A bill for an ordinance changing the zoning classification for approximately 9701 East 56th Avenue in Stapleton. Approves an official map amendment to rezone property located at approximately 9701 East 56th Avenue from M-RH-3 and OS-B to M-RX-5 (master planned, row-home to master planned, residential mixed-use) in Council District 8. The Committee approved filing this item at its meeting on 5-15-18.
I propose bringing us the results. 13 Ice 13 Ice Council Bill. 570 passes. Congratulations. All right. Councilman Lopez, will you please put Councilor Bell for 24 on the floor? That's Mr. President of the Council for 24th series of 2018. Be placed upon final consideration and do best. Thank you, Councilman Lopez. It has been moved in, seconded the public hearing for council bill 424 is now open. We have the staff. You may as soon as I load my PowerPoint. Okay. Which is Aunt Theresa Lucero lowering the PowerPoint. Okay. Good. I apologize. I still have vacation brain. I should have loaded this during the break. My apologies. No problem. Here we go. So this is an official map amendment. It is. Well. There we go. Sorry. It is for approximately 9701 East 56th Avenue. The proposal is to rezone from master plan context, rowhouse, three story and OSB, which is private open space to master plan context residential mixed use five stories. This is in City Council District eight in the Stapleton neighborhood. It is about 331 acres. It is probably the last large piece of Stapleton that we will be rezoning. It is currently vacant and the proposal again to go from master planned row house three stories and private open space to master planned residential mixed use five stories. The purpose is to rezone the property so the existing zoning, as I said, master planned row house three and open space to the north and east is the Rocky Mountain arsenal in Adams County, and there is agricultural zoning there. To the south is an old Chapter 59 mixed commercial, mixed use with waivers and you are one and to the west OSB and master planned residential mixed use five and mixed use five residential master plan. So the property is currently vacant again to the north and east is the Rocky Mountain arsenal. To the south is industrial property to the west, underdevelopment and vacant property. So hopefully you're seeing the aerial of the property. And then the pictures of. The area, most of it vacant. As you can see there, the the high school athletic fields south of 56th, just west of the industrial land, uses that are south of 56 pictures of the Rocky Mountain arsenal and off to the west. You can start to see some of the infrastructure going in. So the master plan context was specifically written for our newly developing large areas like Lourey and Stapleton, and this is a mixed use stone district. So Urban House, Duplex, Garden, Court and Row House are the primary building forms allowed and it's intended to promote development of of these new neighborhoods in phases over time. So this application first informational notice went out in January of 2017. Then there was a revised application. So we sent out a few more notices of complete application. We scheduled planning board, but there were some other issues. Reasons we had to delay planning board. So Planning Board was held finally on in April of this year, and there was a unanimous vote to recommend approval. And we were at Moody Committee on in May. And then, of course, here for this public hearing. There are several RINO's in the Stapleton neighborhood. We have no comment letters from an R.A. or a private party. So no comments on this one. And, you know, the criteria for a rezoning. So I'm not going to read them the plans that that are pertinent to this area. Our current plan 2000 Blueprint, Denver and the Stapleton Development Plan Comp Plan 2000 speaks to environmental sustainability supporting mixed use development, supporting development that mirrors development in the course city and of course, developing housing wherever we have the opportunity to develop housing. So staff believes that this rezoning is consistent with current plan 2000 blueprint. Denver calls this an area of change and single family residential and park, which is sort of remarkably like what's being built there. Except the park is rearranged a bit. And this is the same zoning or same land use category that we've used throughout Stapleton. So staff believes that this proposal is consistent with this blueprint, the blueprint Denver concept land use. So street classifications 56th Avenue is the only street built, although on the East, Havana is built to a degree. Both are mixed use arterials. And then no other streets are constructed in the area yet. The Stapleton Development Plan from 1995 talked about this area as a predominance of residential uses with opportunities for corporate or institutional land uses . District Center in the Middle. Transportation Improvements on 56th Avenue. A significant restoration of the Sandhills. Character of the parks and open space. Special sites for institutional and corporate uses and