A bill for an ordinance changing the zoning classification of 3325 and 3327 Tejon Street in the Highland neighborhood. Approves an official map amendment to rezone land at 3325 and 3327 Tejon Street from U-TU-B and DO-4 to PUD-G 16, from urban context, two-building lot to a planned unit development, in Council District 1. The Committee approved filing this bill at its meeting on 2-21-17.
Forget the president pro tem 13 ice. All right. 13 Ice Council Bill 150 has passed. Congratulations. Councilwoman Ortega, will you please put Council Bill 162 on the floor? Mr. President, I move the council bill 160 to be placed on final consideration to pass. It has been moved and seconded the public hearing for council about once these two is open. May we have the staff report, Jeff? Her still in the house? It's not about parking, I don't think. Yeah, I don't think it's about parking. So, Jeff Hart with community planning in development, this is a rezoning application for a properties at 33, 25 and 27 taken request for rezoning from YouTube and for two Pudi Dusty 16 located in Council District one. So it's about Mid-Block on the west side of the 300 block of take zone is where the subject property is and the highlands neighborhood. And the property is about 14,000 square feet in size. And we'll talk about the existing conditions more, but currently 1895 era residential structure along the front of tailbone and then the back is a now not used anymore was a paltry sausage factory and the property owners are requesting the rezoning to accommodate the re-use of the existing residential building along taken in to accommodate residential infill in the rear. And looking at the zoning context, you see the existing zoning YouTube and that's reflected to the north and the west of the subject property as well. But then when you look east across Dayton and to the south, you see more of the commercial zoning and the commercial existing land uses that you'll see on the slide as well. So a greater mix of uses going east and south and then to the north and west you see mostly single family and two family. And looking at the subject property. So the top image on the slide is looking north on taken with the subject property on the left hand side. And you see on the east side of town, a lot of the redevelopment in the commercial has occurred there, not as much on the west side and then on the bottom image , same thing looking south on Tahoe and with the subject property on the right hand side. And these are images of the property from when the Polidori Sausage factory was still in operation. They actually ceased operations last year. So you see the existing residential structure and that's a long take home on the top right of the screen. And you see the images of when the when the sausage facility was in operation. You had trucks coming in, going from the rear portion of the subject a lot and then images of the surrounding properties. So the images on the left kind of show how on the west side of town it's really maintains that residential character or that residential scale. And a lot of those turn of the century buildings have been retained. On the east side of town. You see a different story where you've seen several of those structures of that era razed for redevelopment, for row houses and a variety of other uses. So the purpose of the party at a high level, certainly more details in your staff report are to one promote the traditional one and a half 1 to 2 and a half story context along Tate honed, which is reflected with the existing building and to accommodate the conservation of that remaining building and to accommodate residential infill on the rear of the lot. And so this is just a graphic that we can come back to, if you'd like, showing how essentially the the uses are sort of flipped on the site under the PD. So whereas you had the industrial warehouse use on the rear of the site, which is sub area B in the PD, that actually that nonresident you use will now get flipped to summary A and subquery A which is residential, is now going to be flipped to suburb. Where that becomes residential is very confusing, I know. But essentially it's a flip of the sort of use footprints that are currently existing on the lot. And the PD does conserve the existing building along town. It doesn't preclude the demolition of that building. But essentially it requires three very strong controls, I think, through setbacks and through very prescriptive standards on what elements of the north, east and south facades have to be preserved, that the the building will be conserved and with lot an allowance for a modest addition to the west side of the building. And so some of the key difference between the difference between the PD and the you a max two zone district is that one in sub area a the height allowance goes up to 38 feet instead of 35 feet, which is what your max two X provides for. And that's simply to accommodate the existing building. So the whole site essentially has you a max two X design and development standards in terms of setbacks, height, things like that. The only difference is in sub area B, which is on the rear of the lot. The uses are per the you RH 2.5 zone district, so only allowing residential in the rear again and nonresidential on the front. And we can talk more about some of the distinctions, if you'd like. So these are the criteria that staff use to evaluate the request. I'm not going to go through each one of them within the applicable citywide plan, certainly. And then we have the Highlands neighborhood plan from 1986. And so looking at the justifying circumstances that Steph provided in the report, one in terms of a change condition, the policy satisfactory vacated the nonresidential building in May 2016 and then also various adopted plans prioritized preservation of a neighborhood character which includes the residential structure like the one on the subject property of that era. And we've seen a lot of those being raised for redevelopment, certainly throughout the Highlands, but even more specifically on this 3300 block of Tay home, which is of concern to the community. And this PD, I think, does a good job of conserving that building. And then in terms of consistency with neighborhood contexts and district purpose and intent, the PD promotes a pedestrian active street front along Tejon and brings the nonresidential uses up to date home, which is consistent with the built environment as it is today and with the zone district, with the restrictions in the PD, the the building forms are limited in scale and also the uses are fairly limited in scale, the nonresidential uses to be compatible with the surrounding neighborhood. And in terms of why it's a PD, we as a city don't like to do parties necessarily, but in this case it did meet the criteria because it was a very unique circumstance with the two different buildings and two very different uses. So we found the PD was appropriate and there really was no working with development services. Over many months, we really were not able to find a standard zoned district that accommodated the sort of the existing conditions and the evolution of the site over time without any waivers, conditions and variances. So I must have skipped the slide, but planning the planning board did recommend approval of this request eight to nothing in February. And we also have two letters of support from the Highland United Neighbors Group that are supporting this request, in particular that it preserves the existing building along. Tejon So staff does recommend approval for those