A bill for an ordinance changing the zoning classification for 2569 South Federal Boulevard in Harvey Park. Approves a map amendment to rezone property from S-SU-D to S-MU-5 (single-unit to multi-unit), located at 2569 South Federal Boulevard in Council District 2. The Committee approved filing this item at its meeting on 7-27-21.
Direct your comments to council as a whole, and please refrain from individual or personal attacks. Councilmember Flynn, will you please put Council Bill 759 on the floor for final passage? Yes, Madam President, I move the council bill 20 1-7 59 be placed upon final consideration and do pass. Thank you. It has been moved and seconded the required public hearing for council bill 759 is open. May we have the staff report and I see we have Jason here. Thank you, Council President Gilmore and good evening. Members of Council Jason Morrison with Community Planning and Development will be presenting the proposed rezoning at 2569 South Federal Boulevard, where the request is from SCD, which is a single unit, District two, SMU five, which is multi-unit with a maximum height of five stories. The proposed rezoning is located in Council District two, which is Councilman Kevin Flynn's district. It's in the Harvey Park neighborhood. Earlier this year, the existing church property went through a zone, light amendment and a parcel reconfiguration to create a new vacant parcel. The applicant is requesting this rezoning to have flexibility to construct 100% deed restricted low income senior housing financed with low income housing tax credits. The archdiocese housing will serve as developer as well as the owner and the operator. The proposed Zone District, which is SMU five suburban multi-unit up to five storeys, allows for residential uses in the suburban house. Duplex, rowhouse and apartment building forms up to a maximum height of five storeys. The site is currently zoned, as said in the suburban context single unit. The single unit district allows suburban houses with a minimum zone lot area of 6000 square feet. Surrounding zoning in the area includes single unit, mixed use, auto unit and open space. The Ruby Hill part view plane is applicable to the subject site. As a result, the site is subject to a maximum height restriction of approximately 100 feet. The proposed SMU five zone district has a maximum allowable building height of 65 feet, depending on the building form, and therefore the site is not impacted by the Ruby Hill Park View plane. As I mentioned, the site currently sits vacant, surrounded by mostly single unit uses as well as multi-unit and some commercial and retail. This slide shows the existing context surrounding the subject site with the proposed rezoning on the top left. Nearby, you see examples of single unit, multi-unit and commercial uses, as well as the existing Church of All Saints to the North and the College View Community Center and park to the east. The Map Amendment application was unanimously recommended for approval by Planning Board and moved forward by committee. Since the staff report was published, we received two letters of support from the College View Neighborhood Association and the South Marly Brentwood, Sharon Park Neighborhood Association. We've also received one letter of support from the Church of All Saints Council and one individual letter of opposition concerned about church overflow parking. As you know, there are five review criteria when analyzing the appropriateness of the request. The first criteria is consistency with adopted plans. There are two plans applicable to this rezoning, this comprehensive plan 2040 and Blueprint Denver. The rezoning is consistent with several strategies in the comprehensive plan and they can be found and detailed in the staff report . The future neighborhood context is suburban. Within this context, we find a range of uses from single unit and multi-unit residential to commercial corridors and centers, as this rezoning would allow a variety of building forms in a suburban setting. The proposed district is appropriate and consistent with Blueprint Denver's context description. The subject site is designated as a community center a future place type on the Blueprint Denver Future Places Map. This place type allows for a mix of office, commercial and residential uses, where heights are generally up to five stories. The proposed SMU five zone district allows a mix of building forms, and the five storey district height is consistent with the existing and surrounding contexts and appropriate for the community corridor designation and this particular location. Similarly blueprint Denver classifies west of Hester Avenue as a local or un designated street, where these streets are most often characterized by residential uses. Federal Boulevard is classified as a mixed use arterial. These streets include retail, office, residential and restaurants with buildings that are pedestrian oriented with high building coverage. The proposed SMU five zone district is consistent with these descriptions because it allows for additional residential uses at a subject site served by both a local street and a mixed use arterial. The subject property is located within the community centers and corridor's growth area. These areas are expected to see 20% of new employment growth and 25% of new housing growth by the year 2040. The proposed rezoning is consistent with the growth strategy that is mapped in this area. Staff also finds that the requested rezoning meets the next two criteria. The rezoning will result in uniformity of district regulations and will further the public health, safety and welfare primarily through its implementation of adopted plans and providing 100% deed restricted low income senior housing, which will provide greatly needed affordable housing options to this at risk population. The application identifies several changed or changing