joint planning with Commerce City and the National Wildlife Refuge. Staff believes that this is consistent with the Stapleton development plan, that by using one of our standard zoned districts, we are furthering the uniform application of the districts throughout the city by allowing redevelopment of our former airport. We are furthering the public health, safety and welfare and of course, changed conditions is the justifying circumstance. And staff believes this criteria is met by all the changes happening in Stapleton and that this is consistent with the zoned district, a context and purpose and intent of the district. And with that, staff recommends approval. All right. Thank you, Teresa. We have five speakers for speakers this evening. I will call the first one. Bruce, Donna. Mr. President, members of council, good evening again. Bruce O'Donnell, 386 Emmerson Street in Denver. And I'm representing for a city Stapleton on this rezoning request. Thank you, Teresa, for an excellent job on what's probably the last big piece of Stapleton, just like Lowry the. Last two nights and eight of last. I guess. But we are here. The team and I are here to see. Do you have any questions? And we formally request that you vote to approve this rezoning request. Thank you. All right. Thank you, Mr. O'Donnell. Forest Hancock. Good evening. My name is Forest Hancock. I'm with four city Stapleton 7351 East 29th Avenue, Denver. I'm here to answer any questions that the council has it. Wow. What a name. All right, Tom Gleason. Good evening, Mr. President. Members of council. I'm Tom Gleason, also with four City 7351 East 29th Avenue. And again, we are available for questions. Great. Thank you, Mr. Gleason. Chairman Sekou. German so-called Russian action moving in self-defense. Representing poor, working poor. Senior citizens. And homeless for. Hmm. Absolutely not. No. No. No, no, no, no, no, no. Put in historical context. The neighborhood in the east side of Denver was called three phases when the gentrification hit. This was the strategy. You had the Near East, which was downtown all the way to. Probable bar. Then you have from Colorado Boulevard all the way to Quebec. That was called the Middle East. And then from Quebec on to Green Valley Ranch was called the Far East. And then here comes the developments of the move with you had Stapleton coming in with no housing and yet the existing stock of housing that was occupied by black people, 95% owned. Yeah. And then you had to flip on the real estate and everything went upside down. By design. That was not no accident. And then here we go. Look at the development. No laws, no development. Red District, Middle East. Business cycle, housing underground. Look, wait, just let's talk about this in the context. Don't interrupt. The reason. The reason. This is what we're talking about. I'm talking about people need to know what they're doing. So you need to know the historical context, what you uprating in so that you can make a decision. Not because of what they say or what to say or what's on a piece of paper. I'm doing what's like history. The history I lived. You weren't even here. You weren't even born. So you don't have a right to say nothing at this point. And it's very disrespectful. I'm going to continue. Okay. So if you don't talk about the reason, you will be cut off. So here comes homeboys. Ever take the record of development? The development inside of what they do. Black people are last in contract works. One, two, three ABC And then you had these black folks leaders who are being paid consultant to explain that to us so we can accept that. Yeah. Pictures on the wall everywhere. In this building. Coconspirator to this whole mess cost so many. Which is nothing but a tool for gentrification. And then we'll come tell you how to vote on it. So long I've been down here. 12 years. Unanimous. Here we go. Unanimous. I bet you that I put my last dime on it. Because I was looking at you doing the subcommittees when you're doing this. I know y'all in alignment with all of this. Tell me I'm not going to get a unanimous vote on this. Go ahead. Go ahead. I don't want people just looking. This thinks I'm some kind of procrastinator or some genius. No. The reason if you pay attention to the zoning process, it will let you know as you're looking at this on video, because you're not coming down here. You can't get here because it's rush hour traffic. 