A bill for an ordinance approving and accepting the East Area Plan, which plan shall become a part of the Comprehensive Plan 2040 for the City and County of Denver pursuant to the provisions of Section 12-61 of the Denver Revised Municipal Code. Adopts the East Area Plan, as part of the city's Comprehensive Plan. The Committee approved filing this item at its meeting on 10-20-20.
We're having issues with Zoom on the Aramaic and Burmese, but we do have Spanish and Karen and we're continuing to try to address that. And so we appreciate folks patience. Councilmember Cashman, will you please put council Bill one one, three, two on the floor for passage, please? Yes, Madam President, I move the council bill 20 dash 1130 to be placed upon final consideration and do pass. Now again. Thank you. It has been moved and seconded. Councilmember Sawyer. Your motion to amend. Thank you, Madam President. The purpose of this amendment is to amend the East Area Plan. The amended Clark file number in the bill refers to an amended East Area plan. This amended plan adds a sentence to Policy L six on page 39. Oops. Sorry. Hold on. I messed up. I got to read the actual part first. I move that council bill 20 dash 113 to be amended in the following particulars that on page one, line 32 strike. Quote 20200094, end quote. And replace with quotes. 20200094a. End quote. Thank you. Thank you. Go ahead. Sorry. No, go ahead. Council woman. Thinks so. Thank you. Council President. The purpose of this amendment is to amend the East Area Plan. The amended Clark file number in the bill refers to an amended East Area plan. So that's the way the amended plan adds a sentence to policy l six on page 39 regarding zoning and regulation recommendations to ensure the plan area neighborhoods are inclusive places by integrating missing middle housing and appropriate locations. The added sentence states, quote, Single unit areas should remain primarily single unit. End quote. Madam President, do you want to do questions and comments? How would how would you like to do the next part of this? Thank you, Councilwoman Sawyer. And we're going to go ahead and we'll have the staff report and we'll open up the hearing, and then we'll go ahead and have questions and comments after we get the presentation. Perfect. Thanks so much. All right. Wonderful. I am getting back to my place, my system refreshed here, and so just need to get back to where we're at. All right. So no other questions or comments, but one hour courtesy public hearing for council bill 20 Dash 1132 is open. Speakers may address the bill as well as the amendment. After the public hearing, council will vote on the amendment and then on the bill separately. May we go ahead and have a staff report? And I see you're already in and ready to go live. Go ahead, please. And evening I'm with where I go with community development. I'm going to give the staff presentation. But I think our executive director, Laura Eldredge, wanted to give us some opening remarks first. Turn it over to her. Excellence. I am not sure. Can people see me? Mm hmm. Go ahead. Okay. I didn't know if I was promoted yet. Thank you. Well, good evening. And thank you, Madam President. Thank you. Council members. I'm proud to introduce the East Area Plan to council this evening for consideration. I also want to thank all the residents and businesses of Denver, of particularly the East Area Colfax, that participated in this project, in this process. Engagement is one of our communities in our communities is incredibly important to realize in the future vision of our neighborhoods and the great city that we live in. I also want to introduce our great CPD staff ahead of their presentation, which I will get through here in a few minutes. I just want to take a minute to preview what you're going to hear this evening, both from staff and from the community. First, you're going to hear about the dire need for affordable housing and about concerns about displacement, both for families and for local business. We agree with the community that the need is urgent, especially in the wake of this pandemic. And this plan really tackles displacement head on. You will hear in detail from our staff about dozens of strategies that came from the community itself to address housing and to support local businesses and about the partnerships that we have built to implement these strategies. You may hear that the east area plan doesn't go far enough, but this plan goes as far as a plan can go. And it goes further than any neighborhood plan we have brought to council before. The plan also addresses the issue, these issues in ways the current plans in this area do not. Those plans where they do exist date back almost 20 years and don't mention displacement or equity at all. When we have these conversations, we often focus on the consequences of doing something. But it's just as important to talk about the consequences of not doing something. The negative impacts are already underway in these neighborhoods in terms of housing costs, rising rents and businesses that are having a hard time surviving. We hear that and we understand that adapt adopting this plan will put us in a better position to do what the community is asking and ensure that they can stay in their neighborhood and that their businesses can thrive. You may hear tonight that with this urgency comes a need for things that the plans themselves cannot do. But through the partnerships that we built with Host and Nest and neighborhood advocacy groups, we're connecting residents with resources and programs that can help them now. Our job as a city doesn't end with a plan. This is where it starts. We will continue working with these neighborhoods to implement the recommendations of this plan in a way that works for the community. With that, I would just say thank you again to counsel for your time, and I will turn it over to Liz and Kurt for the presentation. Thank you. Thank you, Laura. So I'm going to share my screen and I'll give you the presentation. I'm joined tonight by Curt Upton and many of our other team members who can help to answer questions when we get to that part of the evening. So tonight's presentation, I'll go over the plan structure and also give you some background, and then I'll review the three criteria that City Council is charged with reviewing and adopting the East Area plan as a supplement to the comprehensive plan. And this includes the public process plan, consistency and the long term view. To the East Area plan is a long term planning document. It sets out a community supportive vision for the area and includes recommended strategies to help us achieve that vision. As a policy document, it will help inform city decision making over the next 20 years. It is not a regulatory document or a budget document that you stereo plan covers for statistical neighborhoods between Colorado and Yosemite along Colfax Avenue. This includes South Park Hills, Hale, Montclair and East Colfax. Areas north of Colfax are in District eight state, and those to the south are in District five. For context, I wanted to highlight that there are demographic differences between these neighborhoods, which has been reflected in the community input that we've heard throughout this process. The neighborhoods of South Parco, Montclair and some portions of Hale have higher household incomes and higher homeownership rates. Many residents in these areas are concerned about neighborhood change that may impact single unit character, such as traffic or changes to the vote form. East Colfax ranks the lowest in our citywide equity index. It's considered vulnerable to displacement in all three categories in our in our blueprint and host displacement index. The neighborhood has a significant population of immigrants and refugees, a large percentage of renters, and has seen its moderate housing prices rise quickly over the last several years. Displacement has been the primary concern that we've heard in this neighborhoods. As more mentioned, a major theme of the neighborhood plan and community engagement has been around displacement and equity, and the plan's top priority is stabilizing existing residents and businesses. As we all know, these are issues we are grappling with city wide and equity is a. Central. Goal of our city wide plans. Displacement is happening throughout the city and places where development is happening in places where it isn't with a neighborhood plan. We have a chance to help guide that change and integrate and to put anti displacement strategies. This focus has taken to roles in the East Area plan. One is to integrate into displacement and equity through all parts of the plan as opposed to our existing adaptive plans in these areas that don't speak to displacement, the east area plan makes anti displacement a top priority and includes over 27 policies that directly address displacement. This has gone further than we have before in any neighborhood plan and includes a number of strategies grouped under Polish policies such as stabilizing residents, creating new affordable housing, protecting small businesses, and reducing barriers to jobs and new business opportunities. Ensuring that the community benefits from change and new development in the coming years and supporting community organizing and leadership to ensure equitable engagement doesn't end with the neighborhood plan but continues through implementation. On top of that plan, focus, we recognize, particularly with the added stresses of the pandemic, that the need for immediate action is critical. As part of this process, we put together an inter-departmental team to work with the community, particularly the Equifax neighborhood, to address those issues now. These include things like connecting residents and businesses with legal and housing assistance and connecting them to code resources. The partnerships with other departments such as Nest, Ditto and Host are things we didn't have in the past with neighborhood science. I think we all know that change is happening and will continue to happen. Plans give us that opportunity to work with residents, local businesses, nonprofits and service providers to set goals for our future and make sure that development works in a way that works better for our neighborhoods. And. So I'll go over the the plan structure and content. Overall, we have an introduction and then we have area wide recommendations which really apply throughout the East area. And then we also have neighborhood specific recommendations. In addition, we have recommendations for the Colfax quarter itself and an implementation section to go with the plan. The plan is organized and one of our first steps in the planning process around six vision elements. And we started with the vision elements that you find in the comprehensive plan, and we added more detail and specificity for the east area. The plan also speaks to the equity concepts that you find a blueprint over, including access to opportunity, vulnerability, displacement and jobs and housing diversity. And these are implemented throughout the plan and our recommendations, and we also summarized them in the beginning of the plan. So I will highlight some of the priority recommendations in the plan. The first, as I've already mentioned, is helping residents and businesses stay in the community long term. And this means that we have a focus on AUNTJESS placement, which means some of those recommendations include creating a youth services hub that provides local access to anti displacement services , prioritizing current residents for new affordable housing, connecting small business owners with financial and technical assistance, both to that because of the anticipated best rapid transit construction and also rising costs in general. The image on the slide shows a renovated building along East Colfax, with small businesses staying in place and continuing to serve the community. Our second priority is ensuring that the East Area remains an inclusive place in the future by increasing affordable housing options using all available net methods. Today, one third of East Area residents are a cost burden, which means they're spending more than 30% of their income on housing. And we calculated that we're short at least 1400 units of affordable housing. The plan recommends building more housing near bus rapid transit stops along Colfax, using zoning tax credits, partnerships and direct investments. The plan strategically recommends putting that new housing near transit, where residents can take advantage of great access along Colfax, which connects them to jobs and amenities from downtown to Anschutz. The 15 and 15 hours are already among the highest ridership lines in our system, and they will only be improved with the planned Bus Rapid Transit Project. In addition, we want to make sure that new development and change that is expected helps achieve community priorities. Therefore, the plan recommends only allowing increased title on COVAX with the provision of community benefits with affordable housing being that primary benefit. The plan also recommends adding more diverse housing options in residential neighborhoods so that so that there's room for all types of households to live in these great east area neighborhoods. This rendering shows a new building along Colfax that achieves five stories and heights by providing affordable housing. Our next priority recommendation is making Colfax Avenue a street that brings the East Area's diverse community together. This includes making it easier to reuse existing buildings and build small scale development. Creating new roles for high quality design and ensuring that buildings transition appropriately to adjacent homes. Improving the streetscape to be more comfortable and safe and growing the quarter's independent and diverse cultural identity by establishing an international cultural district. Next, the plan prioritizes celebrating the architecture architectural history of Eastern neighborhoods by encouraging the preservation of existing homes and requiring complementary design of new housing. This includes updating our standards to ensure new housing fits in better. And creating requirements for their older homes when new housing options are added. Plan also recommends preserving trees and landscaped areas, creating new parks and gathering spaces, and using green approaches to stormwater management. This can help make the east area safe from flooding healthier and more climate resilient. Plans supports increasing tree canopy, particularly in commercial areas where it's lacking today. It recommends increased permeability and stormwater management and ensuring we have park access within a ten minute walk for residents. This rendering shows a potential new park in the Mayfair Town Center area. This is one area where there's potential to add a community park that can help address the walkable access, particularly in South Park Hill and Montclair. It is also an area with significant flooding and new stormwater management can help address this issue. The rendering also shows the preservation of existing businesses, including grocery stores, new housing options and shared parking. This is an illustration of one concept. The plan recommends additional community engagement around a specific plan. Should a property owner in the area be interested in redeveloping at some point? Our last priority recommendation is to save life and reduce pollution by making streets safer and more convenient for walking, bicycling and using transit. Some of these recommendations include making some of our east west major arterials safer to cross in travel and slowing vehicle speeds with traffic coming near schools, parks and other community gathering areas. This rendering shows one of the one way arterials and east being slowed down with intersection improvements. The Planning Board approved the plan by a vote of 6 to 3 on October seven, 20, 2021, to conditions one that the document be edited for clarity and correctness. And the second was to delete a recommendation in L six, a one which read that single unit areas should remain primarily single units. They said it has been made to the plan and is included in the draft before council tonight. There were 37 speakers at the hearing with 15 in favor and 22 against. Primary issues raised include displacement and the addition of housing options to neighborhoods. I will now review the City Council criteria for review. So our Comprehensive Plan 2040 calls out that when evaluating plans to be adopted as supplements. Both Planning Board and City Council should consider the following criteria that an inclusive community process was used to develop the plan. That the plan is consistent with the vision, goals and strategies of comprehensive plan 2040, and that the plan demonstrates a long term view. Well, first covered the inclusive community process criteria. Planning. Christmas began in July 2017 and has been in progress for over three years. Engagement has included more than 100 meetings in over 8500 comments received. The vast majority of this engagement occurred prior to the pandemic. But we did have to address this past spring and summer to provide opportunities to review and discuss the draft plans. The engagement has included traditional community workshops, including a 500 person meeting at Johnson and Wales in November of 2019. The successful meeting allowed for constructive dialog on draft recommendations that were then updated and shared with the draft plan. We have also home health, virtual open houses, focus group meetings with community members and technical experts. Online service. Community group meetings and events and office hours. We've also worked to build awareness of this project throughout the process. It's included a mailer to all 15,000 households email updates, fliers and local news stories. In addition, through this process, we have had two new neighborhood groups formed, both of which we spent considerable time engaging with. We recognize that there are barriers to engagement faced by many community members. We made efforts throughout the process to reduce those barriers by providing interpretation and up to five languages at our workshops offering food, childcare and free shuttles. All of our online content was compatible with smartphones, ADA accessible and available for auto translation. We also provided videos of our May Virtual Open House in four languages. We kept track of our demographics throughout the process and saw that many of our traditional workshops and online engagement opportunities were mainly seeing participation from white and higher income households. Therefore, from early on, we dedicated more resources to targeted engagement to reach those nonwhite lower income households and immigrants and refugees in East Colfax. We did much of that through partnerships with organizations and also what we call pop up events where we meet people where they are. This included events at affordable housing properties, small businesses and motels and meetings with service providers and business owners. Also an East Coast community collective formed involved last year. We met with them multiple times to take a critical look at and strengthen the plans, antigens, placement recommendations. Specifically in the East Colfax neighborhood, we've had over 20 focused meetings, six of those meetings, being with the East Cortex Community Collective and included a detailed discussion of recommendations that led to over 65 updates in the plan. These meetings also included interpretation, food, childcare, and we included staff from CPD host Nest. The Office of Financial Empowerment and Detox so that we had everyone in a room together to tackle the long term recommendations and also connect residents and businesses with resources to help them today. We use this engagement to elevate the voices of our representatives. And this has resulted in a neighborhood plan that goes further than any before in terms of displacement. The vast majority of X three point youth CapEx committee collective's recommendations were directly incorporated into the plan. Examples of those anti displacement strategies that we updated based on community feedback include recommendations for local access to job training, financial empowerment and housing assistance. Making affordable housing the top priority for increases in height and reducing barriers to homeownership and piloting new affordability programs. Also include protecting core facts, independent and diverse cultural identity by establishing the international or cultural district and by supporting more community ownership. We're recommending inclusive engagement implementation, including any TIFF projects that come forward. And lastly, recommending an ecovacs community center with recreational opportunities, gathering space and local services. Now go to crunch criteria. Number two, consistency with comprehensive plan 2040 and also cover consistency with blueprint difference. The plan is consistent with the goals and strategies and comprehensive plan 2014, as are outlined in the staff report and listed on this page to include all those in our various vision elements. The plan is also consistent with policies and strategies and blueprint. Denver, as outlined in the staff report, including those relating Usain Bolt form mobility and quality of life. The plan updates, maps and blueprint Denver for contexts, places and street types. It also addresses blueprint drivers equity concepts, as I mentioned previously. The last criteria is that the plan should provide a long term view. The austerity plan is a long term plan. And as I mentioned, it has a 20 year planning horizon. It establishes a vision for supporting local businesses and diverse housing options, preserving the diversity of Colfax Avenue, as well as neighborhood architecture, providing trees and open space and making it easier and safer to get around round it direct. It directs the majority of growth to centers and corridors in areas that are served by transit. And the vision will take many years to achieve. With that. We do find that based on finding the review criteria have been met. Staff recommends that City Council adopt the East Area Plan. Thank you. All right. Thank you, Liz, for the staff report. And we have 58 speakers signed up to speak and we have a one hour courtesy public hearing to accomplish that. And so we'll go ahead and get started with our speakers. And we do right now have one speaker that requires interpretation. And so we'll go ahead and let the appropriate interpreter know when that time arrives. And so our first speaker is Merritt Pullum. And as we get Merritt moved into the panelists here we are alternating speakers for and against. And so just want to also remind speakers to please share with us your name and your city of residence if you feel comfortable doing that. And so we'll go ahead and start with you, Merritt. Go ahead, please. Hello. Good evening. Thank you. My name is Merritt Pullen and I live near 10th and Line Street in the Mayfair neighborhood. I've called Colorado home for more than 39 years. My