conditions as a justifying circumstance. The application notes that in addition to the recently adopted guidance for this area in Blueprint Denver, the increase in housing prices and aging population have created an unprecedented demand for affordable senior housing. Lastly, staff finds that the proposed rezoning is consistent with a zone, district purpose and intent of the SMU five zone district. And based on the review criteria, staff recommends approval of this application. Thank you. All right. Thank you for the staff report, Jason. And this evening, we have three individuals signed up to speak. All are participating virtually. And our first speaker this evening is David Hagan. Hi. Good evening, counsel. Thank you for allowing me to speak right now. Sorry I wasn't paying much attention there. I've been busy reading case law about public comment and when and how you're allowed to limit our public comment. When a government decides to offer public comment period in an open meeting it provides the citizens may exercise their First Amendment rights. Government officials can limit comments to controlled, disruptive or. Overly repetitive speakers and impose reasonable time, place and manner restrictions on speech. However, when you wrote a public comment were created. Towards greater public hearing. This isn't public comment. Because you're before my First Amendment, just. Open to public comment. This needs to be. A free speech prediction hearing. The government may not silence speakers on the basis of their viewpoint. The content of the speech limit the time. I start allocated. Basically, you can't stop me from speaking. When you put up a public comment time at the beginning of the session, you have to allow us to speak so you can limit the amount of time to 3. Minutes, but you cannot. Limit us from that. From the time we sign up is when we get to go. This is a recap by the end of the line every single week. Or this week. And so we ask that you speak to the reasons for that topic. It's a reasoning for 2569 South Federal Boulevard in Harvey Park. All right. Well, if you're not going to speak to the hearing at hand, we're going to go ahead and I'm going to move on to our next speaker this evening. We've got Jesse Paris. Yes, there was a care for those watching at home. My name is just personal representative for. Blacks are similar for self-defense because of African-Americans. So success was the only part of a lot of work for a lot of black males. And I'll be the next month of December 20, 23. I'm in favor of this rezoning tonight. Tonight's our seniors are a very neglected community in the city. We don't allow our elders stays in place. So saying that this is going to be used to provide housing for seniors on the full support of it that all five of the criteria so there's really nothing I can say that's going to change your mind on this. So. Yeah. I'm in favor of the free zone, just in case you don't know. The five criteria are consistency with adopted plans, uniformity of district regulations, further public health and safety and welfare. Justified circumstances. Consistency with neighborhood context and zoned district purpose in that sense. So I'm going to rule that out. I would really appreciate it if you allow everybody that signed up to speak. To speak. Thank you. Thank you. Our next speaker is test. I can still thank you for holding this space to speak. And I would just like to. To reiterate what David was saying in terms of the censorship and the limitations that have been placed on the public in terms of their content and and and even the shortening of time, which has has frequently occurred. I'd also like to speak about the. The zoning tonight, which, of course, is necessary for the housing. Need in the city, specifically the low income housing, because right now we're seeing developments all over the city that have been allowed and have actually been intended to be allowed for for at least two decades, according to some of the plans that I've been reading. And and so, you know, this this notion that we have a limited housing stock and that. We we don't have enough housing for people is an interesting one. Given that the city has deliberately limited the housing stock to only people who are wealthy and can afford it. Most of the people moving to Colorado. Are are able to probably afford the housing, but it's the people who have been here for generations who are being displaced. It's people who are black, Latino and indigenous who are being displaced in this city and segregated. Just like they are in the homeless shelters, which I visited last night. And I don't wish anyone the fate of having to go to a homeless shelter in this city. So I'm happy that this housing stock is going to become available, hopefully through the zoning. I would also like to ask that you please reevaluate and re revisit the criteria, the very criteria that you consistently say have been met. Well, I should back up. You say that they've been met for some of them when they are for developers and for white neighborhoods. But for other ones, you say that they either haven't been met or you've heard too much public comment and you and you deny any requests made by the community. But but I would urge you to revisit the criteria on which you're using, because it seems like some voices are getting left out of that process. And I'm also curious how people can weigh in to the actual planning department's decision making, because it seems like some of these issues that come before you that we we come and we bring to your attention and we raise concern about seem to actually start with the planning board of the city of Denver. So I'm curious if if there's any way for the public to get involved with that process. Thank you. Thank you. That concludes our speakers this evening on this required public hearing questions from members of Council on Council Bill 