530 meetings. Yeah, real public meetings and then committee meetings. Or do an afternoon when everybody's at work. All outstanding. So we get to get to communicate with a machine. And then call your office and maybe get a loop. Maybe return a phone call. Maybe not. You guys are busy. Got a lot of work to do and a lot to do. Okay, so you. So are you close with this so you can get on with your process? Because I don't want you getting off to answer that. So, you know, 160 rule. Just just focus on the bills. Focus on the bill. Letting your feelings get made. You're a judge. You focus on the bill. Focus on 160. And stay off your phone. Focus on the bill. Yeah. No, the bill is. No, absolutely not. And if you vote for this, that's a bump of white supremacy. That's above gentrification. And you are above me. And this is the most profane body I've ever seen in my life. Without using profanity. Yeah. Yeah, that's right. Profane. In the annals of history. Smelling like camel dung in the nose of God. Okay. So with that, I'm going to close with this statement. There was a commercial on television. It was about the rabbits and tricks. And this little rabbit was always trying to steal the tricks from the kids. And the kids finally smacked the rabbit. A rabbit. Silly rabbit tricks. Anyway. So that had nothing to do with the rezoning. We're open to questions by members of Council. Councilman Ortega. Thank you. So my first question is about the. Tom, would you mind coming up? So is this site covered within the IATO, as was the rest of Stapleton? Yes. And excuse me, that's the Stapleton affordable housing plan specifically. Okay. So do you do we know yet whether this is going to include for sale or rental or maybe a combination? We this parcel is part of section ten and we expect to have affordable rental and affordable foreseeable. Okay. And where are you guys at in terms of overall meeting the obligations under that housing plan for for Stapleton? We, as you know, we have two components. We have an affordable rental and affordable for sale. Currently, we have affordable rental at 543 affordable rental units that have been completed as part of our donated land program for making that possible. We've donated at the present time about 11 and a half acres. As you recall, the figure initially was eight acres. But the reality is, is that we have donated much more land than that because we've also donated needed land on the Affordable Ownership Program as well. Together, the affordable rental and affordable for sale that have been completed are under construction as 1008 to 84 homes. We have the affordable rental is running probably at a little over, probably over 20% at the present time on the Affordable for sale, which has been challenged. There's no question about that. We are running probably about 7%. Okay. Can you tell me if this is the site that had the application that was received by the Colorado Land Board for drilling that they later. That was withdrawn? No. It was part of. His North Norfolk. Yeah, it was not on Stapleton and it was I think to the east of that, I think. But I'm not absolutely sure. Okay. I know they had gone on the Lowry. I mean, on the. The wildlife preserve with the arsenal. They are still here. But but I know there was one to sixth Avenue, so this this was not one of them. Okay. What what is the condition of the soils? Just looking at the map and the topography of it, it looks like there may have been some. I don't know some soil's issues with it. So what is the condition of that? In this particular area, there was some bedrock that was discovered. And so what we did is we worked with staff to make an adjustment so that the open space was configured to be over the bedrock because it prevented, obviously homes from having basements, etc.. So it's basically just an adjustment. Same amount of open space that was originally planned. Okay, let me just make sure I've asked all my questions. Okay. I'm good. Thank you. All right, Councilwoman Canete. Thanks so much, Mr. President. Hey, Tom, how are you? Just wanted to follow up on a couple of the questions that Councilwoman Ortega was asking. So it looks to me like we're looking at a slight increase in density here in theory. So from the RO home three to the Annex five. Do you have a sense of how many additional market rate units or, you know, overall units that you're you're going to be able to do compared to what you would have under the old zoning. Was to go with this or. Take a look at that. An increase in density. I'm not a councilwoman. I'm not really sure, to be honest with you. I'd have to check that out. All right. Yeah. And the reason I'm asking is, I think as we've talked over the years, when we increase the amount of market rate housing that you're doing, it then increases the percentage needed to be affordable. And so it moves the goalposts in some ways in terms of the goal, because we have a percentage goal here. And I guess to to follow up on that question that Councilwoman Ortega was asking, we we worked with EDI to do some analysis to say what are our hopes, what are the barriers, what are the challenges to getting to the goal by by build out? And I was just curious where that dialog is at. Are you still meeting regularly with the department? There were a few things they flagged that would need to happen for us to be on track because we do. We still continue to have meetings there. I think with the new housing officer, we have not yet met with that person, but the in particular the area where our transit oriented development is, we have already developed some affordable housing there, but we anticipate that there will be a more opportunities for higher density housing there and that will include