get the exact same direction from every piece. But on, on, on the whole, we felt that it was consistent. Thank you. That's that's a great answer. I just wanted to be more comfortable with this. And I understand that when we talk about arterials and collectors and whatnot, we're talking about streets with cars. We and we haven't really taken into consideration transit as an arterial. And there are obviously we have the commuter rail, typically a street that would be an arterial might already have real robust transit on it. So that that makes sense. So it's good to see that. I just want to feel more comfortable with that analysis. Mr. President. Thank you. Thank you, Councilman Flynn. All right. See no other questions. I will just take a second to recognize that the Honorable Chris Nevitt, formerly representing Denver's Luckey District seven, on this body. Nice to have you back in chambers this evening. And that concludes the public hearing for Council Bill 877. It's now closed. Are there comments by members of city council? Councilman Flynn. Thank you, Mr. President. I saw that no one else chimed in, but I can't let it go without commenting that this used to be Elvis Presley's preferred place to stay in Denver. When he played in Denver, he always stayed at this hotel top floor. Am I right? Thank you. Elvis Presley. Elvis. Yeah, obviously. Elvis. Do you know any other Elvis clansmen, Kasra? I have not heard of this Elvis. To whom you speak of, I'm sure. Thank you, as always. Custom in Flint for the history lesson to go along with our evening. Councilman Hines. Thank you, Mr. President. And thank you, Councilman Flynn, for that. I was on the fence. But if it really has the connection to Elvis, I. I've made my decision. Thank you. Thank you. Councilman Hines, I will remind my colleagues that there is no rezoning criteria that includes any preferences of where Elvis like to stay when he was in town. That being said, I want to thank staff for the comprehensive staff report that I think does clearly illustrate that this project, that this application meets the criteria and I will be voting yes tonight, not because of Elvis, but because of the criteria being met. And with that, Madam Secretary, roll call. Black Eye Betsy Tobacco I. Flynn High Gilmer I Herndon High. Hinds High. Cashman. High. Kenny. Ortega I. Sandoval High Sawyer, I. Torres, I. Mr. President. I. Madam Secretary, polls close voting in the results. 1339 Council Bill 877 has passed. Councilman Cashman, will you please put Council Bill 878 on the floor?