reasons, and I'll be glad to answer any questions you might have. All right. Thank you, Mr. Hurtt. We have two speakers this evening. If you come to the front here, this coffee bench, Alexis, Dan Hauer and Steven Latham. I am like, sustainable or just. Representing the applicant. And we're here for any questions. Great. Councilor Steve Latham visit here for questions. Great. Thank you. Have a seat in the council as any questions and direct them to you. That concludes our speakers questions by members of Council Councilman Espinosa. Shoot. Oh, yeah. Jeff. Just a quick question again. Thank you for taking over from Tim and Watkins and and everything in getting this to us. We learned a lot. This this rezoning has been going on for a really, really long time, and I'll get into that in my comments. But, you know, but some great tools have come about between 17th Avenue Tavern, I mean, and the Emily Griffith. And then this with this is own sort of preservation sort of thing, just for my own information. Do is is the city now comfortable when the the the historic when those unique circumstance conditions are met warranting a PD? Are we equipped to sort of better, more expeditiously handle these things so that we don't? I wouldn't I but I wouldn't necessarily say that I would say that the PD tool, you know, is still there for situations like this. And each one is so unique that it totally depends on the project. But the tool, I think is working in for situations like this. But as you see, it's pretty dusty 16, which means we've only had six PD since 2010, so we use them very sparingly. But but in terms of expediting the process, I can't say that we've gotten any better at it. I just think that we recognize the use of the tool little bit better and what it can and can't do. Um, through all these communities, I. Would just encourage, take that one back to CPD. I would encourage having, you know, I sort of asked if you were the specialty and sort of you backed off from that, but I would encourage us to have sort of a team that's better equipped. I mean, not not saying you're not equipped, but that a team is sort of dedicated to sort of those that flexibility so that we don't discourage developers with the sort of timetable that that we took. But but that said, like I said, I think you guys did a great job in the final write up. And so I just wanted to make sure you knew that. Thank you. All right. Thank you, Councilman. Councilwoman Ortega. Thank you, Mr. President. I wanted to ask a question about the driveway that goes to the back site. So if construction of residential occurs in the back, what how will the new folks access that? Does part of that road stay? Does it go? Can you tell us what level of dialog there's been about that? Yeah. So the Pudi kind of memorializes the existing conditions which is I think a 19 foot drive I'll which is one foot short of our requirement for a two way drive. And so when we looked at it, we looked at the stalk contact which was trucks going in and out of there for various sausage delivery purposes. And and so when you look at that compared to residential infill in terms of the impacts, I think that first of all, that would be the access point. More than likely, however, there is an alley that comes north, south and kind of jogs through the 3300 block that this property doesn't currently use. I think it's fenced off. So there's there's I don't know that the access would come from that alley, but I think the intent was for it to come off of town and sort of memorialize how it's been used historically. So this is in my neighborhood and I'm really familiar with the site and I'm not familiar with an alley that runs all the way through because what you're talking about is running into the Aguirre property where Rosalind is used to be. So there's a parking lot there. So I'm not familiar with the an alley that runs all the way through. Um, we have to pull up a map here. So. So that was why I was asking about the access. So it looks like the only access is off the Tyrone Street, not through Third Avenue, because you would have to go through a private parking lot to access it. There's a zigzag alley. It's crazy. It's I wouldn't call it certainly not a traditional alley. But if you look on the screen, it does jog, as I understand it. It does jog. And you can kind of see mid-block how, you know, you come in from 34th and there's an access point just west of town, you can go south and then jog a little bit west. And the you jog like. A real crazy, circuitous route to try to get traffic into a particular property that already has access of a T-Bone. Yeah. And that's something that we wouldn't necessarily address with the rezoning that would be a later with a redevelopment. Understand that. But I'm just asking the question I think would be helpful to know that. That's a good question. Okay. Does the owner representing had anything else to add about that? At this point. There's no current plans for the residential in the back. It's just more. The renovations for the front building that has needs quite a bit of work. So I think the intent, I mean, Ali, is strangely access. I think the intent has been to use that to drive. I don't think there's any future intent to use. That access besides maybe pedestrian. Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. President. Yeah, thank you. I just wondered if I could just quick question. What sausage company is this? Paula? Doris. Oh, nice name. Okay. The public hearing is closed for 162. Council comes from as of council Councilman Espinosa. Yeah, it was the best. Now it's still great sausage, so hopefully. So, yeah, I just want to thank the developer, Steve Latham, for his incredible amount of patience, extraordinary amount of patience through this this entire process, but for also coming and coming forward with this idea and then, you know, being willing to sort of grind through a very laborious rezoning process to figure out how we how we did keep what is a identifiable and and beautiful existing Denver Square, repurpose it and redevelop the property to to your needs. I also want to let my colleagues know that when you put a building this deep into a site, you know, this is a long going concern of mine in my own neighborhood. You're definitely going to impact them immediately adjacent neighbors. And that was where we started. We started with getting the people that shared property line in the rear and to the south and to the north. I got him on board and explained what was we were trying to do and we had everybody, everybody's buy in. So as much as there was a lot of positive comments on the prior rezoning, this one was met with some very warm comments from planning board, even though they sort of questioned, you know, are we going down a slippery road of pwds? CBD assured him that there was unique circumstances, which there are, and it's a real creative project and it sort of keeps this part of Northwest Denver and Highland funky. So thank you very much for everything that you guys have done. Jeff, Lexi and Steve, thank you. So with that, I again will ask you all for your support on this really unique piece of team things. Thank you, Councilman Espinosa. Seeing no other comments. Madam Secretary, Raquel Espinosa. Flynn I. Gilmore. Herndon, I. Cashman Canete Lopez High New Ortega I. Assessment Black. Clarke, I. Mr. President. I. Please call the voting and thus results. 13 Eyes. 13 eyes. Uh, yeah. Can spell 162 passes. Congratulations. All right. See no other business before this body. Go and enjoy the national championship. Thank you.