civic experience includes former president of Mayfair Neighbors Inc. Denver Wright Denver Moves Transit Task Force, the Upper Montclair Stormwater Basin Study and the BRT Task Force. Former Councilwoman Sussman appointed me to the East Area Plan Steering Committee and her and Councilman Herndon nominated me to chair the committee. Developing recommendations for this plan was not a simple task with neighbors and businesses that depend on a solid vision for the future. My goal was to help deliver the best plan possible so that our kids neighbors have the best opportunity to thrive. I wish to say thank you to my fellow steering committee members, current and former City Council members, community planning and development staff. The consultants hired help and give input. Denver East Neighborhoods First Unite and the East Colfax Community Collective and all the RINO's in our neighborhoods and to our neighbors and business owners who live, work or rent in our area. The time you spent attending meetings, sending emails or inputting comments on various drafts was valuable and appreciated. Our goal is to create the most equitable neighborhood plan. The steering committee dug deep and shared experiences that benefited the vision. I learned so much more about myself, my neighbors and the city than I ever expected. We identified early on that the steering committee was not the most diverse group and that we were not reaching everyone in our community. I am proud of the work CPD, the Consultants, City Council and the Steering Committee did to expand our reach and spark conversations with those who felt like they were not being heard. Direct mailers, focus groups, community forums and most importantly, time was added to the plan. It was important to do better, and I believe we did. The steering committee started with 14 and ended with nine voting members. We voted 8 to 1 to advance our recommendations to the Denver Planning Board. I believe this is a strong indication of consensus. Not everyone was able to get everything they wanted in the plan with a compromise and realize that maybe what one or many of us thought was a good idea was not actually something that fit our community. Throughout the past three years, various neighbors and organizations were able to challenge our thoughts and ideas, which in turn allowed us to rethink our ideas and make a recommendation stronger and relatable to our community. We all want safety, security, great parks, reliable transit options, and access to entertainment. What we need more of is better food access for everyone. Affordable housing and job security. And better education for all. Can you hear me? Yes. Oh, sorry. Go ahead, Merritt. That was one of our translators. Go ahead. My apologies. I constantly thought about how my children will see the plans impacts 20 years from now. What will be their Denver? Do we capture what our neighbors and small businesses need to thrive? I am proud of this plan and the volunteer steering committee members I had the pleasure to work with. I asked that City Council approve the East Area plan. I also challenge City Council as well as CPD to not only approve this plan. That's the time we have. Thank you. No worries. All right. Our next speaker is Brendan Green. Brendan, we've got you up as a panelist here, so you might just have to unmute. Hi, my name is Brendan Green. I'm with the East Corpus Community Collective. In my comments tonight I want to address the amendment and the claim that the addition of the lime single unit area should remain primarily single unit was the result of an inclusive process. This land was not in the initial draft recommendations and was only added since February 2020 and the first two years of the IAP. The input around the plan came largely from the more affluent neighborhoods of Montclair and Park Hill organization. Bringing the diverse voices of East Colfax was formed in October when we held our first press conference, calling out the inequities in the planning process on November 21st, 2019. On November 23rd, CPD, based upon the feedback they had received from more privileged communities who were organizing against missing middle housing, released an online survey to workshop how to integrate and scale back missing metal housing in the plan. They also conducted a workshop at Johnson and Wells University with 500 people in attendance on the same topic. Our perspective of wanting to incorporate more missing middle housing throughout the area and throughout East Colfax was not even included as an option, so the process was already skewed. After three months of the survey, the CPD reported their findings at the Community Steering Committee meeting on January 30th, 2020, where I happened to attend. CPD shared the feedback on the survey with 85% white, 46% Park Hill 19% East Colfax Feedback from the workshop at Johnson and Wells was 63% Park Hill and only 11% East Colfax. Based upon this completely inequitable three month engagement process, CPD announced the addition of the line single unit areas to remain primarily single unit and received universal feedback from all but one steering committee member that this worked against anti displacement goals in the plan. We want to be clear this is not initially in the plan recommendations. It was added after CPD received feedback from a very specific community, released a skewed survey that did not have all perspectives included, received very skewed feedback that was not racially representative or reflective of all of our neighborhoods, and then made a fundamental shift to the plan that significantly altered its direction. The Planning Board was right in removing the sentence and acknowledging how it works against citywide goals. We ask that you oppose this amendment for this reason and the fact that it was added after a process that was not inclusive. Additionally, the East Kotex Community Collective stands in opposition to the plan as a whole because we do not feel the full plan reflects our voice and input. Since we began to engage in January, after more than three months of analyzing the plan, we have acted in good faith and achieved 65 additions to this plan. But imagine what the plan would have looked like if we had this level of engagement from the beginning. If the diverse communities of Colfax would have been engaged in a meaningful way and been a part of this process from its launch, this would not be the plan that we would have written for ourselves. If we truly want to create plans that fight displacement, we should empower neighborhoods at risk of displacement to do this independently without being forced to negotiate, forcing our neighborhood that is dead last on the equity scale, 78 out of 78 in Denver. To negotiate, our future is setting us up for failure. We ask you to vote against the plan in a very and at the very least on this amendment. Thank you. Thank you. That's the time we have for you. Next step, we have Mary Coddington. Hi. My name is Mary Coddington. I'm a Denver resident, and I'm here today on behalf of the Neighborhood Development Collaborative or in DC. And DC is a group of 17 affordable housing providers and service providers. Who have come together to. Promote housing, security and community well-being for. Everyone. In pursuit of that goal, the organization strongly supports the East Area Plan and encourages its adoption by City Council. We support this plan for the following reasons. First, it's important to mention the way the plan was created. The three plus year plan process use demographic based outreach, which sets a standard for plan making and highlights the goal of CPD to create a plan that reflects the vision of the whole community. As the work of IN is primarily focused on low and moderate income residents, the additional effort to gain the perspectives of the immigrant and refugee communities is especially appreciated. The plan highlights the sentiment of residents that the east area should remain a place where a diverse range of families can live and work. To meet this goal, the EAP recommends using all possible methods to increase affordable housing, including to use duplexes and higher density near transit. These strategies and their implementation and appropriate areas will allow for complete and vibrant neighborhoods that are accessible to people from across the workforce. Not only will this continue to improve upon the already lovely neighborhoods of East, but will also interrupt the concentration of poverty that occurs when you have a city full of people with the mantra Yes , but not here. Members of NDC focus on different levels of housing affordability and different strategies to achieve it. But all of the members recognize the importance of a diversity of options to meet the wide range of needs and indeed is very pleased to see this point acknowledged in the EFP as well. The Neighborhood Development Collaborative does not support the proposed amendment to add the language to the plan. Single unit areas should remain primarily single unit. The plan uses the word compatible or compatibility 36 times, and it's repeatedly recommending the inclusion of housing types that are responsive to the existing. Contexts. By trying to block missing middle housing from single unit areas. Economic segregation is perpetuated, and the need for affordable and diverse housing options has just shifted into other parts of the city. The state demographer Dr. Coggin KPD, have all reached the conclusion that Denver and the East area will continue to grow and cities themselves are always in a state of change. This plan is a response to that change, and it's an attempt to direct it based on the different needs and priorities of the neighborhoods within the plan area, as. Well as the city as a whole. And planning is never a perfect process, but the EAP is grounded in comprehensive plan 2040 Blueprint, Denver and the voices of the community, including those that often go unheard because of the thorough planning process and the focus on equity. The Neighborhood Development Collaborative strongly recommends this plan. Thank you for your time. Thank you. Our next speaker is Ron LaFollette. Hello. Hi. Go ahead, Ron. You just have to sign my notes again. First, I want to give thanks to all the city staff, the city council members and their staff and all the neighbors in the east area that they put in a lot of hard work for. The development of this plan. The goals of inclusivity, the affordability and prevention of gentrification, I think represent community values that our residents can be proud of. Unfortunately, there are components of the plan regarding adding density to single family neighborhoods that are inconsistent with these goals and do not achieve these goals. In today's paper, the principal city planner, Curt Upton, says that opening the pathway to more units to 80 youths and missing middle housing should provide more affordable homes for people there. In the same article, Councilwoman Sawyer says gentrification is already happening, and by placing affordable housing in that priority, we will hopefully slow the process of gentrification. Words like should and hopefully will not achieve the goals of this plan. Supporters of the plan agree there is no way to enforce affordability. Without enforceable affordability. There's no inclusivity, there's no prevention of gentrification and obviously no affordability. Passage of a state law is a prerequisite to approval of this plan. However, previous efforts to pass this kind of law have been fought in defeated by developers. I can tell you what the plan will do regarding 80 youths and missing middle housing. It will increase density and it will do so at the expense of neighborhood character preservation, of which is one of the goals of the plan. It will increase congestions on our streets and make them unsafe. Also in conflict. With one of the. Goals of the plan to increase walkability and safety. It will not create affordable housing. It will most certainly benefit the developers who love density without affordability requirements. If you care about inclusivity, the prevention of gentrification and affordability, as I do, I ask you to vote against the plan. Thank you. Thank you. Our next speaker is Monica martinez. Hi. Can you see me? Mm hmm. Go ahead. Hi. My name's Monica martinez. I live at 35. Eudora. I'm the executive director of the Facts Partnership. The Facts is a 16 year old nonprofit that's been dedicated to strengthening, is supporting the businesses and residents along the East Colfax Quarter. I was also a member of the East Area Plan Steering Committee with Merritt, who served admirably as our chair. Thank you for all the time you put into the project over the past three and a half years. I attended 26 meetings. Some of those were the steering committee meetings themselves, but a lot of them were community community meetings. I believe that the plan is a balanced plan that provides policy guidance for keeping East Colfax corridor diverse and affordable over the next 20 years. The plan also was a very inclusive process, and it was it's consistent with the plan 2040, as well as Blueprint Denver. And it provides a long term vision for this corridor. I won't go into the data that you already know. You guys know that Denver has an acute need for affordable housing, and now with COVID, a desperate need to support our small business owners, especially those business owners of color, and the immigrant and immigrant communities such as those that own businesses on East Colfax. Instead, I'll tell you about Dante. Dante was a young African-American man that I met at Hermann's Barbershop, a barbershop on East Colfax. Herman talked about how he grew up in the East Colfax neighborhood, but he no longer lives there because he can't afford it. But he still comes back because he feels that it's his community and he comes for his haircuts and his shopping. And so I would want you to encourage you to think about this plan in the eyes of Dante. If we do nothing and we do not adopt this plan, there will be no coordinated policy to address the needs of someone like Dante. 80 use likely will not be built at scale as we need them to, and new affordable housing will not be built on the metro areas. Largest transit line. The 65 anti displacement strategies for businesses and residents that were added in the final draft of the plan will not be implemented either. So once again, I would say that this is a balanced approach. And yes, I'm one of those people that wishes that it could go farther. But I also recognize that public policy is an art of compromise. In the 263 pages, there are multiple strategies to address the needs of someone like Dante to add housing that he wants to live in, as well as strategies to support the businesses that are that he'd like to frequent. So therefore, City Council, I would encourage you to accept this plan as it comes to you from planning board and with your added amendment. And please support the plan to add more anti displacement strategies. And let's bring Dante home. Thank you. Thank you. Next up, we have Tim Sweeney. Good evening, council members. Can you hear me? Mm hmm. Go ahead. I live at 12th and Ivanhoe in the Mayfair neighborhood covered by the East Area Plan. And my economists today are in favor of the amendment, restoring the remain primarily single unit sentence and about not setting a bad precedent. When City Council's Luti committee held its October 20th hearing on the East Area plan, a few council members asked why they needed to have any particular concern about setting any precedent. When they approved the plan and here's the concern. As Liz Weigel just explained, the planning department engaged in an incredibly inclusive community process and arrived at the draft that came to the planning board with the sentence remain primarily single unit. And this. Weigel will also confirm that neighbors defending single unit neighborhoods and others opposing single unit neighborhoods all participated with equal vigor throughout the process. I'm sure all will agree it was a deeply difficult, deeply emotional, but deeply democratic process, resulting in many compromises that included the remain primarily single unit sentence. Or so we thought. Fast forward to Planning Board on October 7th when an elected planning board members accountable to nobody, none of whom participated in it in any of the three years of community meetings, voted to remove the Remain primarily single unit sentence, substituting their wisdom and point of view for the compromises hammered out in our community during the three previous years. It appeared that the rationale is we have master's degrees in planning and public administration. The rest of you don't. So the compromise reached by your community doesn't matter. This, I suggest, is the unacceptable precedent. But City Council should take care to avoid when future neighborhood planning initiatives come to your district. And they will soon. And community compromises are forged. Please make sure our elected planning board members are not invited or permitted to short circuit the painstaking process of building consensus. Please vote for tonight's amendment. Reinserting the remain primarily single unit sentence that our community wrote. Thank you for your time. Thank you, Mr. Sweeney. I want to just let folks know and let our interpreters know that we have coming up after the next speaker, we have one more speaker, but we are going to need to turn the translation off for Karen and allow time for the translators to say that. So we're going to go ahead and just wanted to give you that head's up because our next speaker is Barbara McFarlane. But then after that we have Sarah who needs translation services. And so Barbara, please go ahead. Here I am. Hi, I'm Barbara McFarlane, my husband Pete Marzouk and I Marzouk Fine Foods at Colfax and Fairfax and we also live in the east area and my whole neighborhood. I'm also on the board of the Colfax Mayfair Business Improvement District. Along with other business owners. We have participated in the East Area planning process for the last three years. Thank you, everyone who has put so much thought to building a great city and Colfax is going to be part of our great city. The East Area Plan will support the thousands of service workers along the Colfax corridor. This is important to me because we have so many employees that work at Mars and I would love to see them living there. Most of the employees can't afford to live in the area as it stands, and the same applies to workers at our other favorite restaurants, bars and shops. The plan has strategies to create more opportunities for local workers to live near where they work in a wide variety of home types that are more affordable than single family homes in this area. I want us to think three years forward and let's imagine that we're free. We get to walk anywhere we want, we get to hug anyone we want, we get to go into bars and restaurants and we are unfettered by the problems we're in right now. I think there is room along Colfax for higher density. I would love to see more people on the street. I would love to walk on Colfax and look up and see pipes hanging off of balconies and lights on and some people having dinner on their balconies. We need more restaurants, we need more services and we need more housing. Colfax can be a better main street that works for everybody. Please approve the plan tonight. You still have a lot of work to do. Thank you. Thank you. And we're going to go ahead and move our translation to the Korean language. And we have Sara. Sara. Up next Mayor Oromia in start I it that occurred what she said. I'm with. You. Okay. Hello, Sara. Good evening. My name is Sarah. Yeah. Who they'll tell. They're ready to care. I just know that were ten or. I. When he learned that, Keith, I'm going to sing for me. I came from Thailand refugee camp in 2007. They need a new kitchen. The order is called the whole day. I live in is Colfax neighborhood and in there there is an idea that is called the ruin. Is the black hat yellow. Whether you pull it back or pull up at the end of this evening, I don't like the. Photo book we are. Doing there, but I work well. Brandon and everybody do well. If I'm like, okay, look, a little more than 10 minutes around basketball minute, I do that. You do it. The first time I am part of the East Colfax Council is when I went to a meeting in my household and I met with the part of the Affordable Housing Committee and she asked me if I would like to join and I started being involve at. Okay. Miller Capito, look away. I didn't a bill to get over here we'll do it local but if we do local, new and local then there's some of that. If that group of premium that do well go back to the community level. Learn among us as a refugee who came here and we don't have a lot of money and support if. There are organizations or a group like a plan that will support us. It will be a great idea. I didn't end up or then it was either. You opened with a pendant Mockingjay and it was any second. And I knew though if they knew where he was calling myself, I would deliver that if called given that nuggets. I know I've been there for you. You know, the Aurora, the mine is a completely different resource. And I still live in the apartment on Grace apartment. And then many of my friends could not afford living in Denver. So a lot of them have to move to another state, as well as some of them move back to Aurora to find a different place. I knew the grenade, though. Yeah, it is. Of course it is. The same area with your computer, you know, somewhere within the universe. But for the latest, by keeping a resolve within the already difficult on my balance due to both I feel a lot. And for me I really love East Colfax neighborhood and I have been living here since I arrived in United State and I would love to be able to buy a home one day. That is when it's become affordable for me and my family. Since then, they're the only thing I'm with our analysis because I knew I was being a model of a role model and these have been no end up ancestry positive tests for my runaway here less than human available here aroma and I would like to ask our center console to look out for us and to listen to the plans that arrive from the community and to make the housing affordable of the delay. And then it is closer than ever. And within a month I would never be able to pull my or that I'm mother more than likely where the local market this happened in November. And I will love you to know that the organization that is focused on meditation helped us in so many way. I did though within myself with as a 20 neither as a mother how Yahoo Jupiter made us the new pasta. Our kitchen is the most elegant is temple we lower than either my neck is difficult their problem they get to other with many. I would be much better privileged to have that kind of healing without any damage. If I do that, you will always be with other people. And I would like to think that you've Colfax organization that helped me. When I lost my job from working at the hotel, they were able to help me to get the assistance and