759. Councilmember Flynn. Thank you, Madam President. Is there someone here from the archdiocese? They are participating online so we can queue up. Jarrett Leroy, I believe, is present. Okay. Why were cuing them up? Jason, maybe you could address the question that the College View Neighborhood Association raised about set back from federal that they support the project but they would they would surely like to see some sort of a setback from the from busy federal boulevard for the front of the building. What are the what are the setbacks that are what's the range of setbacks for this zone district? Sure. So great question. So, a potentially what we're looking at, it's a it's a 20 foot setback right from wide right of way. And then there's also a ten a ten foot setback. And I did check with David Pellet. Pellet. Yeah. Thank you. And spoke to him a little bit in there. There was definitely some clarifying that had to be done. But I've spoken to to David and he's supportive now. Okay. So essentially what the answer that you gave me sounds like it satisfies the college view, concern about the setback on federal. Correct. And then the other the other concern was the letter of opposition from a neighbor on I think it was on green court at least. So about overflowed church parking. And I guess what are our requirements for parking for a facility of this nature and when it's using a lot that's been split off from a larger lot that also has parking requirements. Are they being met? By this reasoning? Mm hmm. Yeah, they will have to be met. So that'll be all discussed during the site development planning process with the various services. So they will have to be met in order to move forward. Okay. I'm thinking of the proverbial you know, you build a church for Easter Sunday. And. That's when you get the greatest attendance. And there's no doubt that there is overflow parking in the neighborhood on large these days, I imagine. So if there's a who is it from the archdiocese who's online? It's a Jarrett away. Okay. Could could he address that question for us, Madam President? Yes, of course. So the question is, what? What does the church do? What is the church's policy regarding overflow parking versus providing adequate parking on your on your parcel? Sure. Can you hear me? This is Jared. Thank. Yeah. I mean, almost every one of our churches, our parishes is well over part two standards. And we do have significant parking on the property now, um, to, to handle the, the need and even on feast days and on holy days. Um, and even without this parking lot or this lot, this lot is actually undeveloped and it's grass and there's equipment parked on it most times. And it's not really a parking lot per say for, for heavy church traffic. So, uh, we do have parking on the street. I know that's not always on large days. That's not always the, the, the preferred parking, but there is some there along the back side of our the parish lot as well as like I said, there's, there's more than, you know, 170 parking spots available on the property as it is today. And also, could you remind me, because it's been a long time since I had my meeting on this. You had you're applying for a five story. A zone that allows five stories. Is this going to be a five story structure or is it four stories? The current plan is for stores. That was that was my recollection. The reason I raised that is that one of the reasons I was concerned about the five storey height. And I think we need to remind everybody that we go from SMU three to SMU five, where we jump over four. So if you want four stories, you have to apply for five. Thank you, Madam President. That's all I have. All right. Thank you, Councilmember Flynn. And not seen any other folks in the queue. The public hearing is closed. Comments by members of Council on Council Bill 759. Councilmember Flynn. Thank you, Madam President. The Church of All Saints has been serving this community since the early fifties, I believe. There are still some people in Brentwood behind it who remember the huge fire that consumed this. I believe it was the social hall in the mid-fifties. And it's an institution in the neighborhood. And this parcel has been vacant, I think, ever since that time. The the archdiocese, through its some of its subsidiaries, also operates a housing for lower income seniors at Golden Spike just down the street. I believe that's a 12 story property. And the reason I raised that, Madam President, because this is one of those instances where the zoning out of a single unit zone district, which the church is on, even though it's not a single family home, zoning out of that blueprint gives us guidance. That uptick in density can be justified in that context, even in the suburban zone. And when I look up around federal north and south, I see that there is increasing density. There has long been density on Federal Boulevard. It's well-served by transit. It's well traveled. It's a state highway. And I believe that this is an appropriate double jump in in density from a single unit. And with with that and having met all the other criteria, particularly changed circumstances, I will be supporting this. Thank you. All right. Thank you. Councilmember Flynn and I will be supporting it this evening as well. It meets all of the criteria as presented. Council Bill 21, Dash 759 is on the floor for final passage. Madam Secretary, roll call on Council Bill 759, please. CdeBaca. I. Ortega. All right. Flynn. I. Herndon, I can I can i. Can each i. Sandoval, I. Sawyer, I. Torrance, I. Black eye. Clark. I. Madam President. I. Madam Secretary, closed the voting and announced the results. 13 and 13 Eyes Council Bill 20 1-759 has passed. Thank you to the staff and members of the public who joined us for that required public hearing or on to our second council member Flynn, will you please put Council Bill 810 on the floor for final passage?