additional affordable as well on ownership. Okay. So so no new announcements yet and how to make up the gap on the for sale side in term. I think their conclusion was that you would need to increase the pace of the affordable development. Right now it's kind of plodded along and it would need to increase considerably, which means using more developers at the same time. And then you would also need to to increase the density in a few of those places. So those were a couple of the recommendations. So are we in action mode on those or we're still figuring out? Well, and again, on the two pieces, first of all, on the affordable rental, that is something that requires in spite of the fact that we donate land and provide cash subsidies and requires traffic credits. And of course, that's a that's an issue to be dealt with there. On the affordable ownership, we have experienced a greater pace of the affordable ownership. We have two very good developers of affordable northeast Denver Housing Center is one and then Thrive is doing another one as well. So that piece has picked up and we think that going with those two developers makes a lot of sense at this point . Always in the back of our mind, we have talked about the possibility if it reaches a point that a another developer should be brought in. But we often make things more difficult for the two that are actually doing much better now. So our current plans are always just to stay with those two developers on the affordable ownership. Okay. It's my understanding that the EDI analysis is was that if you continue that there is no way to meet the goal because they have a capacity, they can only do so much at one time. And so it concerns me to hear that a decision has been made not to change strategy, because the conclusion was that that strategy would not get us to the goal. So I will check back and that that's concerning to hear that. Okay. Thanks. All right. Thank you. Councilwoman, can each. Councilman Espinosa. Theresa. I'm going to reference three slides because they're trying to understand this completely. Yeah, I think I understand it, but I need to see it and hear it from you guys. Slides five and six. One is the existing context zoning. Right there. One more. Next one. This one? That one. So what I'm going to be referencing is the stuff that's being built out right now, which is currently our five on the west side of the open space. And then what is the proposed area which is which is currently RH three? One quick question actually, is the general building form? I mean, is the urban townhouse? Form part of. Did it address the master plan special context or not? I'm sorry, can you repeat your question? So currently the, the if we're talking about those two zone districts, the R five and the RH three. Mm. They both allow single family, they also duplex they bought. But then the RH meaning rs5 then skips over garden court and and row house and goes right to the general building for. The General Building Forum was one of the problems that we addressed with the slot Home Task Force. Does that apply to the match in this context? Yes. Okay. The. So now the next slide after this. If we're looking at those two areas, we see how the form the current rx5 has been developed. Right. You have a little bit of retail along 56 or Northfield Boulevard, and then the rest is all largely single family duplex and largely single family with some. Townhouses on the edge that thrive this building. Now, if we go to the way in in the back set of slides where we're looking at the GDP. Hmm. Oh. Yeah. What I want to know is, is if we're going to the zone district that allowed them to just plat and build tract after tract after tract of sort of single family housing. It does this GDP tell me that this will this will in fact have a different outcome or will have the same outcome. The GDP doesn't get specific about which land uses where. I mean, it sort of does with its the patterns it has. But in the language, it's hard to read. But it's it basically says it's the intent of the developer to develop a range of housing types and know it's hard to read, but. So what are we hearing from the owners representatives here? What? It sounds like you guys are are you sort of on the west side, even though it's the same zone district, you're sort of you're doing single family largely in this area is intended to be something else or is it going to be more of the same? Do you want to answer that or. Councilman. We're working with the. Same homebuilders, bringing in the same product that you see on the west side of Section ten now. Okay. So under Mark's five, we can build garden courts under the general form. In the west side, we actually have. Row homes completely lining the central median. On Beeler Bel-Air median right there. So it is a blend of single family duplex row homes. And I guess I'm drawing a blank on a third right there. But it is it is going to be I don't want to say replication. But same builders, same products with the exception of we've got one new builder, I. Think we're talking about