now I'm very grateful for them and that those are without intimidating like well, I never used to do that was they don't want to look out the if to pretend why don't we build on my life? But I look at them, they were like a bunch of people that you don't know. And I just want to say thank you so much to the organization that help many people who are in need. Okay. I got Lola. Okay. Okay. Okay. But doesn't matter. But I know. I mean, I think if there was a guy, he was, you know, he was available for that. Okay. What would you. A general idea. Yes, that would be. And I just want to ask you guys to think about it for more affordable housing for the family who are in the East Coast experience. Yeah, that's. Thank you. Thank you very much, Sara. We appreciate it. And our next speaker is Philip Beck. All right, Phillip, we've got you unmuted. Go ahead. Please. Thank you. My name is back, and I live not. Quite in. The east area plant itself, but nearby in the Capitol Hill neighborhood on 12th and humble. I would like to comment tonight in support of the unamended east area plan. I'm in favor of increasing density in the city if we can do so responsibly with an emphasis on affordability, preservation of neighborhood character parks and open space, pedestrian and bike safety, mass transit and so on. The city needs amenities like these to be livable. I attended several of the public meetings and I believe the plan strongly emphasizes livability. I believe the East Area plan will make Denver more sustainable. It makes sense to provide more housing in the city center, where jobs are also concentrated. By putting more housing in the city center, you take advantage of existing infrastructure. Our roads, utility lines, mass transit, the services there are already in place. It's much better than sprawling out around the edges of the city where new development needs expensive new infrastructure and services, and also pushes out into natural habitats. When people live close to work, they can walk or bike or ride transit to work instead of driving. The East Area plan. Also supports a a more affordable city because it would add more housing stock where people want to live without providing more housing. City neighborhoods become unaffordable in a long time. Residents are driven out and neighborhood character is lost. In in regards. To the proposed amendment, Denver's like many American cities where most residential land is zoned single unit. As a result, over the decades, not enough housing has been added to accommodate growth resulting. In an acute. Housing shortage and affordability crisis. You can absolutely. Add density in single family zones while also respecting neighborhood character and scale by adding things like accessory dwelling units and duplex and other housing types that are that are consistent with the existing scale. So I would urge the Council to to pass the. East Area plan. But not the amendment. Thanks. All right. Thank you, Philip. Next up, we have Nina Goldstein. Hi. I'm unmuted. Can everybody hear me? Mm hmm. Go ahead. Okay. My name is Mina Ishida Goldstein and I'm a member of the ERP Steering Committee. I live right off Colfax in the plan area. I'm raising my children here and my parents also live a few doors down. A multiracial. Multicultural family with both immigrants and U.S. born parents and family members. I own and live in a historic single unit bungalow and love my diverse block, which has apartments. Duplexes. Shops and single unit homes of different sizes and styles with a beautiful array of neighbors. I love my neighborhood, and one of the reasons is that I experience a lot of joy living here. For me, it's the cheerful sounds of children playing outside, neighbors laughs and music. Ethiopian feasts at the local place, trading homemade spring rolls, chili paste and barbecue at our front doors. Bingo in the front yard with my 97 year old neighbor volunteering at schools. I support the East Area plan and I'm excited about the emphasis on missing middle housing and smaller units like Granny Flats, which already exist quite a bit in the area but somehow became disallowed. More varieties of home types, sizes and prices are needed and wanted by past, current and future neighbors. I have spoken with hundreds of neighbors and friends in the area and having flexible and affordable housing. Varieties is the top. Concern. Unfortunately, many of my neighbors have already moved, had to move to cheaper places in the suburbs, which has weakened our community and forced them into long commutes. Other parts of the plan important to me are the ideas for better mobility and communities serving businesses. A few years ago, when I was badly injured in a car crash. I was lucky to have walkable. Businesses nearby, so I didn't have to become dependent on others or isolated. And I'm excited for more locally owned businesses and improvements in transportation, streets, bike lanes, sidewalks and crossings. I'm very concerned about income inequality and segregation, and I feel that all of us residents of city government need to work together on solutions. The language about keeping the area primarily single unit should not be added back. It inaccurately describes the east area and could hinder housing. Variety that will benefit more people. Throughout this long. Three year planning process. CBD met with many different neighbors and groups and significant accommodations were made to try and balance various needs, always with a sincere aim of listening and helping people who are vulnerable or who could become vulnerable to displacement. I look forward to City Council and neighbors working together on implementing this plan. Thank you. Thank you. Our next speaker is Adele Fisher. And. All right, sorry about that. Hi. My name is Vidal, and we live near Niagara. And Colfax in the East Colfax neighborhood. As a homeowner and resident of South Park Hill, I wanted to voice my opposition to the East Area plan in its current form. I am asking the City Council vote no on the East Area plan. The existing 3 to 5. Area. Stories of zoning heights along East Colfax are more than sufficient for growth, including low income housing. Even the city has acknowledged that no zoning changes are needed in order to accommodate this growth. The people have already spoken on this on numerous occasions. I was with over. 500 neighbors at the public. Meeting last year where nearly everyone I spoke to. And heard speak were against the unnecessary height increases and the removal of single unit zoning. It has been well-established that. We do not want or need height increases or the removal of single unit zoning. To accommodate growth. Why has this new plan not reflected all of this input from the residents who live here? With all of our recent stresses and struggles of COVID, unemployment, home schooling, etc., many of us have not had the time or energy. To fully review the new revised plan, and many are not even aware that it was getting pushed through. Many neighbors, especially elderly and those who cannot. Afford home computers or high speed Internet or smartphones, have not been able to view the new large slow loading plan. Online and in-person meetings were not. Oh, I'm sorry. What is the rush when. There is plenty of room for growth, for affordable housing and the current zoning without any changes needed? The huge development at ninth and Colorado is not for Johnson and Wales is now up for sale. The VA is another potential development site with these as well as all the other building. Currently. Underway everywhere. Around us. Our area will already accommodate a massive amount of growth without any height increases to our existing zoning. All of this build existing buildings should be required to include a significant amount of low income housing. As a resident and property owner in the South Fork Hill, I am telling my city council to vote no on the East Area plan. This plan needs to go back to the drawing board and continue to get resident feedback. It should be up to the residents who. Live and own property here. If the zoning is to be changed. Right now. The plan does not reflect the hundreds of residents input and the new petition asking the city council to vote no on the plan. Gathered over 600 residents just in the past few days. City Council members listened to your residents and vote no on this east area plan. There is no rush and this plan needs to be continue to be fully updated to reflect our input and suggestions so that the plan works best for everyone in our community. Thank you. Thank you. Our next speaker is Kinsey Hastert. Hi there. Good evening. My name is Kinsey Hastert and I am a Denver resident. But I'm here this evening representing enterprise community partners. And I'm here. Tonight to express Enterprise's overall support for the East Area plan, as well as our opposition to the amendment proposed this evening. Excuse me. Enterprise works nationally and here in Denver to make home and community places of pride, power and belonging for all. We do so through capital investments, policy and programmatic engagement and advocacy, and we strive to do all of this through a lens of racial equity. First, we'd like to truly commend the EIB Steering Committee's residents, who participated in many numerous public hearings and the CPD staff on the incredible work that has been done to date. We also thank the City for its commitment to high quality planning that is intentional, equitable and measurable, as evidenced in the Neighborhood Planning Initiative. However, we do oppose the amendment proposed this evening as acknowledged in the EIB and Blueprint. Denver intentionally increasing residential density and allowing for diverse housing types can contribute to more affordable housing conditions. We agree with Denver's strategy of increasing housing diversity, especially in neighborhoods that currently have little of it. One benefit of extending housing, of expanding housing diversity is helping to increase homeownership opportunities for communities of color. Although certainly not the only contributing factor. Areas that are primarily single family tend to have low homeownership rates for people of color, including in neighborhoods. For instance, according to data compiled by Shift Research Lab, 88% of the residential units in South Park Hill are single family. While the overall homeownership rate is high at 81%, that rate for Latino households is only about 2% and only 3% for black households. In contrast, in the East Colfax neighborhood, where a smaller proportion of homes are single family at 68%, over a third of owner occupied homes are owned by Latinos and 7% by black owners. Another benefit is enabling more people greater access to opportunity. According to Enterprises Opportunity 362, which scores census tracts based on housing stability, educational opportunity, access to quality jobs and transportation. EOP neighborhoods that are primarily single family have high access to opportunity in all of these categories. Increasing housing diversity in these areas would diversify who has meaningful access to such opportunity in the future. For these reasons and in support of our partners who have so thoughtfully elevated the voices of residents that too often go unheard. We do not believe that the EPA should state that single unit areas should remain primarily single unit. Without the proposed amendment, Enterprise supports the East Area Plan specifically for its vision for increasing housing affordability and preventing involuntary displacement. Thank you. Thank you. Our next speaker is Dirk McDermott. Thank you. Thank you for the opportunity to present my views on the East Area plan. My name is Dirk McDermott. I was born in Denver and I've lived with my family in Park Hill for 30 years. I'm a resident of the area and like many. Of the speakers that were. Ahead of me, I'm not in favor of the plan that is before you today. I have a number of reasons why I'm not in favor of this plan. In the Denver East, Neighborhoods First has done a good job of presenting the challenges to this plan, and I refer you to their literature. But here are my top reasons. Number one, first and foremost, the planning commission, an appointed, not an elected body, approves the plan but is chose to remove protections for single family homes in the East Area plan that community engagement. I'm not in favor of removing protections for single family homes. We have a strong, healthy, family oriented neighborhood that has been built on the foundations of the zoning. And we do not want this to change. I would like to acknowledge and support Councilwoman Sires Amendment. The key EOP decision process has been conducted during the pandemic and has not included the person to person neighborhood interactions that we should expect of citizens. I believe that the community would shape a much better result by. Spending more time. Post-Pandemic on this important effort that will impact our neighborhoods over the next two decades. They're key items the public has asked for that are not included in the plan. Just an example, the elimination of a large Safeway and King Soopers supermarkets and replacement with one very small market. And then finally, the BRT proposal, the centerpoint of the transportation infrastructure in this plan has several deficiencies that should be resolved before approving a plan with this as a centerpiece. Specifically, it's not a fully funded project, and with RTT and Price, it's not at all clear how this project will be built and managed. It also appears the impact of traffic diversion onto adjacent streets has not been adequately addressed. Thank you for the opportunity to address the Council. Thank you. Our next speaker is Thomas Robbins. Hello? Can you hear me? Mm hmm. Go ahead. Hi. My name is Tom Robbins, and I live at the corner of 12th and Crime Area. My wife and I are both teachers in Denver, and we support the East Area plan. Several years ago, we sought to live near our schools and given the price of homes in these neighborhoods, we were extremely lucky to find a multi-family unit dating from the 1940s in the Mayfair neighborhood. The East Area plan would increase housing density in the area, which undoubtedly would increase its affordability towards neighbors such as ourselves. Furthermore, a powerful tool we have to combat climate. Change is through increasing density in urban. Areas. The benefits to this are manifold. Namely, increased public transit use. Bicycling and. Walking. And a lesser dependance on the automobile as the primary mode of conveyance through a dense area. As an avid bike commuter, I know that. It is possible and preferable to commute through Denver in any season on two wheels. Although I wish street plowing were a higher priority. This single action, increasing density and mixed use. Zoning has far reaching effects and addresses numerous challenges to a growing city. I focused on its direct impact on climate change. Its positive impact on affordability towards a diverse population does not go unnoticed. More people should have the opportunity to live in these neighborhoods. For these reasons, the East Area Plan has my family's full support, and I encourage you to approve it. Thank you for your time. Thank you. Our next speaker is Eric Stark. I. Can you hear me? Mm hmm. Go ahead. Hi. Thanks for having me. I'm Eric Stark. I'm a Denver resident, 20/23 and Birch. I wanted to talk about just my experience with the ERP. I'm speaking not in favor of the ERP. I attended the Zoom meeting by the CPD on October 7th, and what I found most striking was that most of the people who were for it were either parts of business entities, coalitions, organizations, or they were part of the steering committee. The vast majority were not homeowners, renters or small business owners. In fact, most of them were on the con side, including myself. I think that's important for city council to recognize that if this plan is passed, you really start to ask the question Who does it benefit the most? I also want to talk about I get a sense when you're talking about planning in Denver, the whole process is flawed because you can't provide guarantees or protections in the plans. Every time we asked about guarantees or mandates, we were told It's a plan. You can't do that. That's City Council's responsibility. Meanwhile, they pass this plan to City Council for consideration, and city council can then pass a plan that still has no teeth or guaranteed protections or or guarantees of much of anything. This is something exploitable by developers, and I honestly feel like if we're going to have a rock solid East Area plan, you have to have mandates. When we asked about mandates for affordability, we're always told state law, state law, Telluride resolution, we can't provide that. It's against state law, but you can certainly recommend them in the plan and say we need to consider whether affordability mandates are of are appropriate, especially for the East Colfax neighborhood. Instead, the city council gets a plan that doesn't even talk about mandates, so why even consider them? This is just a flaw in the plan itself. It's kind of the tail chasing the tail. It doesn't seem like anyone's in charge or there's any real leadership or accountability. The final thing I want to talk about is there's a lot of propaganda about affordability, including from addus and up zoning to increase density. We have seen in Denver for the last 20 plus years how this doesn't work. And 80, for instance, are being used largely for short term rentals, R&B and B type things without a mandate, saying that those must be used for long term rentals to get you approval. You will not get affordability from any use. Same thing with up zoning. We have seen whole areas of northwest Denver up, zoned into boxes on top of boxes, next to boxes in the 4 to $700000 range. Still no affordability. So until there are affordability mandates, the East Area plan is flawed. And I ask that our council vote no. Thank you. Thank you. Our next speaker is John Desmond. Madam Chair, members of Council, thank you for the opportunity to speak. My name is John Desmond. I live in the South Park Hill neighborhood about a block off of Colfax. I'm speaking in favor of the plan tonight, but in opposition to the proposed amendment. I first want to commend city staff and the consultant team for the tremendous dedication they have shown, along with the incredible amount of outreach they have done to the neighborhood. And I believe that the plan is, as is currently drafted, strikes a great balance between preservation and growth and between limiting displacement and welcoming diversity. I'm going to take a personal approach about this tonight. I. I have been involved in civic activities in Denver for 40 years, and I've lived in this neighborhood in Park Hill for 17 years in a single family house, and I would like to live out the rest of my life here. But I may not be able to always be able to take care of my current house. I may not need all of the current space I have. And so I would love for there to be a variety of diverse housing options for me and people like me. I also may not be able to or may not want to drive my car as much in the future. And so I'd like there to be viable transit options and more services and stores that I can walk to. And I would love for my adult daughter and people of her generation to be able to move back to Denver and live close to me. All of these wishes require density and diversity and affordable housing options to be created, options not really available in the current neighborhood. The plan is very forward thinking on preserving these options. But my fear is that the amendment, as written in its very vague and subjective form, will be used by some people to obstruct, change the change in diversity necessary and required for this neighborhood to be accessible in the future. To me, people like me and young people like my daughter, and to other people who want more than a traditional, expensive, single unit dwelling. In particular, I'm concerned with what does primarily mean and the primarily single family amendment. Does that mean 51%? Does that mean 99%? How are we going to resolve that if that stays in? I don't think you can resolve it. And I think the best way to deal with it is to remove that language. So in the name of diversity and affordability, I urge you to approve the plan and oppose the amendment. Thank you. Thank you. Our next speaker is Amy Wright. Hi, I'm Amy Wright, and I've been a Denver resident for 42 years and a resident of South Park Hill for 38 years. I live at 19th and Glencoe Street. While the goal of the UAP is noble, it does nothing to guarantee affordable housing. Single family zoning should remain single. Family Zoning. My neighborhood, South Park. Hill was designed incredibly. Well 100 years ago and is already a very diverse neighborhood. Within four blocks of my home are duplexes, four plexus apartments, a retirement home, schools, places of worship, daycare centers, bus lines, businesses and single family homes of many sizes. I see similar diversity. In most of the other. Neighborhoods in this plan. Adopting this plan. Will only increase housing. Density, decrease greenspace, and deteriorate the neighborhood character without guaranteeing more affordable housing. I suggest that you work with the state legislatures to pass legislation that requires developers to put in a certain percent of affordable housing units in each development. Before you move forward with proposals like the East Area Plan, other moving parts that could significantly impact our neighborhood are the group Living Amendment and the addition of Addus. Furthermore, growth can be accommodated through the current zoning areas include Johnson and Wells. Campus fell out of the East Ninth Colorado Boulevard area and now the VA hospital that the city has already said could accommodate the growth. I ask that you limit changes and development to Colfax Avenue and restrict heights to five stories. Keep the single family zoning in place to preserve the character of the neighborhood that so many of us long term residents love. I ask that you vote no on the Denver East Area plan. If you do. Vote for the plan. Please include the proposed amendment that Sawyer proposed. Thank you. Thank you. Our next speaker is Hillary Patel. My own. Uh huh. Go ahead, Hilary. Okay. Thank you. My name's Hilary, and I'm the executive director of the Colfax MI Fair. This trip. Which includes about 200 small businesses and property owners along East Colfax Avenue. And within the Mayfair Town Center area. My board and many business owners have participated in this process for the last three years. Doing fieldwork. Focus groups, surveys and community. Meetings. What we've learned is that the status quo on Colfax today is not sustainable economically, socially or environmentally. The Syria plan addresses many very alarming trends in our area, including extreme economic disparity, lack of affordable housing, local businesses and low wage workers at the breaking point, and older buildings giving way to national. Chain stores and drive thrus. Many of these existing. Conditions are being accelerated by COVID 19. We desperately need to create more opportunity and more affordability for everyone. We need smaller homes and smaller storefronts. We need more jobs, homes and services. Near public transit. This will reduce traffic, improve air quality, support local business and provide homes for our. Workers and our neighbors. We need to change the rules. Have a main street that works better for everyone. The East Syria. Plan is just the first step. We need to. Invest now in long. Overdue public improvements, incentives, zoning, adaptive reuse reforms and inclusive housing policies. We asked you to approve. The plan tonight so we can get back to work. It's. Thank you. Our next speaker is Todd Fisher. Andrea. Hello. My name is Todd, and I've lived in history for over 25 years. And when City Council vote no on the estate plan in its current form. Our elected members of City Council who represent these districts should listen to the will of their constituents and vote the plan down. The non transparency of covert electronic meetings has changed the conversation to individuals who have more to gain monetarily, such as developers and stakeholders putting their $0.02 in through technology. This is a dirty tactic by the city to push through legislation during the worst pandemic. In our times when most folks are distracted by unemployment, home schooling, mental health issues to name a few. As witnessed before the shutdown, hundreds would come out in person to voice their dissatisfaction with this proposed destruction of our neighborhood. There's no reason the East Area Plan needs this up. Zoning. The current zoning has not yet been fulfilled. And there are other areas such as ninth in Colorado, South Colorado and I-25 elegies and new developments in Aurora that have not yet been finalized. I would like to put the planners to the test to show us some hard numbers in regard to how many new units are going up in Denver and surrounding areas. Since we are told there is a housing shortage with the resources the city has. This could help put things in perspective. I bought my property with the current zoning and find it unfair to change it from single unit zoning. As it stands now, AIDS are able to be built with a city permit if you can afford hundreds of thousands of dollars to do it. If young people want to share a house, as I did for ten years with five roommates in my twenties, there is no task force that's going to come knocking on their door to evict them. The argument for so-called low income housing is only a hot button issue used to fool people into believing that somehow this will benefit the homeless. But the reality is what is being proposed should really be labeled moderate income housing at best. We are already an inclusive neighborhood with relatively affordable housing. Many of us are working class and safe to get into a home we thought we could grow old in. The proposed building alone will take years and cause many more issues. More density means more pollution. Noise, pollution, trash, dog, excrement and air pollution. Denver is already one of the worst in the country for air quality, congested parking, more accidents, more crime, more mental health issues. The list goes on. We love our homes and neighborhood the way it is. That's why we chose to live here. Others are welcome and can purchase a home, as we all did. I implore city council to side with the residents of the area. Know Jesus. If you start from. On this. We have not changed our tune in the last year since most of us found out what was happening beneath our noses. We continue to stand against the current AP over and over again. It's sad to think that the people who make up this community have less rights than the corporate identities who ultimately were the ones who created this plan for their own profit. Please vote no on EPA. We cannot allow developers to have a free for all on building. Thank you. We next up have Maggie Lee. I. Very, very. Good. And Maggie, you might have to unmute yourself. Maggie. That was great. That was great. You hear me and see me? Mm hmm. Go ahead, Maggie. Thank you. Good evening. I'm Maggie Lee and I live and work in the city and county of Denver. I am here today in my capacity as director of programs with Mile High connects. We are a broad partnership of organizations from the private, public and nonprofit sectors driven by our vision of a racially equitable, resilient Denver region, where community driven solutions are at the center of transformative change. Mile High Connects acknowledges the immense amount of work that has gone into gathering and balancing the diverse stakeholder input to inform the East Area plan. This effort to broaden community perspectives is in line with Blueprint Denver and the 2040 Comprehensive Plan calls for advancing equity. Additionally, as an entity rooted in affordable housing and transit oriented development, Mile High Connects was pleased to see the inclusion of transit oriented development in a diverse corridor with rich cultural history. However, if we are serious about equity and mitigating displacement pressures in communities of color's color excuse me, we recommend that single family units remain primarily SFR to be struck from the plan prior to the official adoption. The single family unit policy that has been reintroduced to the plan is in conflict with existing citywide plans and hamstrings the East Area's neighborhoods ability to effectively address a historically exclusionary and environmentally unsustainable form of housing by limiting properties to single family units. Neighborhoods may be limited in their anti displacement efforts, such as creating affordable family units, affordable multifamily opportunities like townhomes or accessory dwelling units. We have the opportunity now to protect our most vulnerable neighborhoods and recommend the adoption of an East Area plan that provides structure for economic recovery among residents, businesses and property owners to make our communities truly equitable and resilient. Essentially for the East Area plan to survive. We need transit oriented development. We need density. And we need to be guided by community. More specifically, we need language in the EOP that does not limit a neighborhood's ability to create affordable multifamily housing opportunities to meet the needs of our future. Thank you for your time today. Thank you, Maggie. Next up, we have John Sawyer. Hello. Good evening. I'm John Sawyer. I'm a citizen of South Park Hill. I'm no relation to Councilwoman Sawyer, and I'm not a member of any cause related, organized group or committee. Well, there's a lot to like about the East Area plan, and I respect the work that's gone into it. Three issues compel me to ask council members to vote no tonight. First timing. We're in the midst of a global pandemic. Cities and states are shutting down again. So why would the city make this matter a priority when we as citizens are preoccupied with survival? I find it unconscionable this vote is even happening. Second Economics. While Denver's economy may appear strong right now. Colorado has always been boom bust. By all indications, we are in a downturn already. Downtown. Residential vacancies are rising, rent prices are falling for the first time in over a decade. Citizens are moving rural because technology enables them to work from anywhere. RTD is in crisis. Businesses are closing or barely holding on. So why would council push forward a 20 year plan amidst such economic uncertainty? This, too, I find unconscionable. Last, the whole single family zoning thing, East Area Plan is one of four calculated attacks to undo single family zoning in Denver. There are neighborhood plans like this one, the residential infill project group living and allowing to use everywhere. Clearly, this administration is hellbent on killing single family zoning. And for what? No city has proven that eliminating single family zoning results in anything better, more right or more fair. What is proven is that single family zoning has created stability in Denver for over 100 years. Any notion of undoing what's working, such as omitting the language Councilwoman Sawyers amendment proposes be replaced, strikes me as a covetous, covetous attack by the city on citizens life, liberty and property. Encouraging density where it is not warranted is just a text wolf in sheep's clothing, and that too is unconscionable given market forces and won't deliver the affordable housing outcomes that wishful thinkers would like to believe. So what's a better way? Leave single families only alone. You can only destroy a great city once. So don't. As the language proposed in the amendment back in and focus on one thing making Colfax a commercial residential corridor that is the envy of the world. Because we can. We can. Thank you. Thank you. Our last speaker this evening is Jessica Vargas. Thank you. Good evening. My name is Joseph Vargas, and I'm here today representing the Denver Streets Partnership. We're a coalition of community organizations advocating for people friendly streets in Denver because we each have a vested invested stake in ensuring our city is healthy, safe and accessible to everyone, regardless of how they get around. As with past area plans, the Demonstrates Partnership endorses the mobility and transportation recommendations in the EOP that support the creation of more people friendly streets. We're excited to see that the plan contains measurable goals for increasing walking, biking and transit usage. The plan outlines a bold vision for repurposing public street space and making infrastructure improvements that would make walking, biking, rolling and riding the bus safe, convenient and accessible transportation options for everyone. Excuse me. People friendly streets do not only result from rethinking street design, but also from supportive land use, development patterns and public transit service. A healthy mix of densities and land use types allows people to live closer to their daily destinations by making these options, these transportation options, more realistic for getting from place to place, rather than forcing people to live so far away that driving becomes the only practical option for getting where they need to go. Integrating more housing transport, more housing options near public transit further ensures people who need it the most have access. To it, which can. Significantly reduce transportation costs for CoSport and households that make up one third. Of households in the east area, as well as most of the thousands of service. Workers along the Colfax corridor. We're disappointed that the plan highlights places in the east area that are a five minute walking distance from high frequency trains. But then does little to recommend that higher densities be prioritized even within those relatively small sections of the area's neighborhoods. Therefore, we. Oppose the amendment to the plan that will limit existing single unit areas to remaining primarily single unit in the future. Limiting densities near transit, employment opportunities and neighborhoods serving businesses. Now means limiting. The number of people who can access and use these services and amenities on a regular basis in the future. At a time when expanding affordable housing and easy access to public transit are critical to addressing historic social and racial inequities within these neighborhoods, restricting land use to a single unit could result in. Smaller, more affordable homes being replaced with larger, more expensive homes. Driving up housing costs even further, imposing more restrictive measures with work against the vision of the East Area as a welcoming, walkable, historic and dynamic place where a diversity of people live and work. We appreciate the extensive amount of community engagement, data analysis and thoughtful discussion that informed the development of this plan. The DSP urges City Council to adopt the plan without the proposed amendment. Thank you for your time. Thank you. That concludes our speakers. Questions from members of Council on the Amendment and or bill. We first up have Councilman Herndon. Thank you, Mr. President. Hey, Liz. Great job with a presentation. I'll let you pause for a second. I'll put Kurt to work, and I'll ask her a couple of questions. So, Kurt, I challenge the notion that the East Colfax community was not engaged until the collective was founded. So can you please just talk a little bit about East Colfax engagement from the very beginning, please? Sure. Absolutely. Thank you for that question. Councilman Herndon, Curt Upton to be playing in the moment. So I think as Liz summarized in her opening presentation, we had over 20 meetings in the East Colfax neighborhood going back as far as 2017 when we when we started the process. So we've been engaging residents in the East Colfax neighborhood for three years and as a result of some of that engagement, there were organized groups formed. And so some of the formal organized groups we engaged later in the process. But the actual residents in East Colfax, we've actually done more outreach to that neighborhood than the rest of the neighborhoods. Great. Thank you. I appreciate that. And we've heard a couple of things about zoning. Does the East Area plan change any zoning throughout the east area in its current form? No. I mean plans themselves again, as as Liz mentioned in her opening presentation are not regulatory. So the plan itself does not change any zoning. It makes a number of recommendations on how to use zoning in the future to achieve many benefits that we've heard through the process with the time being using zoning to achieve our affordable housing goals. Thank you. I appreciate that. Can you talk a little bit as well about the Bus Rapid Transit? It wasn't mentioned a lot in these comments, but I'm sure my colleagues have gotten a lot of emails that mention the BRT. So I wanted to afford you the opportunity to talk a little about that, please. Sure. And we do have staff, I think, on the call. I think Brian from Dottie can answer any more detailed questions. But the BRT is moving forward to the next phase of the development process. So it does have funding from the general obligation bond to go into the environmental clearances and do the detailed design work that's required to get federal funding and to construct the project. Thank you. What was it prior to the East Area plan? And I'm being a little silly with this, but what plan did the city council just pass? I think it was last month. The essential plan. Right now during pandemic. Correct. Thank you. And I have one more for my president. And I'd like to ask Irene Aguilar if she could just speak briefly as well. So if if this sentence about single use was a page of a 200 plus page, it'd be less than 1% of it because it's a sentence, it's an even smaller percent. And I actually think that's how much time we should dedicate to this. But since it has gotten a lot more strength and I actually think that it deserves I want to ask you this question. The sentence that was deleted there is amendment to put forward is that the only place in the plan where we are mentioning single family units. No. There's actually, you know, several places. I think the most prominent place that single unit is represented is in the places, maps and the plan, which is essentially the land use plan, which maps out, you know, the different categories of land use intensities and including the single unit land use category or place as what we call that . And in that description of the single unit areas as part of that Places map, it indicates that the single unit areas remain predominantly single unit. So it's the sentence under discussion is a clarification and just further reinforcement of recommendations elsewhere in the plan. Okay. So it clarifies what is stated in other places in the plan, the ones that. Correct. And by saying it's primarily a single unit, does that prevent anyone from using, utilizing to use? No. We stated very clearly that every homeowner should be given the opportunity to build an ADU, and we consider that the zoning code considers a single unit property with an attitude to to still be a single unit. Great. Thank you for that. I appreciate it. Hey, Irene, good to see you. I just wanted to give you the opportunity just to talk about with your work that you do in your partnership along with the East Area Plan. Not particularly a question, but I just wanted to give you a little opportunity to speak as well. Thank you, Councilman Herndon. We actually have had a wonderful time working with CPD in East Area. Liz Talley That for me we had at least six different dates of meetings with probably at least 16 hours of conversation. And it was wonderful to hear. On the ground. From the community what their needs were. And it actually led to a number of changes in our planning for this year, including putting navigators. Out there in community. And working with business services to try and help find business displacement in that community specifically. And what has the most excited is that this community really brought forth a lot. Of great anti. Displacement ideas. And and I've. Offered to sit down and work with. Them and prioritize them and figure out how we. Get them through to the finish line. As you know. This is an aspirational document and we'd like to turn some of them into action and look forward to doing that in the future. Thank you for asking. Wonderful. Thank you. Those are all my questions on the president. All right. Thank you, Councilman Herndon. Next up, we have Councilman Sawyer. Thank you, Madam President. So, Kirton. Liz, I want to turn to page 39 of the East Area Plan because I think page 39 sort of sums up best for everyone kind of page 39 could be the East Area plan. You could just sort of take that page policy. L six What is policy? Six The overarching policy? Wholesale six recommends integrating additional housing options and ADAS and all East Area neighborhoods inappropriate locations. So it's that recommendation to allow more housing types in our neighborhoods. Okay. And so the wording that was removed that we've moved to put back in the plan, that's that's a part of a six. Right. Correct. It's a it's a sub strategy under several strategies. And in fixing it again, as Kurt mentioned, it was intended to provide that clarity around the ways that we should be integrating housing options . Okay. So like we lived this plan for the last three years or so. Just to clarify for the people who didn't l6 as a policy says, and I'm quoting here, ensure east area neighborhoods are inclusive places by thoughtfully integrating compatibly, does that come compatibly designed missing middle housing and accessory dwelling units to use in appropriate locations? Right. And then l6 a1, the the language we want to put back in says primarily single unit areas should remain primarily single unit. Right. And then Al 61 says, well, missing middle housing units, 2 to 4 units should be integrated into appropriate locations. A2 use should be allowed on all lot. So this is all on page 39. If we vote to move this language back into the plan. So is that is that right? Am I misstating. That's correct. Okay, great. So can you explain two things? Question one. How does all that then work together? So this recommendation again is about integrating housing options into our neighborhoods, and it provides additional guidance about how to do that, right? So considerations for our future regulatory process and the plans are very specific about saying that this should be done through a citywide regulatory process, which we expect to be a residential commercial project. That will be something that will be coming forward next year. And so this guidance basically will be used in that process. As we write zoning regulations, we talk further with the community and we implement the plan guidance. So the the. Single the language about single unit, again, was intended to make clear what we see elsewhere in the plan, that there's still opportunities for single units and they should continue, but that this is really about thoughtfully integrating so not eliminating single unit, but. Integrating those new options. Where they're appropriate. And it gives that additional guidance around to use to make clear. That those are appropriate on all of us. Okay. So would it be fair to say thank you for that explanation? So would it be fair to say then that what this wording of this amendment does is ensure balance in this plan? Correct? That's correct. And would it be fair to say that that is a reflection of three years worth of some pretty tough community conversation ? That's correct. I'd say this recommendation evolved quite a bit over time based on. The. Community input that we've heard over the last year, plus on the specifics. Of the recommendations. Okay. And one of the requirements for us to find that this is that this plan can be adopted at all, is that this is consistent with the previous adopted plans. Right. It's got to be consistent with 2040 and Blueprint 2019. We talked a lot about this at Ludy, but just to refresh and for people who weren't present at Ludy, can can you or Curt just sort of walk through then how it is that this is or is not. Consistent with those adopted plans, please. Sure. I'll walk through. So we do we do feel that it's consistent with or without this line with blueprint. Our blueprint Denver does have a very similar recommendation about integrating missing metal housing in low and low, medium places. So both types and then it give some suggestions for how that may happen and appropriate places that could be considered during that process. So this recommendation gives additional guidance in the East Area plan, but we feel that it is still consistent with that intent to integrate, right, not to eliminate single unit, but to integrate those additional housing options. So this line that we originally had in the plan was again intended to sort of re-emphasize language elsewhere in the plan and to make clear that it's this integration. But we do feel in either way, the. Recommendation is. Consistent with that blueprint. Denver guidance. Okay. Thank you. And so, for example, I was looking through the foreign northeast area plan. Did either of you work on that plan by any chance? Or maybe Laura could speak to that plan or if Sara's here and she could speak to it? I'm not. I'm not sure if there's anyone here who worked on the plan. From CPD. We didn't directly. Work on it, but we. Could try to answer a question or see if there's anyone else online. Okay. I'm just curious because I found a few examples of some language in the far northeast area plan, which was adopted a year a little over a year ago of some language that's pretty similar. So I just wanted to kind of see if there was some legislative history on that. Like, you know, page 34, promote the continued use of single unit zoning on properties with existing single unit homes and identified by this plan as residential low single units. Page 152 Maintain the character of Mont Bellows. Existing residential areas was the high priority of the community. 