bringing in there. But no, no changes to our our recipe from what we've been building in Stapleton. Okay. Because I appreciate that. It's not that I wasn't I was actually expecting nor do I know that any other sort of concept would would be successful. I will just admit that I was a bit I was a bit green to the master plan zone districts. I didn't actually understand the context until tonight. And I'm sitting here going, how to how is this our X5, the same animal that we're dealing with in other contexts? And it is. It is an. And and so I just needed that clarification. So I appreciate it. It's a good question. But no no changes on our business. Program there with the homebuilders we're working with now. Thank you. All right. This concludes the questions for members of council. Sorry. Can I just clarify the building forms? I pulled out my code. Would that be helpful? Yes. Four or five urban house duplex in general. That's it. Yeah. So we didn't create an urban townhouse. And so you could theoretically not that any of your builders do this, but you could build a slot home out there. So choose. Correct? If that's the builder they select. They're looking for new places. I could tell you that much. All right. This concludes the questions for members of council. This hearing for 24 is now closed. Comments by members of Council. Councilman Herndon. Thank you, Mr. President. It is amazing to think in 2008, prior to be on town council, when I first my real estate agent brought me into Stapleton at the Timeless East Bridge. What has become of this community? There was no East Bridge Town Center. There was no connections through the war. There was nothing north of I-70. Blessed Lake was the actual park, not the new neighborhood. And what it has become ten years later is truly remarkable. I'm in support of this. I will say that affordability is a prime concern for anyone. I would encourage my colleagues, if you ever want to do a drive to with me, because I don't believe anyone on this day is has I'd be happy to drive through you and show the multiple sites. I do know Councilman Canete, who has been a champion for that, has done that with for city. I will also double check with Audi because I have been a part of those analysis when it has come to the affordability for city is doing a great job with the forint. There is a struggle with the first sale, but I've personally spoken with Jean Meyers of Thrive and Gate with Northeast Denver housing toward their products and toward their sites. And there's still the possibility coming at the TOD site. So I am confident that we are going to hit that. And you're already doing that above when it comes to the for rent cap housing is going again for traffic credits. Northeast Denver how they are doing their product off of Moline which take section eight vouchers I believe. And I mean, there's not another community in this city where I can say we have those transitioning, transitioning from homelessness, are living next to those and almost multimillion dollar houses. And so the success of Stapleton is truly remarkable. And I want to applaud all those who had the vision, community members, elected officials beforehand for what this community has become. And it's amazing that this is the last major piece north of 56. So can I want to congratulate you on that? And I would encourage my colleagues to support this so we continue to move forward this development. Thank you, Mr. President. Thank you, Councilman Kelso, Indonesia. Thank you, Mr. President. I agree with my colleague's comments about, you know, the the the impressive quantity of housing and the the important developers who are doing it. They are doing a great job. And I have done, I think, two of the twice I've toured. And I think there was quite a bit of progress even in between those tours as well as being some of those groundbreaking. But one of the things I'm faced with today is a decision about whether or not the proposed zoning is in conformance with the plans. And one of the adopted plans for this site includes the fact that there are contractual obligations. And I think one of the things that I regret our predecessors didn't do is they didn't require that the proportionality of the housing occur along with the development. And so we're in this unfortunate position of back loading, particularly the for sale housing. And so I have to evaluate the zoning decision and whether it's going to impede our ability to conform with those contractual obligations. And every time we increase the number of housing units overall, we increase as a as I described in my question, the goalpost moves for the affordability. You cannot build a 100% affordable condo project at a Tier D. I hope that's really important for folks to understand that you can't get it financed. The FHA will not underwrite the loans for the individuals who live in those condos to be able to get there first time homeowners. So you can put some of the affordability in a in a single building attitude, but you can't probably exceed 50%, which means then you have every the rest of