3.1.3 Maintain the character of existing residential neighborhoods below. So I was just curious if someone could talk about the, the history of that plan and what that look like and how maybe that. Was adopted and whether some of those conversations happened are similar to these conversations. I can I can touch on that. Councilman Sawyer. So the far northeast plan uses the same place descriptions and place types that we use in the East Area plan because they're establishing blueprint. Denver And so in the far northeast plan does have a map of single unit areas. And the places map just, just like the east area plan has a map of single unit areas. And the same description applies. So the guidance in Blueprint Denver is, is to integrate additional housing units into single unit areas. That's part of the description of what a single unit place is. It's not solely single unit properties and how it's defined. And so there's a consistent approach with how we're designating land uses in the in the far northeast and in the east area. Okay. Great. Thank you for clarifying that. I really appreciate it. I might have some other questions, but I know my council members have a bunch of other questions, so I will see my time. Thank you very much and congratulations. I really appreciate all of your hard work on this plan. Thank you. Thank you, Councilman Sawyer. Councilwoman Black. Thank you, Madam President. Liz and Kurt, I have a question about missing middle housing. On page 40, there are photographs of some examples of existing missing metal housing, triplex, duplex, a row house. And so in aspirational terms, it sounds great. But in Denver, we haven't seen any. Sort of attainable that's taken from this page. Middle housing be built at all. New attainable, middle missing middle housing. So I'm just curious on any strategies you have for creating new missing middle housing that is attainable. Thank you for that question, Councilwoman Black. I think you're you're absolutely right on that. We've struggled to have that happen in historically in Denver or recently in Denver. And something that's key to this recommendation about missing middle is that integration of and implementation of affordable housing strategies. We stated that should be part of that process. Going forward, whether that's. In financial or technical assistance to help existing homeowners take advantage of these allowances. Looking for opportunities for homeownership. But really, what are those programs we can pair with missing middle recommendations in addition to pairing design requirements really are that residential infill project is intended to look at all of these things together so that we're tackling the multiple issues that come forward with achieving missing middle. So we keep hearing about the residential infill project and that we keep hearing people say it's it's not going to eliminate single family zoning. Now we're adding a sentence back into this about single family zoning. So I don't understand how those all work together. Are we are we aiming to get rid of single family zoning? Or are we aiming to preserve it and how are we going to get. Missing middle attainable housing. In either situation. Our intent is not to eliminate single unit turning. Our intent is what we say integrate. But you could think of only, you know, potentially certain lots or certain locations may qualify to add additional units. So that could be based on what characteristics or their location. You know, that's really a regulatory process to come up with those standards about when it may be appropriate. So there would still be single unit zoning in place, but there could be more allowances in those neighborhoods based on that process. So that's not a complete elimination. That's adding those housing options where they make sense. Okay. And then is the goal to ultimately allow 80 use on every single unit law in Denver? Blueprint. Denver is very clear about accessory doing and being appropriate. We also have recommendations about removing barriers and making sure that, again, they're feasible for existing homeowners to take advantage of and that they're designed compatibly. So, yes, that we do have that plan guidance, not zoning in place today to allow accessory dwelling units throughout all of Denver. And that's reinforcing that area plan. Okay. Thank you. All right, Councilwoman Torres, you're up. Thank you, Madam President. I was. Since your sincerity of what I. What I want to better understand is how it is interpreted when we talk about primarily and predominantly when we see that in the area plan. What does that mean to you all in CPD when you're reading an area plan that uses those terms? Since we're talking about single unit, single unit to unit 80, you kind of permitted areas if loses of there any more incurred, isn't there anymore? How does a new CVD employee who is, you know, has no history with how the crafting of this language was done? Read this and and come away feeling like integration was the goal as opposed to protection. And single unit. Housing. Thank you, Councilman Torrance. Great question. Plans are policy guidance. So ultimately any regulatory change that comes forward will come before a CPD go, before a planning board and city council and have to show that it's consistent with our plan guidance. Right. And there's, you know, not just this line, but the plan overall and any other city adopted plans would provide that plan guidance. And purposefully, a plan is not that exact tricky regulation of what know 50%, 51%, that type of language is not included in that plan because it does give that ability for the future council to interpret whether they feel that that sentence. Has. Been met, but ultimately is intended to reinforce that it was saying appropriate locations. You're right that we weren't eliminating single unit. The single unit opportunities will still be there in neighborhoods along with these other missing middle options. There was really concern throughout this process that we were trying to kind of just erase complete neighborhoods and we went through iterations with maps and different options for this. And I know, as you're saying, we don't have that history necessarily in the future, but it's really it's intended as guidance. There's plenty of language in the plan about integrating and providing those additional housing options. So I think that's very clear that that we should be having not just single unit in these areas, but it gives that guidance that we should be looking at that we've still maintained the single unit opportunities. And. And that clarity, I think, is what's it like? I mean, I'm on the radar right now for folks. And and whether or not even that single line, even if we do refer to predominantly single unit and two unit throughout in other places in this neighborhood plan that this one in particular feels. Like particular guidance as opposed to balance to what might be elsewhere from folks that I've listened to both in this hearing but also in the planning board hearing, I haven't necessarily talked about wishing that the plan eliminated single unit zoning. That was not the commentary that I came away with. So it was much more about just making sure it was very clear that it wasn't protecting it as opposed to calling it out for integration. The. See. Liz, I don't have another question for you. I do have one, though, for Irene, if she's still in our queue. Mm hmm. Hey, go ahead, Councilwoman. Hey. Yeah. Hi, Irene. How are you? I'm good. So you talked a little bit about some of the engagement that you were involved in related to this plan. A lot of what we've heard about. Is some of the need for things to be more deliberate. We've heard mandate in some of the comments and things, things that an area plan might not be able to provide, but that maybe departments or offices like Nest do or could. In in your interaction with this plan process, have you identified things that either Denver economic development, an opportunity or nest in particular can move forward with or can identify as investment or integration opportunities for city departments? Definitely. As I mentioned, there are two things we're already moving forward with. One is that we have community navigator contacts there with two different organizations in East Colfax. And then secondly, we're working on a contract with multiple organizations to do business displacement prevention in East Colfax and hopefully design a model that can be extrapolated to other neighborhoods. As time goes forward. I think more importantly, though, there are a number of ideas that came. Up in. The plan that were put forward by advocacy groups that are not necessarily a city controlled, some are state controlled, some perhaps are federal control. And so I am looking forward to a promised conversation with the East Colfax Community Collective to sit down and prioritize what two or three they'd like to see us really try to implement so that those can be built. Into. Our budget requests and how we plan to spend our money in the future. And I imagine in any of those would support any of the rest neighborhoods if their state or federal covers. Yes. And in fact, one of the ideas in particular of the East Colfax community had was around trying to figure out how we do a designation as an international district. And we've done some exploration with the state and. And with arts and venues about. Different practices that might be available. And actually, PUMA, one of the consultants, has agreed to help with that voluntarily, because I think it would be great for the neighborhood. And so what's nice about this is that the neighborhood was engaged and making their request. And we hope to continue to see. This as we go to other neighborhood plans. I. Right. Thank you. You it as. All right. Thank you, Councilman Torres. Councilman Flynn. Thank you, Madam President. I actually thought Councilman Cashman was in line before me, but let me get to my questions. Thank you. Curt or Liz, maybe that explain. Or answer this. Has there ever been an analysis of how much residential square footage potential exists in the plan area under the current zoning? We've heard a lot of talk, in fact, in the last couple of years about the density that is currently allowed that it's not yet built. And I'm just wondering if we've ever analyzed how much of that there is. Thank you for that question, Councilman Flynn. So, yes, we have done an analysis of the zoning capacity of the east area in terms of the ability to absorb the projected growth in employment and residential units. And we found that that zoning, if it was maximized, built out completely, that it would be able to handle the projected growth by the Dr. COG models. We've also found, though, that there's a number of limiting factors sort of built into the zoning to not be able to completely max out the zoning. So there is a for example, there's a number of lots along Colfax that are really too shallow to be maximal, have a maximum zone or build out . There's other regulatory barriers in place and there's a number of properties that we are recommending not be built out to their capacity because that would require demolition. And there's a number of properties that people would like to preserve historically. And so all of those factors came into account when we were putting together our recommendations for the growth strategy. Okay. Any do you have any numbers you could put on that? Liz? You might. Yeah. Liz If you have those numbers in front of you, I don't have them. But in terms of the projected growth in the area, a. Residential, it's 4200 4800. Unit units, correct? Correct. Yeah. Units are in the in the four neighborhoods. And has that been compared to the existing unbuilt entitlements that exist in those four neighborhoods? Yes. And I think that that's what curves speaking to that we have capacity it's whether that growth. Whether it can. Help us meet our community goals and that's why we have the recommendation about. Rate. Increases and how that should come with. Community benefits. Okay. And I would have to say, it's very rare that that existing entitlements could be completely maxed out in any in any neighborhood to begin with. I remember the old be seven zones downtown. We would have had skyscrapers on every one. And clearly we don't, nor would we want to. Kurt or Lee, as the planning board voted 6 to 3 on this. Are you able to explain the competing reasons that members had for why this was a split vote? It's it's not often that we get a recommendation from the planning board that is that is that a divided. Yeah. So. Oh, go ahead, Liz. I was just going to speak to throw an amendment itself, to add that to remove the single unit line. That was a vote of 7 to 2 with one feeling that it didn't go far enough. The plan still had other things that talked about single unit and one. Just not. Supporting that change in the plan. And then the overall vote was a vote of 6 to 3 in support of the plan. So again, that that planning board member who felt the plan didn't go far enough in terms of increasing density and allowing more, you know, housing in general did not support the plan. The seven member who did not support the amendment to strike that line did not support the plan. And then a third. Member. Felt that there could be more community process as an extension of the process itself. So it sounds like for different reasons, perhaps 7 to 2 on striking that sentence that that the community had put in there and then 6 to 3 on the plan with one of the three not thinking it should have added, I guess added more density or allowed more density or cleared the way for that. Okay, Liz, in your answers to our council, Councilmember Sawyer and Black, you're talking about the plan's intent to introduce missing middle units into single family areas, inappropriate locations, I think was the term that you used. Does the sentence that was originally included in the plan that went to the planning board, which the board took out, saying single family areas basically should remain primarily single family. Would that would that sentence prevent any future rezonings to introduce missing middle units in appropriate locations which which blueprint speaks to. It would not prevent it, though, would be guidance that should be considered during a regulatory process. So basically the sentence single family area should remain primarily single family does not exclude multi-unit four plex duplex inappropriate locations as blueprint advisors. So what does what does not, including that sentence, mean for future rezonings or plan guidance? Could that could that be used to say an entire neighborhood can be reasoned for multi-unit? Such as what? We have an overlay, for example, where it saw mostly twin unit zoning. So we would say that it does not give fighters for elimination either, because as Kurt mentioned, we do have a place map that describes similar to the blueprint of our descriptions that these areas are predominantly. Go or communities. Depending on what that label is on the place map. So it already has that guidance elsewhere in the plan. And then the overall policy L6 says inappropriate locations too. That often provides that guidance that it's not necessarily everywhere. But it's. Appropriate places. Okay. So with it or without it. The East Area plan would mean the same thing for future plan guidance on rezonings. Yeah, we would say that it would still be recommending again that integration in appropriate locations and not the elimination of single. Unit primarily does not primarily means for the most part does not mean exclusively. Correct. Correct. So this would not putting the sentence back in which the community had wanted before it got the planning board would not would not exclude missing middle units being introduced, inappropriate locations. Correct. All right. Thank you. That's all I have. Madam President. Thank you. Councilman Flynn, Councilwoman CdeBaca. Thank you, Madam President. And I have a list here. So the shorter, the better. So, first of all, can you remind me, Curt, what the percentage of single unit zoning is in the food plan? Councilman CdeBaca. I don't have that exact percentage in front of me. I can look it up for you, but it's. It's the majority of the east area. Got it. Irene does next have the power to make recommendations on whether something is truly consistent with our equity goals in our plans. No, we do not. At this point in time, we do not. And then for CPD, I Del Fisher mentioned the whole the massive amounts of growth that could we could accommodate right now with current zoning. Can you describe what percentage of the corridor is not utilizing their current entitlement? Councilman CdeBaca I don't know, again, the very specific percentage to that question, but I think it's safe to say that, again, the majority of the properties along Colfax are not maxed out. Most of the properties along Colfax today are zoned for three stories and some five stories. And that there is not the market today or has not been the market today to build those out. In addition to that, as I was mentioning previously, we have identified a number of other regulatory barriers in the zoning code and in other codes that we have that regulate development, that are barriers to actually redeveloping many of those properties, as well as just a lot configurations of those properties being very small and shallow probably are not feasible in most cases to build out to, you know, maximum zoning. Do you have percentages for that, for those that are not able to be built out no matter the change? No. But what we have done is what we've mapped out similar to the in the East Central plan. We've done a lot by lot analysis along Colfax and categorized each of the lots into different sizes and the smallest sized lots that we think are not really developable at the maximum level. We've identified those as not appropriate for any additional height. And in many cases, we've identified those with existing what we call character buildings, which may or may not be historic but have contributed to the urban design and the history of the area. We've we've flagged those properties for keeping the same and actually no redevelopment because it would any redevelopment may result in demolition of those properties. So the result is a balanced approach to preservation and redevelopment. And we've added the requirements to any redevelopment that would take advantage of additional height, that community benefits be provided. And with the top priority right now, because we're in a housing crisis being affordable housing. Awesome. I have a question related to that in a second, but I'm sure you can anticipate it, but I'll get there. Can you quickly define what a policy means to CPD? Because I'm having trouble seeing the difference between our goals, objectives and. A new use of policy. I haven't. Used. I haven't seen. The word policy used to describe what we're seeing here. So can you explain what CPD's definition of a policy is? Sure. What we mean by policy as it when they're included in area plans is really guidance for future decisions. And so when a future decision around regulation, so whether we're writing those specific regulations with numbers or we're making a decision about infrastructure, that we use these policies in the plan to help guide those decisions in the way that's helping to achieve the outcomes of the overall vision that's articulated in a plan. So I'm having trouble with that one because we currently have equity goals and policies around equity that we're having a lot of trouble operationalizing in our rezonings. So can you explain to me if policies are operational actions that we need to take to achieve our goals? How how will rezonings look different after this plan than they do right now? So what? It all depends on, you know, the specifics of the actual rezoning case. But for example, if there is a property along Colfax that wishes to rezone to a greater height today, the the policy that would be used is either the neighborhood plan that exists today, which there is one, for example, in the East Colfax neighborhood and Blueprint Denver. So we would use both of those plans. We would use Blueprint Denver and we would use the the old plan that's in place now for East Colfax that's called the East Montclair Plan. That's how it was done in the 1990s. And use those the policies in those plans to evaluate a rezoning decision. As was mentioned before, the East Montclair plan does not recommend affordable housing, does not mention for inclusive neighborhoods or anything about equity and blueprint. Denver recommends that Colfax in general, like other corridors of this type, be allowed up to five stories. And then beyond five stories, community benefits kick in. And so what that would result in is, let's say, a three story property along Colfax today could easily, I would say, meet plan guidance of building a five story building with no affordable housing requirement. If the East Area plan is adopted and it falls within one of the properties that we've mapped out, that's appropriate for up to five stories. Affordable housing would be required. Well, that is assuming that we've defined community benefits and included affordable housing as part of that. Those priorities, but I don't think we've achieved a. Static definition of community benefits in this plan either have we? Well, similar. And if you recall this conversation coming up in the East Central Plan, there are a range of community benefits that are articulated, with the idea being that, again, this is a long term plan over the next 20 years, that one would hope that we're not always in an affordable housing crisis. But there may be other community needs, let's say, ten years from now, that are more appropriate for the given moment. Maybe that's affordable business space or a grocery store in a food desert or a public park, etc.. And so those decisions would require council approval based on the current highest need. The East Area plan does recommend that today because we're in an affordable housing crisis in Denver and in particular, it's the top priority in the East Colfax neighborhood because of the the threat of gentrification and displacement. So we do think that it's articulated clearly that affordable housing is the top priority benefit at this time. And so does that mean say for example, say there's a property on Colfax that wants to capitalize on their entitlement zoning to build a boutique hotel, but they're not offering any affordable housing in that boutique hotel. But they say we're going to have a swimming pool, a rooftop swimming pool. And a community benefit would be to offer access to the neighborhood, to that pool. Does that mean or does this plan mean that CPD is going to tell us or recommend to us not to approve that up zoning? Because that's actually not a community benefit agreement that's relevant right now. That that specific example wouldn't meet any of the community benefits that are articulated in the plan, and it certainly wouldn't meet the affordable housing community benefit. So as I was going back to sort of this hypothetical example of some of the common properties along use Colfax that are currently three stories. It's it's possible that the scenario that you described could meet existing planning guidance from what there are in place today that were written in the 1990s, that that example would not meet the East Area plan recommendation and therefore, you know, would be highly likely to be found inconsistent by city council. Would it be inconsistent with CPD's recommendations, though? Yes. Awesome. Good to know. And I heard street safety mentioned. Was there a traffic study along Colfax for this portion? I know there wasn't one for East Central, but was there any kind of traffic study that is informing our street safety plans here? There was there was also four for East Central. So there's been several traffic analyzes done in the east area. Many at a very high level and more detailed levels depending on the topic. So the Colfax BRT project has done traffic modeling of future traffic volumes both on Colfax and surrounding streets and in the East Area plan. We did an in-depth analysis of crashes and looking at specific intersections which informed the priority safety improvements that are recommended in the plan. And will those still be so? You know, when we make a plan, we don't actually get to make the thing happen overnight. So if this plan passes. Is there any funding that comes to with it to do any of the things in our plan? Well, no, I mean. As as Liz said in her opening presentation, a plan is not two things that are often, you know, a source of of of conversation with the community around implementation plan again as a guiding document that guides future decisions, including budget decisions. So it's not the budget decision itself. It's a guidance for those future budget decisions. So as you know, future budgets are created through the capital improvement program or future general obligation bonds, etc.. Plans will be consulted to look at what were the priority projects that were articulated in the plan. So that is, you know, something that I think keeps coming up. We keep hearing that the plan is guidance and it's aspirational. But is it not also a legal document? Well, I mean, it depends on what you mean by a legal document. Is it is. Do we not use it to justify consistency with plans in our quasi judicial hearings around us zoning. Correct. So for certain decisions like regulatory decisions, like rezoning decisions and tax increment financing decisions, there is a requirement to find consistency with an adopted plan. Again, so it's basically saying that you should you have to use this plan as guidance when you're making decisions on rezoning cases, for example. Thank you. And the last couple of questions. What are the top three most dense neighborhoods in our city? I would have to check, but I would you know, they're they're not in the east area if that's if that's the question. So, you know, Capitol Hill, I believe, downtown, are some of the two highest density neighborhoods. The third. I would have to check. And are those the most affordable neighborhoods in the city? Well, it's it's depends on what you're looking for, I guess. And I would also have to check, I mean, there's different ways to measuring affordability. So, for example, if you're looking at total affordability, that includes housing and transportation costs combined. And again, depending on your family situation, whether you can get to work with other transportation modes, places like Capitol Hill can be quite affordable because they have smaller units and they're close to transit and they're close to jobs and other amenities. And so what we see in those neighborhoods is that families spend quite a bit less on transportation costs. In fact, some of the highest rates of households that don't own any cars and they get to work on bicycle or in transit are in neighborhoods that are dense like Capitol Hill and North Capitol Hill, etc.. They're. The most affordable. Neighborhood in our city. What's that? I'm sorry. The most affordable neighborhood in our city. I I'm not sure. I mean, again, it depends on what your definition of affordability is. If if you're if you're in need of a subsidized housing unit. For example, five points, I believe, has our highest concentration of subsidized income, restricted properties. And so, you know, you would you'd be able to find an income restricted property there easier than in some suburban areas because there's typically not as many income restricted units in suburban areas, for example. And if you're able to, again, live in a smaller studio unit and you don't have a large family, you may find a more affordable option in an apartment closer to downtown. So it's it's just a difficult question to ask at a broad scale. Thank you. And what plan? What neighborhood plan in the city has stalled. Displacement. You know, I'm not sure the answer to that question. The plans are adopted with different priorities and different goals depending on when they created. And so, for example, some of the older plans that were created in a different era, like in the 1990s for the the East Colfax Plan that's in place today. The issue was disinvestment and and population and people leaving those those areas and high vacancies. And so the goal was revitalization and trying to encourage more development, including market rate development. And so in those instances where we're not seeing a lot of emphasis on a plan guiding decisions to more inclusive neighborhoods, I think more of the recent plans where this topic has been a priority, you know, it's it's it's there to new to be able to to tell. But I guess what we do see is displacement and gentrification happening throughout the city in places that don't have plans and places that do have plans. And I think most of our our again, our more recent plans that emphasize affordability and inclusive neighborhoods and equity are two new to see kind of the effect of that over the long term yet. And so maybe this is a better way to reframe it. And it's my final question. And if you don't have the data, I would love for us to make it a priority to collect this data. But what neighborhood plan in the entire city has been approved and followed by increased rates of displacement. Again. I would have to I'd have to get back to you on that to answer that with any level of accuracy. But again, I would just go back to saying that, you know, oftentimes what we have done in the past in Denver is we've prioritized doing area plans in locations where we're seeing a lot of changes. And so when when you see a lot of changes and a lot of investment going in, oftentimes that can lead to higher prices. And it's not as necessarily as a result of a plan being adopted. It can be actually mostly due to market forces that are in place separate from a plan. And so, you know, I think you're you're asking a very important question. And I think it's something that we are looking at as a department. We just created a tool, a mapping tool that aggregates all of our data sets in the city and overlays that with plan areas. So we can kind of take a look and track what's happening in areas we have and have not planned. And again, what we've seen is gentrification, displacement happening independently of where a plan is. And so this is it's obviously a much bigger issue than just whether there's a neighborhood plan in place or not. Thank you. I would love to see the pre preplan rates and post plan rates just for a comparison. Thank you for all that. I appreciate it. Thank you, Madam President. That's it for my questions. And cue Councilwoman CdeBaca. Councilman Ortega, you're up. Thank you, Madam President. So let me start with my first question, Kurt. Since you're still there, why don't I throw this one to you? In the conversation about brain space. I didn't see or hear anything about how green space would be used to do gardens such as community gardens or rooftop gardens. And since part of the conversation talked about food insecurity and addressing some of the healthy food needs of the community. Did I miss something or was that just not captured at all? Thank you for that question, Councilman Ortega. Yes, this is an important topic. Again, the plan it's a it's a big plan, as was mentioned several times in the testimony. It's about over 280 pages. We do have a whole section of the plan on healthy food and food at food access, including mapping out appropriate locations for community gardens and using open spaces to grow healthy food. So and not just mapping those areas, but also creating policies and strategies to implement some of those ideas. But was any of that incorporated into. Any of the new developments so that you're not just looking at, you know, buying a lot to turn into a community garden. But if you're looking at, you know, over a course of time, multiple three or five storey buildings being added where they're appropriate along the Colfax corridor, and they would get some. Sunlight that it. Could be incorporated either into the open space of a site is big enough or could include a rooftop garden. So with the policy, it's address those kinds of things as well as looking at separate lots for community gardens. Correct. Yeah. So that's that's some of the idea in the policies and strategies is not just, you know, vacant lots, but also incorporating incorporating those types of amenities into new development as well. Okay, great. Let me just roll into my next question. And if you're not the right person, we've talked a lot about ideas. Do you have data on what percentage of the overall northeast area that encompasses the plan area that includes ADUS today? That allows I'm sorry, that allows a to use. So so my two questions are what percentage of the area allows them and then what percentage of the housing stock already includes them? So Liz can correct me if I'm wrong, but just I don't believe these single unit zoned areas in the east. I don't believe any of them today allow accessory dwelling units or A2 use today with the current zoning. Okay. And that's a little different than it was in the East Central area where a number of those. Areas of that plan did in fact allow aid to use, although there had been very few that had actually been constructed. Yeah, that's correct. So the east central area where is is primarily multi-unit zoning and commercial mixed use zoning, whereas the east area is primarily single unit zoning today. And and even though the language in the plan would allow for the, again, its guidance write a guidance document, but it would allow for ADAS to be incorporated where the lot sizes are big enough to accommodate them. But that in itself does not allow that to happen without the zone change happening. Correct? That's correct. Yeah. So a. Plan. Or lot by lot as people want to incorporate it. If somebody wanted to do that now or after this plan was adopted, they would have to rezone their property until there is, you know, a citywide sort of rezoning that allows that to happen in single family areas, correct? That's correct. A rezoning would need to occur either, you know, on an individual lot citywide or, you know, similar to Councilman Sandoval's proposal, too, to do it at a neighborhood level. That I would. Yeah, that would also be consistent with the East Area plan. Okay. So now I want to talk about assemblage of lots and. The difference between assembling property. Adjacent to commercial corridors versus assembling them within the fabric of single family neighborhoods that are not contiguous to commercial. So. By. Assembling within a single family block, for example, that has just all single family homes. How would that change the density in this plan? Well, if it was. If someone assembled single unit properties in a location that used to plan recommends single unit zoning, then the assemblage would would result in single unit homes. Right. So you would if the question is if you could assemble single unit single unit properties and redevelop all those singular properties and into multi-unit, for example, that wouldn't be allowed per the plan guidance in the East Area plan if it was in a single unit area. Now if that aborted commercial, how would that be different? The dent on the commercial side, not on the residential side where it's a single unit zone. Correct? That's correct. As long as the designation on the land use map, which is the places map, recommends that adjacent zone to be a single unit. You would not be able to combine a mixed use property with a single unit and expand the mixed use area. Okay. Okay. So now I want to move to a question about what kind of review was done of the infrastructure and its capacity to handle. Death density increases if the entirety of the area was built out to the maximum capacity. Did did the plan look at. Not just the roads, but, you know, the sewer lines, the the water lines, you know, any of the the utilities, any of the infrastructure. Can you. Yeah. So. So in addition to the traffic analyzes that were mentioned previously that were done in coordination with the Colfax BRT project and then also as part of the East Area Plan, looking at traffic and crashes and the state of mobility infrastructure. We also closely coordinated with our stormwater management team and looked at some of those issues and we did find a number of infrastructure deficiencies in terms of stormwater management that inform the recommendations for additional green infrastructure and also stormwater pipes that are in the East Central Plan infrastructure recommendations. The way we deal with water and sewer infrastructure is a little different. And what what happens there is when there is a an individual redevelopment of a property, let's say, along Colfax, that the infrastructure in terms of water and sewer is tested and analyzed for capacity. And if there isn't sufficient infrastructure capacity, then that there's a requirement that that capacity be added through the development process itself. And so that's how we typically handle, you know, water and sewer infrastructure development is through the actual development and permitting process. So where we know the zoning allows for higher density. And we've got multiple contiguous sites. Did the infrastructure review look at trying to create anything like a, you know, a metro district that would just focus on the improvements to the infrastructure so that we're not dealing with them one off. Because if you look at. Multiple sites going vertical. Some of them may or may not have parking garages or parking lots that could increase the, you know, impervious surface, the quicker runoff that goes into our sewer systems. Was that part of the the review that our agencies looked at or I guess I'm bringing this up because we have seen where we're looking at areas where lots of development is going to occur and you're going to significantly increase the capacity of what will be in that area. So not just roadway traffic, but just all the other infrastructure. And the example I use over and over is the 38th and Fox area where we've got one roadway into that site, but we've also got some serious drainage problems and you know. We started allowing a bunch of rezonings to happen before looking at the infrastructure. And I'm just trying to see if we looked at trying to address some of that infrastructure impact issues on the front end so that we're not trying to address it just piecemeal. That. Yeah. Yeah, that makes sense. I think this is it's obviously a very important question. And obviously, you know, the 30th and Fox area is somewhat of a unique situation in that, you know, some of those challenges are not the same as in the east area in terms of the lack of connectivity to the rest of the city . But again, we did look at the traffic volumes and that did inform our infrastructure recommendations. We did look at stormwater data that did inform our stormwater infrastructure recommendations. And I think your question to how do we pay for it and financing, that's also a big part of the plan. And we do recommend using different tools and creative tools to finance our infrastructure, including tools like metro districts. As you as you may know, a portion of the east area has in place an urban renewal area designation. So a portion of Colfax has tax increment financing as an additional tool to help fund some of those infrastructure challenges as they come up. Okay. Thank you for those. I have one question for our city attorney. And Nate, are you available? Yes, I'm here. Okay. My question is about the. Amendment that is being proposed and asking if there are any legal implications to leave the language just as it is as it was moved to us from the planning board. If if it were just to remain intact, one of the speakers made some reference to some concerns. And I just wanted to get your clarification on whether or not, you know. Leaving it the way it is, as it was filed, has any any legal implications whatsoever? Thank you for the question. Councilwoman Ortega, Neighborhood Services and City Attorney. There would be no real legal implications if council approves the language that was forwarded from the planning board or if the amendment passes. Correct. Okay. And and as staff has already stated, I with or without the amendment, it would it would still be consistent with blueprint . Okay. Thanks so much. I have no further questions. Thank you, Madam President. Thank you, Councilwoman Ortega. Councilman Hines. Thank you, Madam President. So I had a bunch of questions that have already been answered. I want to pick up where Councilmember Ortega just left off. That CBD mentioned that it was neutral about the amendment. And can you help me y or can you help me understand why the this amendment in or out, doesn't affect Sebelius position ? Yeah, I can answer that. Councilman Hines So that's the thing. As we stated previously, we view the line, the sentence under question as just being additional clarification of similar recommendations that are made in other sections of the plan. So we we find that the criteria that are put forward to an adopt a plan being consistent with Blueprint Denver on the comprehensive plan of an inclusive community process and having a long term view those criteria would be met with or without that sentence in the plan. So. I mean, I guess. As as we've already just talked about. District ten is different than. Whatever is east of Colorado. I don't I'm assuming there are things east of Colorado. I don't know. It's not district so but it's so the sentence on its own in my view it's it seems counter to my personal values. But I know that because we just passed the central area plan a month ago also has been covered. I know that one sentence in a document that spans hundreds of pages. I mean, I just wonder, like, are we really making a mountain out of a molehill? You know, I just this is really become a lightning rod or is it just kind of so I just I'm trying to understand why there are people vehemently in favor and opposed to one sentence in a and a plan that's hundreds of pages. And I guess I'm I'm interested in your thoughts. Because you're closer to the plan than I am. Yeah. Well, I think, um. You know, there's, there's very strong opinions by certain community members on, um, single unit areas in general. So there are some, some community members who want single unit areas to remain exactly as they are and be preserved that way for the long term. And there are other members of the community on the exact opposite end of that policy decision, where they want all of single unit zoning to be 100% eliminated. And so there are those there's very strong opinions that we've heard throughout this process, articulating both of those viewpoints, um, what Blueprint Denver recommends and that, which is one of the things we do when we have these kind of difference of opinions at a neighborhood level is we say, okay, what is the citywide guidance say about how to resolve these competing points of view that we're hearing at the neighborhood level and at the citywide level? Blueprint Denver does not say to eliminate single family zoning, and it does not say to keep single unit areas exactly as they are today. So the blueprint, Denver doesn't recommend either of those extremes. And so we've taken a similar approach with the recommendation to the east area is saying that, you know, single unit areas should accommodate some additional housing in a thoughtful, reasonable way, in appropriate locations, etc.. But they should not it should not be done in a way that completely eliminates the single unit established urban design of that neighborhood. Okay. Are there areas in the used area plan that don't have a currently have any. Planning document that's less than city wide. Yes. Yeah, there are there are several areas and particularly in particular the Hale and the Montclair neighborhoods, that that don't have any neighborhood plan. Okay. Yeah. And I mean, we in District ten have areas as well that don't currently have have never had any sort of, you know, non city neighborhood plan. And I think I think it's critical for us. To have some sort of. Planning document just because with without any sort of. Documentation of the conversation between neighbors, developers and and and the city. I think that's that's tough. But. Okay. And then the last thing I want to ask about. Is that. The timeline of the East Area plan, I know the East Central Area plan, which covered a majority of the residents in District ten, you know, there were multiple delays. I think that's the same in the East Area plan. I just wonder if you could if you. Could. Recap, you know, if there were delays and if so, what the what you know, what brought those delays on? Sure. So yeah, similar as what happened in Central is that there were a number of requests to slow down the process and do more engagement because there was a feeling that more people needed to hear about it and be able to weigh in, and that required more time, more outreach, etc.. And so similar to what we did in the central plan, we did extend the process to work with those communities that felt like they needed more time or they felt like they needed to help organize and bring more people into the process. So that the delays were because you wanted additional community engagement. I'm assuming also now that COVID is here, there were probably also some delays just to make sure that people could get. Access to some of the virtual. Presentations, too. Is that right? Correct, yeah. And in particular, you know, some groups that we had been working with pre-COVID and we wanted to continue that dialog like in the East Colfax Community Collective, for example, needed some additional time to help make that shift to Zoom meetings. And so we extended the process. Mid 2019. What was Chris thought? When was when was your plan or vision? Our goal to have the East Area plan come before council like we're here tonight. Well, I guess originally, you know, our goal was to complete the plan in 24 months. And so we're we're we're well beyond where, you