that is going to be market rate. So and 50% is high. There aren't very many condo projects that are that are at that rate of affordability, which means you're going to, again, be increasing the number of market rate units as well. So I have to be able to see a path to know that if we're going to increase the amount of market rate housing, that we have a specific time allocated plan for how we're going to do that. And that that's where, you know, we spend a considerable amount of time going over the math. There is enough land, I believe it's possible there probably is enough financing and and demand to make to make those projects financeable. In terms of the the loan market, how much will one lender give to one developer is a question, a concern. And this I worked with with both Gate and Jean. They're both really great developers. This isn't about them. This is about, though, the contractual obligation. And the contractual obligation then falls on us as a city to enforce. So if we end up at this finish line and we're not there, then the question about how we go about legally enforcing it becomes our responsibility and how I say to the constituents who continue to share their concerns not just about the pace of new housing, but our loss of housing as some of those units time out because they're getting to that 15 year, the 15 year. Covenant period is ending on some of them in very short order. So I just can't without more information to indicate to me how we are recalibrating to make sure that we don't just meet the existing goal, but now we meet an increased goal because the zoning increases the capacity. I can't support it today because of the conformance with the plan. It does meet the other criteria in terms of, you know, being the right mix for this location. But but but that legal agreement is is an important one that we're bound, I think, to enforce as a city. And it would be inappropriate for me to say, go ahead. And then at the back end say, oh, I got you because you didn't you didn't fulfill the agreement. I think we're your partner in this. I think it's up to the city to help to develop strong criteria and enter into those negotiations to make sure we are helping this community achieve this goal because we're not just achieving it. For the residents of Stapleton, where we you know, we're achieving it for the overall citizens of Denver who forwent significant resources through the tax increment financing in order to make it possible. So it really, you know, in my mind, this is a goal that belongs to the entire city as well as to the residents who believe in the vision of that diversity. And we owe it to both of them to to make sure that these earnings conform with the plans. And I just can't find that tonight. So I will have to vote. No, thank you. All right. Thank you, Councilwoman Canete. Councilman Espinosa. I am not intending to contradict what I but Councilwoman Kennedy just said. But I do see it slightly different in that the the the forms that the allowed forms in the existing zoning versus the proposed zoning based on if you're building essentially the same thing using the same product. I mean, developers, you, you, you basically can keep going. There's there's nothing in the current current use by right situation that couldn't allow you to develop most of what you're doing. So the carve out, I mean, the ability to go from the garden court in the row house to add the general, that actually gives you a lot more latitude to be able to develop these affordable units to do to do, to be more economical and efficient with your square footage and to deliver these units. And you know that I'm saying that from an informed place, having worked out there and done these very same things. That said, I remember having these conversations, which is, yeah, you guys weren't expecting when you started this project some however long ago was you had a wildly successful market and you weren't expecting a couple of years, couple of three years of recession. But you've had you were also weren't expecting this degree of prosperity. And so I do think that there is in your business model, there should be I don't get into your financials and whatnot, but there should be the capacity to push these and help these guys deliver these units at a faster clip on the affordable side. So and I do see the general building form as helping deliver on those those needs. So I will be supporting this zoning, but I'm going to put it on for city. I'm saying that if it doesn't get done, it's because for a city didn't bite the bullet and dig in and make this happen. Because I think that I. I believe you guys can. So let's close the gap. There's still some struggles in the business side of things. I get that on the on the commercial side of things, but there is no problem on the residential side of the proforma. And so please, we have a need. This is a great place for families and people to start and a long, a very long, prosperous life in Denver. And but if they don't have the opportunity, it can't happen that way. So please provide those