know, we're past three years now. Yeah. Um, and some of that had to do again with, um, community outreach and extending to get more involvement. And then part of it has this had to do with COVID as well. Okay. And just one quick note. I would. I think Capitol is the most dense neighborhood. I don't think CVD is the second. And I think it's North Capitol Hill, then Cheesman, then Speer, then Westwood. I guess that's somewhere not in District ten and then Congress Park after that. So District ten is very dense, very know as far as population density and I don't see any of the used area plan neighborhoods in the top. At least ten neighborhoods. So just to underscore again that the east central area plan and east area plan are not the same animal. I thank you, Madam President. Thanks. Thank you, Councilman Hines. I've got a couple of questions here. Liz or Kurt, either one of you can take it. If this plan is supposed to provide guidance for the next 20 years for this area. And there's an affordability issue. Why? Would we want to have the statement that says single unit areas should remain primarily single unit? I can take that question. Councilman Gillmor So the the approach here that we've seen, I guess, historically in cities of low density areas has been one of incremental change even over that long term time period. So for example, there are many neighborhoods in Denver that have allowed accessory dwelling units for a long period of time. And those accessory dwelling units are oftentimes are never constructed for a variety of reasons, including relying on an individual homeowner to kind of become a developer. Oftentimes. And so when when there is a desire like we've heard in the east area to not recommend demolition of neighborhoods and, you know, large scale redevelopment, that the goal here is to do incremental development in the form of duplexes, accessory dwelling units, triplexes, etc., and the missing middle that's oftentimes done by homeowners themselves becoming their own developers. And that happens very slowly. And so even though there's a long term, 20 year view, this incremental approach to change, we would not anticipate the entire neighborhood flipping around from primarily single unit to something completely different. Even over that time period, we would likely see a more incremental approach that would look kind of similar to some neighborhoods that are in Denver today. Watch Park and in some areas of the east area plan itself where you see single unit character but a more of a sprinkling in of different housing forms like duplexes and row houses, etc.. So that's kind of the thinking of of a more incremental change over that long term horizon. And so with that incremental changes, though, from an equity lens, the far northeast area plan that Councilwoman Sawyer referenced on page 34, because I started it yesterday again for for this hearing, I believe that there is an equity issue at hand with this one sentence, because in the far northeast area plan on page 34, it does say promote the continued use of single unit zoning on properties with existing single unit homes. But then it also lays out residential, low single unit and then residential, low medium row house in the far northeast area plan. And the residential low medium row house can include single unit two two unit residential. Rowhouses, but then also small multi-unit buildings, multi-unit buildings. And so why, with the incremental nature of these neighborhood plans, would we again have a statement that doesn't say, promote the continued use? It says Single unit areas should remain primarily single unit. How how was that, I guess, decision made? Because it seems like you could look at it from the flip side. And for those property owners that want a neighborhood to stay single unit only, it seems like by including the sentence in the East Plan, you're giving more protections to those neighborhoods than you might be giving to black and brown neighborhoods. Like we never had an option to say, Hey, do you guys want to put a sentence in there that says single unit areas should remain primarily single unit, that that was never an option given to my community, not that they would have taken it, but I think from an equity lens, we've got to make sure that we're communicating this in an equitable way. Yeah, I think that's an important question, Councilman. So just to clarify those examples that you provided in the far northeast where there was different zone, that there was different categories like, you know, row house designation areas and multi-unit designation areas. Those those are also in the east area plan. So the east area plan is not just a single unit, you know, recommended areas. We do have a bunch of areas that we're recommending for two units for row houses, for apartments, multi-unit. There's a there's a variety of land use designations that we're recommending what the sentence under consideration right now would only apply to areas that are we're recommending for single unit areas. And I would just go back to saying that we're using the same terminology that was used in in the far northeast area in terms of how we're designating single unit areas and in in Blueprint Denver. So Blueprint Denver articulates these residential low areas to include a mix of housing units, not only exclusively single unit but predominantly single unit. So the same when the Urban Infill Housing Regulatory Project is implemented, those single unit areas in the far northeast area will be treated the same as single unit areas in the east area. Right? Those that those designations will apply and the single of the predominantly single unit language is in place in both of those areas. If that provides some clarity of clarification for you a bit. But I mean primarily. Means something different than promote. And so I think having that additional language in this new plan definitely gives me pause around the considerations of the amendment. My last question is, you know, doing a quick search, is there anywhere in the East Central Plan or the far northeast plan that has this exact wording? Single unit areas should remain primarily single unit. I don't believe so. Not that exact wording. Okay. Thank you. All right, I. Councilman Sawyer, I was going to have the last question, but do you have a follow up? And then we'll go ahead and close the public hearing out and vote on the amendment. I actually just wanted to respond to your question, because where that sentence actually was taken out of the plan, if you were able to read where it was originally put in, the way the entire sentence reads is it says Consistent with adopted citywide policies and blueprint Denver integrate missing middle housing with rules to preserve valued neighborhood characteristics and address unique issues in the East Area, as follows Single unit areas should remain primarily single unit design requirements to ensure new construction is compatible with unique setback heights, etc. etc. So write regulations to discourage replacement of smaller homes with larger homes that are less affordable, etc. etc. So it is part of a it's part of an entire an entire thing. So it's not just that, that one sentence. And, and, and so I just wanted to make sure that that was clear in there. Thanks. Yes, thank you. I have printed out the information on the planning board amendment, so I. I have it in front of me, so thank you. All right. The public hearing for council bill 20 dash 1132 is closed. Comments by members of council on the amendment. Councilman Herndon. Thank you, ma'am. As you know, since we have since the planning board removed as my thoughts of myself were and I go back to Councilman Stan Sandoval, which you said at committee, we sure are spending a whole lot of time talking about what's out of the plan than what's actually in. And then, Councilman Hines, I think you summed it up today when you just said we're adding I can't I'm paraphrasing, you're giving a lot of power to this to the sentence when I don't believe is there. So I'm going to say those the bulk of my comments for what's actually in the plan and whether this passes with the amendment or not, I believe this is worthy of a yes vote, but I do believe that planning board arbitrarily took it out the way it should be since it's referenced in so many other places. And I think Councilman Flynn did a good job of asking the questions, whether it's in or not. It doesn't change the spirit of what we do. But if community members have concerns about why it was taken out, why not put it back in? So I will support the amendment. Thank you, Madam President. Thank you. Councilman Herndon, Councilwoman CdeBaca. Thank you, Madam President. Just some thoughts this much like our East Central plan in my district on this same corridor is a fascinating case study. Nearly every single week we have upswings in historically black and brown neighborhoods. Residents of our most marginalized neighborhoods sign up consistently to protest of zoning properties in our vulnerable neighborhoods that are justified because their entitlements or earnings. We go back and forth and back and forth with our developers, begging them for affordable units that they're not mandated to provide. We cross our fingers. We spend our tax dollars to employ entire teams and departments to negotiate with developers, begging them for whatever we can, compel them to toss our way voluntarily . We teeter back and forth on whether or not to allow them their upside earnings that always are justified by a plan like the one we're contemplating tonight. And then we complain that we have to approve their up zoning if plans exist to justify it. We ignore the pleas of low income people explaining how adding market rate units in any area that was below income actually decreases affordability generally throughout that ecosystem. Here we have advocates of neighborhoods challenging densify in their neighborhoods in a majority single unit zoned area. Demographic data suggests that these neighborhoods are predominately white and predominantly wealthier, with the exception of East Colfax. Yet their arguments against density are exactly the same as those from our overburdened bipoc communities. But all of a sudden, you also now have council members who justify densify in our neighborhoods every week. Someone else's district usually mine against the will of my constituents, mostly black and brown and poor, who have changed but yet have changed their tune now on Densify and the neighborhoods in their district and still calling it equity. Something here doesn't add up, and I'll let you all do the math on that. However, I will point to the obvious facts. Density does not equal affordability without mandated protective policies, and we don't have a single, proven or guaranteed anti displacement policy in this plan or any of our plans, for that matter. We don't even have a concrete definition of community benefits that lists and prioritizes affordability. The list of anti displacement policies are not actually policies. If you can read a so-called policy and still have to ask. How. It is not a policy. Additionally, regardless of your socioeconomic status, race, ethnicity or housing type, we all are clear on the fact that passing this plan is a green light for developers to exacerbate the challenges we have yet to figure out at all of our expense. I can't support an amendment to shield middle and upper class neighborhoods from having to shoulder the burdens of our city. I also can't support yet another neighborhood plan that calls itself guidance without, with and becomes a legal document that promises and dictates what we owe developers without guaranteeing anything for the people who need it most. That's it for my comments. Thank you, Madam President. Thank you. Councilwoman, can each. Thank you, Madam President. I will restrict my comments just to the amendment, because I think that's the section we're in. So first, I want to thank everybody who testified tonight and the many hundreds of people who've contacted my office over the past year, really, but especially the last few months. You know, it's there's been a lot of effort to, I guess, make the case that the amendment has no impact. And if that's the case, I think the risk is that it creates false expectations. The majority of people who testified tonight asking for this amendment did not mention that it made way for middle and missing middle housing . They didn't express their support for those other things. They talked about a desire to only put new housing on major redevelopment sites and to have no none of the growth in the single unit areas. So. So I my my concern is that I can't support an amendment that one has no clear impact on the plan. And two, leads to potentially false expectations or confused expectations from the public about how this sentence will work and be interpreted in the future. So I think it's it's too ambiguous to to be effective in the ways that it may have been intended. And as others have described, there is plenty of existing language in the plan without adding this layer of confusion, because the sentence clearly has taken on the expectations of huge portions of the community who've emailed or testified tonight about what they think this sentence does. And the staff, even the sponsors, described it as doing something very differently. And that's a sign to me that it's not drafted effectively to accomplish its goal when there's a disconnect between those who are testifying for it and what they believe it achieves and what the staff and the and the sponsors have described it as. So I can't support the amendment tonight for those reasons, and I will reserve the rest to my comments for the larger discussion. Thank you, Madam President. All right. Thank you, councilman. Connection. Just a quick reminder, it is comments by members of Council on the amendment, Councilman Sawyer. Thanks so much, Madam President. Just quick comments on the amendment. I think, you know, we've spoken a lot about it. This is a simple clarity, a move to add clarity back to the plan without this. You know, we've got maps that refer to something that doesn't exist anymore. We've got later sections of the plan that refer back to something that doesn't exist anymore. And so I think this just makes the plan whole again because removing this one sentence added confusion. So this just adds clarity back to it. And I think that, you know, what's really important here, and I think what the community is really saying is that this sentence was, you know, and the maps that reflect the sentence and all of the other sentences that refer back to the sentence throughout the 280 odd pages of this plan were the result of three years of community conversation. Three years of hard. Fought community conversation. And this plan has its proponents and its opponents. But it's a good plan, and the community deserves a plan. We're better off with a plan than without a plan. And so it would be a shame to have a community full of people not support something because they felt like they were undermined by an appointed body that took out one sentence of a plan thoughtlessly, you know, after hours of testimony on a whim. And, you know, it's not reflective of those three years of community conversation. So I would urge my fellow council members to support this sentence, because this is reflective of those community conversations. And so I think it's really important that we do that. Thank you. Thank you, Councilwoman. Councilman Flynn. Thank you, Madam President. It's I think it's actually odd to call this an amendment because it's putting something back into the plan that the community put in over those three years that Councilwoman Sorge just talked about. But that an intervening process removed the sentence doesn't block missing middle housing from single unit areas. It simply responds to Blueprint's policy recommendation to, quote, ensure residential neighborhoods retain their unique character as infill development occurs primarily means only for the most part. Opponents of reinserting this sentence appear to believe that it means exclusively rather blueprint speaks of context sensitive density, inappropriate places, particularly near transit, corner lots and so forth. I disagree with the the person who testified during the hearing that this sentence would be used to keep added density out of primarily single family areas. In fact, the opposite is the case primarily does not mean exclusively. It simply means the existing character can be maintained. While, as Blueprint says, missing middle structures can be added in appropriate places and not everywhere. I think that's a statement that that does need to be made. And even. Madam President, the far north east plan when it says promote a single family where a single family already exists. I view that as an even stronger statement than the one that we're being asked to reinsert here. We need to be careful about introducing what is sometimes called gentle density, which I call displacing you with a smile. I agree with Councilwoman CdeBaca, who talked about how density has made many of our neighborhoods unaffordable, where we've added duplexes in some neighborhoods, we've lost affordable single units and they've been replaced with out-of-reach duplex units. In Denver neighborhoods where we've added general density, we force people out through rapidly escalating housing prices and rents. We have neighborhoods where small and affordable existing homes are replaced with duplex units at each cost, nearly double the price of the house they replaced, and which then drive up property values and taxes on the remaining residents without this sentence. Future up zoning would have plan guidance that could result in eradicating existing neighborhood character. Without putting this guidance back into the plan after it was the result of work and compromise by the stakeholders. We're telling these neighborhoods that that they should not retain their existing character. I don't think that's the aim of the plan after it's after the three years of work. So I support the amendment to restore the voice of the community in its own plan over that of a divided vote on on the appointed planning board. Thank you, Madam President. Thank you, Councilman. Councilman Cashman. Yeah. Thank you, Madam President. Yeah. When I first heard this amendment, I didn't like it at all. It felt exclusive. Then I started thinking about it and grabbed a dictionary and grabbed several. And this, as I read, this amendment doesn't shield anybody. I think both sides need to look in the dictionary. If you're counting on this to preserve your single family neighborhood without change, you're going to be gravely disappointed. And if you're against this amendment because you think it says that there can be no change, I think you're equally as off base. Right now, we've got single unit neighborhoods that when when a rezoning comes before us planning looks at it and says, now, this is a single unit neighborhood. There's no there's no plan guidance. So to do a duplex or an 82 or whatever, I think the planners ten years down the road, 20 years down the road that would look at this, would see a door wide open for for incremental change in the way of multi-unit housing. You know, it doesn't say stay the same. It doesn't even say almost entirely. It says primarily. Primarily means to me when you drive through it, you go, Yeah, it's primarily a single family neighborhood. But there's this that, this and that. That gives it texture and flavor. So. I think it. I as has been said, I just think it underscores other elements of our of our greater plans and this plan that speak to diversity of housing. As I think they should. Thank you, Madam President. Thank you, Councilman. Councilman Hines. Thank you. Madam President, I thought there was someone else in the queue before me. So I know that this is a long discussion. I want to thank everyone who has spent this much of their evening to talk about a big document that a lot of people won't pay a whole lot of attention to outside. Of the planning. Circles after tonight. So thank you for your interest. Thank you for your excitement in and making sure that our city is in the direction that we wanted to go in. I know that there are some comments of a planning board. I just want to I want to stick up for planning board. And I know that they're an appointed body. I also I also know that part of the reason why they're appointed is because they are planners, they are experts in their field. And and while I may not agree with everything that they decide on there, their purpose is to be experts. And and I think that that our current planning board has achieved that. I think it is a country comprised of people who really know a lot about zoning and are passionate about Denver zoning. So thank you playing board for all you do. I am. As I mentioned in my questions, I am concerned that we are spending a whole lot of time and putting a lot of cycles on one sentence and I just throwing that out there. I'm also concerned that I don't want to push my values on an area of the city that is dramatically different. From where. I live. We have the four densest so the three densest neighborhoods in the city and numbers four and five as well. So we're, you know, District ten is way different then than areas that are District ten, just, frankly. And and so I don't want to I'm concerned about saying that my values for where I live should be the same, where everyone else lives. As a value statement, I think it should be really citywide. I'm also of an open mind to get rid of single family zoning entirely. Minneapolis has done it. Oregon has done it. I mean, there are places that, you know, that have already taken the plunge and made that happen. I also want to make sure that we do that in a measured approach. I know that Denver and Colorado's history is not the same as Oregon and and and Minnesota and and we are very cautious with our land use. So I just want to throw all that out there. I. I'm I'm afraid that we're making much ado about nothing. And and so this amendment, you know, I, I ultimately will side on the the the planning process and the three years of community input, you know, instead of the planning board. I hope that the planning board understands that, that my thought is I want to make sure that we hear from the community as opposed to from. Planning for it. But I think you really are the planning board really is a body that. That provides a lot of meaningful information to us and is a is a wise group of individuals. Thank you, Madam President. Thank you. Councilman Hines. Councilwoman Torres. Thank you, Madam President. My own notes on the amendment. I don't begrudge the planning board because they're appointed and not elected as though that's the only criteria for decision making in the city they're contemplating. And I think they did their job here. I will not vote to return the sentence back to the plan. CPD's made it pretty clear that it's not necessary to the intentions of Blueprint Denver in particular, and that it causes this source of confusion. I'd rather see it eliminated and focus on other areas of the plan that that need some attention. So those are all my comments on the amendment. Thank you, Madam President. Thank you, Councilwoman Torres. Councilwoman Sandoval. Thank you, Madam President. I have a lot of people on this slate. And sometimes when we. Talk about area plans. We talk about prescriptive and we use this word prescriptive a lot. And the plans are recommendations. And what I heard tonight was a lot of really good discussion about what the community thought and how impactful this could be to certain groups of people who live in the East Colfax neighborhood and to council mentors is great. I really I learned I. Have I don't have a degree in planning. I've learned all my planning and everything that I've learned just from watching planning board for since 2012. And I've learned how to take things and have different debates on them and the planning board is appointed. So I don't know what the future of the planning board would do in the when they interpret this language. So with that, I would I'm not going to support this amendment this evening due to the fact that I think that it was actually well thought out. And I watched the planning board and it was a very deliberative process. So thank you, Madam President. Thank you, Councilwoman Sandoval. Madam Secretary, roll call on the amendment, please. Black I. See the bucket? No. Clark. I. When I. Herndon. I think I. Cashman. I. Mitch. No. Ortega. No. Sandoval No. Hoyer, I. Sorry. No. Madam President. No. Madam Secretary, please close the voting and announce. The results. Of the. Six, nays 17. Six days, seven eyes. The amendment passes Council Bill 20 dash 1132 has been amended. Councilman Cashman when we may have a motion to pass as amended, please. Yes, Madam President. I move that council bill 20 dash 1130 to be placed upon final consideration and do pass as amended. Thank you. It has been moved and seconded. Comments by members of Council on Council Bill 1132. Councilman Herndon. Thank you, Madam President. And how do you succinctly at 1026 at night summarize three plus years, 100 plus meetings, thousands of comments on this. Well, I will. And recognizing you have other colleagues that want to comment as well. So I should first start off with a significant thank you to every individual who has weighed in once or multiple times on this plan, because whether you support it or not, you have created a better plan moving forward for the east area. And some of you may not think that and never will, but your critiques and your hard questions were got us to the place where we are. So I sincerely thank you for that. To the CPD and the team, Liz, and all the individuals who who worked on this. Thank you for your diligence. Thank you for your flexibility. Because as we were moving through this, pivoting to to stop and do more thorough community outreach, I appreciate that as well. The steering committee members who from the very beginning and it evolved over time. Thank you for that. Why is this so important? Even in the middle of a pandemic, this area is changing. If you think about real estate, prices in the middle of the pandemic are still going up. And our city and county of Denver, if you think about what's happening, as I mentioned earlier today, 8315 East Colfax received a tax credit. The area is changing. And if we don't have a plan in place to guide this changes. It can go in the direction that we don't want it to go. I mean, I really appreciate the in me back up because if we vote down this plan and just for the north side of Colfax, you've got a plan from South Park Hill, this from the 2000 and on East Colfax, you have the East Montclair plan from the early 1990s, as we mentioned, doesn't even talk about things such as equity or affordability. But that doesn't just mean you approve the plan because it's newer. You have to look into the plan and see what does it actually do for the community. And I believe the plan that we have in place speaks to what the community has asked for through the hundreds of meetings and thousands of comments from CPD going to where you lived prior to the pandemic, to hear from people to us finding every avenue possible to have a conversation during the pandemic. And I printed out several of the different recommendations, and I'm not going to read all of them. Liz highlighted the top six at talking about making the East Area an inclusive place. We talk about preserving trees and landscaped areas. We're talking about helping residents and small businesses stay in the community long term. But then we talk about equity from improving access to opportunity, reducing vulnerability to displacement, expanding housing and jobs. And we go into several different categories throughout the entire East Area plan, whether it's zoning, where we're talking about encouraging to maintain rather than demolishing existing older homes by revising design requirements to encourage renovations or additions, we can talk about the affordable housing recommendations where it says Expand diversity of housing types and affordability to support households at different sizes, ages, incomes in all the neighborhoods. And that's we have recommendations about community serving retail. We have recommendations about pedestrian improvements, neighborhood traffic, calming measures, parks and open space, community safety and well-being. And I won't read all of them, but these are just our recommendations are priorities for this area. But then we go into specifically the particular neighborhoods and I'll talk about East Colfax and South Park just because those are the portions that I, I, I represent. And though I'm not going to read all these recommendations via land use via the economy, but reduce involuntary displacement, address the affordable housing shortage in East Colfax. It's what it's particularly saying on South Park will prioritize land policies that aim to maintain that character in South Park Hill residential areas. These are our values and I think this is what's going to move us forward for the next 20 years. So I'm I'm proud of the work that we've done on this. And not everybody got what they wanted. I would have a conversation with a constituent who wants me to vote no because the plan doesn't go far enough. And then I'll turn around and have another conversation that says with another concession, the plan went too far. So this is what? This is what? You have various constituencies, you find a sweet spot. And I believe we are there and we are much better off as an east area moving forward with this plan than without. The hard work really begins now because it is a plan. So we need to do the work and have the tools in place. If you don't know Councilwoman Zoya and I, we plan to plagiarize Councilman Sandoval's movement to add 80 used East Colfax. It was a great thing to do. And in northwest Denver, we want to start that conversation in East Colfax and other tools we're doing as well. So I think that was kind of succinct. So my apologies. But I want to once again end where I started by thanking everyone for their work on this, because we truly have , I believe, a great product that I'm excited to support and everyone from the beginning to the very end. Thank you for that comments moving forward to make this the plan that we have. Thank you, Madam President. Thank you, Councilman Herndon. Councilman Sawyer. Thank you, Madam President. I also want to start just by reiterating what I have always said, which is I truly believe that, you know, continuing without a neighborhood plan does a disservice to our community. And there are several neighborhoods that don't have a neighborhood plan at all, especially Hale and Montclair. And I want to thank every single member of our community who participated in this and CPD and our fellow council members. Prior and CURRENCE, thank you for all that you have done and our steering committee members really grateful. It was a tough road to get here, a really tough road to get here. But where we have gotten is pretty amazing. You know, just to kind of clarify, I heard some misconceptions and I want to make sure we really understand that you sort of plan as in rezoning any properties tonight. We're not selling properties to developers. We're not up zoning properties today. We're not closing grocery stores like fliers that went around this weekend. We're not ignoring stormwater problems. We're not allowing any use in every neighborhood overnight because that's already allowed under blueprints. There's you know, we're not relying on BRT funding for the success of this plan because 15 and 15 are already the two most used bus lines in the entire system. The truth is that the East Area Plan is a vision for how these neighborhoods are going to grow in the next 20 years. We are going to grow. We're a city we should grow, but we have to make sure we're doing it in a thoughtful way. And that's what this plan does. It looks at the next 20 years and it says, okay, how should we grow so that we keep the unique character of these neighborhoods, but also add the things that the residents say they care about? So when we surveyed these the residents extensively and in many languages, I might add, they said they wanted small businesses, neighborhood walkability, green space, safer streets, the things that augment the quality of life. And this plan attempts to balance all of those desires in a holistic and thoughtful way. Is it perfect? No, because there are some things the plan simply cannot do. And the groups who are opposing this plan, they want guarantees and they want us, you know, to promise that added density will bring affordability. Me, too. But unfortunately, no one can guarantee that. But the plan explicitly recommends, I think, 27 different ways to stop gentrification and displacement from happening in East Denver. We've already talked about this tonight. It's happening here. It's a result of market forces. And but there is literally never been a neighborhood plan in Denver that has attempted to do more to address these issues on a policy level than what the East Area plan is trying to do. Some people want the plan to identify specific parcels for green space, but these neighborhoods are built out. We can't take people's private land to make a park. But here's what we can do. We can commit to working with Parks and Rec and make this a priority and identify parcels where we can use to raise funds to purchase these in the future when they maybe become available. And in fact, we are already working with Parks and Rec to do that. We have their commitment. Some people are really concerned about traffic. And me too. And that's. Fair. This is a big one for our neighborhoods with BRT coming. We can't magically fix that. But here's what we can do. We can commit to working with Dottie and DPD. We've got traffic improvements already coming on 13th and 14th. Our office has saved $20,000 to do a traffic study of Eighth Avenue to implement traffic calming measures and safer crossings there. Some people want groups to halt East Area plan entirely until COVID 19 is over. I can tell you that there is more community engagement now than ever before. Just look at voter turnout. You know, we've look at all the emails that our office has received and phone calls in the last couple of weeks, you know, hundreds and thousands. I've always said that under principles, the principles are blueprint and 20 2019 and 2040. All of our neighborhoods are better off with a plan. When I came into this office, I didn't support the East Area plan. It proposed eight story buildings, which was completely out of character for the neighborhoods. It wasn't specific enough. Most people in our neighborhoods didn't even know it existed. But my goal was never to stop the plan. It was to create a thoughtful plan that made sense for our community. And I think tonight we've achieved that goal. Over the last 17 months, my office has worked tirelessly to engage the community on the plan, pushing the city to fully engage. And Liz and Kurt have gone above and beyond in more ways than I've got time to detail. They have stepped out of their comfort zone, meeting with residents in their backyards, hearing specific concerns about unintended consequences. And because of that work today, we've got something that strikes the right balance. I believe we've reached a place that's thoughtful about development and strategic in our goals. One of my fellow council members once said to me, You've always got to keep in mind you're going to have to see people at the grocery store for the rest of your life. So you'd better be sure you're ready to defend your vote in the checkout line. And 17 months ago, I wasn't ready to do that. But today, I am proud to say that I am willing to defend this plan for all of the years to come in the grocery store, in the checkout line and anywhere else in our community. And I hope that my fellow council members will as well. Thank you. And. Q Councilwoman Sawyer. Councilwoman, can each. Thank you, Madam President. And to my colleagues and the staff who worked so hard on this plan, I just want to thank you for the time that you spent and for your work. I just wanted to I already thanked everyone for participating, but I just want to share a couple observations as I vote for the plan tonight . It's understandable that this has been a hard process imagining a future and preparing for a future that we do not control. Right. And it's not just the pandemic we don't control, but we don't control private property. We have an envelope within which we can create some restrictions, but generally speaking, we don't masterplan each person in a city centrally. That's not something we do in America. And so we have to plan for a future without control. And that is really tough. But I guess here are my two observations. The first is that quality of life is not a fixed resource. It is not the case that there is only asset allocation for a neighborhood or for a city, and that if more people share it or new people come in who receive it, that somehow those who are there currently or those who are existing will somehow be diminished. And I think that this is the theme, right, of city planning, which is that we can and should fight for a quality of life that expands to encompass, you know, for example, more racial diversity in neighborhoods. That enterprise documented in their testimony are not very racially diverse. That will not diminish the quality of life for the predominantly white homeowners in that area. It will change, right, the the makeup of the neighborhood. But the quality of life can be shared by new and additional residents. Right. So. So I think that quality of life can grow with with our communities, with our neighborhoods, with our blocks. And I think that it's not that one person wins and another loses. And so I think that that's really something that this plan fights to really make that point, that this is about, you know, that historic character should be preserved, but it can't just be preserved for the people who've always enjoyed it. But it could also be preserved for for new residents to enjoy, for example. Second observation is that, you know, some folks debated our plans binding. Are they, you know, prescriptive? Are they, you know, guidance? Here's the word I use for plans. I'm I'm nine years into this gig, so take it or leave it. But here's my and I guess I did six years of community organizing around planning and development in Denver before. So let's call it let's call it 15, 16 years in this in this in this field, plans are leverage. And the question is, do they give you more leverage or less leverage than you had before the plan for the things you care about? And I think that, you know, that the two councilmembers who represent this district made all the points about the many ways that these plans create more leverage in terms of equity, historic preservation, affordability and other and other things. The second question is how does the leverage for the things you care about compare to the leverage created for the forces of the market? And I think that, you know, I will say that it is no joke. I used to fight. I'm not joking. Year long campaigns to get the word affordable housing into a plan. Right. Like the one reference to it and one page. This is what I did for a living before I got elected to this council. That's how hard it was. And then I would ride that one phrase that we'd fight to get in for the next three years until I got to 66 unit development, you know, in Union Station neighborhood. Right. So that was the painful process. This is more leverage for equity and these topics than it is. And so the question is to for you all, what's the leverage of us as council members and of your local government? So I already dedicated the entire legislative session before COVID to supporting the Tele right over whatever I'd bill, working closely with the sponsors, providing technical assistance. I will do that again. I know my colleagues all signed on in support of that. The city, you know, registered in support of it. And we will be there again. It is a statewide battle. It's not exclusively in our control. And it's about, you know, building alliances with with our neighbors across the state. Right. But that's the kind of thing that I will commit to doing. I will say that there was a question about resources. This plan has actually created leverage for resources. This council worked with the administration to get funding for implementation to the three equity areas that have newly adopted plans for participatory budgeting. A half million dollars, right. Of leverage of implementation for projects. So that is something that if this plan is adopted tonight, this community can count on. They can count on having a voice to help to spend those dollars in the east central area. I don't know the exact boundaries yet, but the idea was implementation of plan. So. So I think leverage matters. Quality of life matters. And this plan creates more leverage for more people to enjoy quality of life in these areas. And therefore, I'll be supporting its name. Thank you, Madam President. Thank you, Councilwoman Kenney. Councilwoman Torres. Madam President. So I've got five neighborhoods from District three who are currently in the West Area plan process. They are both balancing, I think, expectations of the plan. Many knowing it's not the only ticket toward affordability or. Permanence or stability. But we're watching all of these processes closely and trying to identify what what makes sense. Westwood Neighborhood has the most recent. Plan in my district 2016, and they continue to experience displacement, housing pressures. Families moving south into Councilman Flynn's district. And it's not to do with the rezoning. We haven't had a lot of rezonings in Westwood. Kurt said something that sparked. Something for me and I wanted to thank him for that. And it was a focus on what else does this plan do and what else. Does that inform. The plan for? West. It's been incredibly helpful for securing bond. Funding for Parks, for Rec, center, for infrastructure, and if. Anything, the plan speaks to maintaining a community identity. That's important to West Denver. The work that's gone into this is. In part due to community input during that process, what the plan actually says. But also those of us in on this call, our community members who stay involved demanding that moving forward. And so their responsibility to realizing kind of the soul and the vision of a plan and even what it misses becomes a lot of our responsibility after the fact. So I hope that. The work that's gone into the East Area plan. We'll do something similar to that in the future. And I also will be supporting it tonight. Thank you, Councilman Torres. Councilman Sandoval. Thank you, Madam President. I just wanted to say thank you to the two council members who brought this forward. I worked on a couple of neighborhood plans as a council aide, and I never had four languages with interpretation. So when we're talking about equity and we're talking about access, I want to just bring that to light that tonight at council we had four different languages and English spoken and made access and room for everybody. That is really telling to get community out and to get us out this late and to be participating and to be able to feel, have the ability to speak up. I think that talks a lot about the process and it talks a lot about how I always think about community outreach is like an onion and you want to peel back the different layers to get into the center of it and to get this many people speaking out in support or opposition. But the fact that we had so much community show up speaks volumes to me on how deep of outreach and how impactful the outreach was. And to Liz and Kurt, thank you for your steadfast leadership. I know going into this is not easy and a lot of times you are seen as the force that you have to be up against. And so to still hold that space and create it safe so people can talk about things because one thing you're going to hear is home is where the heart is. And so you start talking about people's homes and you start talking about things. It's usually a person's biggest investment. And so to be able to hold those spaces so people can talk about their homes and have respectful discourse, it's not easy. And I know that you're not that taught that in planning school, so thank you for doing that and thank you for holding those spaces. And to the two council members, it shows volumes on the kind of community outreach that you've done, and I look forward to looking at your EDU process in the future. And with that, I will be supporting this prep plan. Thank you. Thank you, Councilman Sandoval. And I'll wrap up quickly here. Congrats to Councilwoman Sawyer and Councilman Herndon. I know that this was a heavy, heavy lift multiple years and your engagement with the community, whether they liked it or didn't, you had that engagement with them. And I think that that's so important and I appreciate that and all of the CPD staff time as well. My husband and I, we lived for a bit of time. Our first home was at 1960 Verbena, and so this entire area is near and dear to my heart and just wanting to make sure that we're able to maintain the important diversity that we have in this neighborhood, especially with black and brown folks. And so I look forward to the the work that's going to come forward, but the work that you have already done and put into this plan and I will be supporting it tonight as well. Madam Secretary, roll call on Council Bill 20, Dash 1132 as amended, please. Herndon. I. Sawyer. I find. I. Cashman. I can eat. I have Ortega. I. Sandoval. I. Today. I. Black I. See the background. No. Park. All right. Flynn. I. Madam President. I. Madam Secretary, please close the voting and announce the results. One May. 12. I. 12 Eyes Council Bill 20 dash 1132 as amended has passed the pre adjournment announcement on Monday, December 14th. Council will hold a required public hearing on Council Bill 1159, changing the zoning classification for 30 to 2510 Argo Street in five points.