opportunities. This zoning, this additional little carve out gives you that additional flexibility. Please use it to deliver on what is needed. Thank you. All right, Councilwoman Ortega, I'll be brief. And Stapleton has been very successful with the development, both with commercial as well as residential. I share the concern that we have not yet been able to get there on the for sale side. I know on the rental side we've done very, very well. And I would just ask that rather than wait till we get to the end, that we have, you know, periodic updates where you guys come in and tell us where where this is going bring you into our. Council committee to to do an update, maybe with our housing subcommittee to just monitor where that's at, because I think we all want to make sure that that that goal is met. And if we just wait till the end, then shame on all of us for not really tracking it in a way that could be a lot more intentional. So that would be my request to our current and incoming president. So I'll be voting for this tonight. Thank you. We have an incoming president. I'm just telling Councilwoman Quinn each year. Thank you. I did just want to add one more fact to the record, because I think I glossed over it in the mention of rental reminded me there are two components in the housing agreement that that was signed. One was an aspirational goal about the quantity of rental overall, and the second was the portion of that that would be affordable. Where Staples in is doing a great job is on the portion of the rental that is affordable. It's higher than the aspirational vision in the agreement, but the overall quantity of rental is far lower. And I have to put this on the record because I'll get an email from a cab member by the morning if I don't. But the cab will tell you that the overall there is much less rental in the entire project than was envisioned. And whether it's dedicated as affordable or whether it is simply just rental housing, which generally is more accessible for folks who may not be candidates for for for sale, that is an aspect to the mixed income vision that is is not quite where the community expected it to be, where the agreement estimated it to be. That is not a binding piece of the agreement. But I did just want folks to know that when you analyze those quarterly reports and time, you're great. I appreciate you sending them. You guys have been transparent and shared everything we've asked you to. But but you can you can track this, and you have to pay attention to the total number of rental units, not just the percentage, because the percentage is high, but the overall number is low. So I just because I glossed over that, I just wanted to make sure I clarified the record and and because I know the community will catch me if I if I didn't clarify that. Thanks. I sure will. Thank you. Councilwoman. Can each. And the only thing I have to add is a. Gentleman heard it. You know, I was just going to offer that they they do come. I think there's some generalizations that I, I wouldn't characterize as fair to the to the builder right now, but it's not the appropriate form to have this element on chambers. But as someone who has lived here and lived this for a long time, I have no doubt the developer's commitment to affordability. And there are some things that have changed when it comes to that number. As we have talked about with the cab, the fact that one neighborhood, Central Park West, is a huge residential neighborhood, the original intent that was supposed to be commercial, but there was no interest in commercial at that time. So being adaptable and being flexible for city with residential, what's the community embraced? And that did change the number overall and has an impact. So I just think there's some things that we're just not getting specific enough that I don't think is fair. So I would offer that this does come to committee of those councilmembers are interested or come to a cab meaning we talk about this regularly affordability. So I just wanted to just throw that out. There's, there's some numbers that we're not getting into now that I think we should before we make generalizations. But I, I would hope that the majority of this body would move to support and support this. Thank you. Okay. Any other comments? Going once i will say Councilman Herndon, another area where homeless housing is next to $1,000,000 homes is right here in your downtown. All right. I will be supporting this as well. Great debate, everyone. Madam Secretary, roll call. Herndon. I Cashman. I can eat. Lopez All right. New Ortega. I. Sussman. I black. Clark All. Right. Espinosa. Flynn All. Right. Gilmore I Mr. President. I police. So the following US results of. 2012. As one nay 424 has passed. Congratulations. Monday, August six, 2018. Council will hold a required public hearing of Council Bill 18 Dash 668 Changes on a classification of 2900 South University Boulevard in Wiltshire. You know about that? And it required a public hearing and council bill on Council Bill 18 Dash 699 changes on classification of 150 and