A proclamation honoring Antonio (Tony) Lopez for his service to the Denver Police Department and contributions in District 6.
to solve a problem. I know we've been at many, many community meetings. I can remember one Saturday morning we were at a Wieden seed meeting in the Baker neighborhood. The city was successful in securing a HUD building. It was a home on on the block that we had one of the key gang members that lived on. And we were having a meeting, a weeding seed meeting in this house and down the street where this gang member lived. We heard these gunshots and the officers ran down the street. They ran out, told everybody to duck and cover. And I don't even remember if you guys caught the bad guys. But, you know, these are the kinds of responses and incidents that I think all of our officers deal with on a day in and day out basis. And yes, we have been challenged with police community relations. But I got to tell you that we didn't see a program. Made all the difference in the world, in our police community relations. And I think these are the kinds of programs that, you know, if we could get back to having some resources to be able to to have the kind of programs that allow us to have that direct interface very similar to what the Weed and Seed program did. That was the first steps of community policing in the city of Denver under the leadership of Jerry Whitman. And Jerry did that program so well with all of the officers who who worked with a number of neighborhoods across the city where we had some serious gang warfare in the in the early nineties, so much so that they called it the summer of violence. It's when we created the. The curfew program that still exists today to make sure that young people, when they're out past curfew, there's a place for them to go to make sure that they're safe and that we don't have, you know, the kind of activity that occurred back then. And these are all programs that Commander Lopez has been involved in, in one way or another. And I just I just can't thank you enough for the work you have done. And I just have to say to Commander Sutter, you have some big shoes to fill. I know you have been around the city a long time and you have done an outstanding job as well. But everybody in this district knew Commander Lopez, and I know that you will get to know them as well. I know we have a meeting in downtown in a couple of weeks with some of the neighborhood groups concerned about some of the violence on the 16th Street Mall. But I know you two have been friends for a long time and Tony's probably filled you in and all the details of what's going on. But I wish you luck in your new position. And Tony, same with you as you go out to dinner. Thank you for your service. And I want to thank your family for the sacrifices that you all have made for him to be able to serve our community as well as he has done. Thank you. Thank you, Councilwoman. Councilman Lopez. Thank you, Mr. President. And thank you for bringing this proclamation forward. Commander Lopez, we have a good history together. And you have served this district very well, but. You've served this city very well. You know, you've. And this time we see you as a commander. For the longest time, I've always known you as Lieutenant Lopez. Right. And out in District one. And the first time. So for those of you who don't know, I well, I talk about this all the time of being a native . But I grew up I was born and raised in Denver, born and raised in the West Side. I was born in a in an era where you couldn't wear a color like this tie or a shirt like this blue. And if you did, you you'd nearly get killed. You had threats on you just for doing it. I couldn't even wear a Broncos shirt walking around Westwood because it was blue and you couldn't be walking around Westwood wearing blue. I learned my lesson the hard way on that one. I got beat up pretty badly and there was that. That was pretty rampant in the early nineties. There was a lot of fear. So the Weed and Seed program was a very effective program. It was one of those programs that you really invested in to really try to figure out how we would be able to create this this community right where where there's less violence affecting our young people. But the one thing it relied heavily on was police involvement and a trust between community and police. And during that time that was pretty rough as well to. And I've made it well-known that I was growing up as a kid. I didn't trust anybody in a uniform, especially a police uniform, for a lot of different reasons. There was a lot of discourtesy back in the day. There was, you know, you just growing up in the West Side, you didn't have that good relationship. Right. But then along comes a person like Tony Lopez and Commander Quinonez. Who get it. And. I first met Commander Lopez when I was organizing with the Janitors Union. And we would go and shut down a street. You know, get arrested. And, you know, first thing I thought there, all these guys are going to drag us. They're going to, you know. No, no, no, no. I'm just going to give you an order, plain and simple. And there it was. But he we always were in communication. Any time we had a protest or an action. And some of you in this room remember this. You know, we the first person to say, hey, we just want to make sure everything goes well. I want to make sure that the folks are peaceful and I make sure you guys don't get hit by cars. We'll help you. Really? Yeah. But what if it's. Critical of you all? We'll still help you. Right. It's your freedom of expression. It's your free speech. And we're here to protect those rights. Right. And in 2006, I had the task of organizing, along with a couple of other people, the largest march in this state's history. 100,000 people we had. The first one was about 75,000. The second one was about 100,000 and 2006. And my first. And that was a huge amount of people that we could not really fathom or to think about. I mean, how do we keep a violent act from happening? How do we protect the protesters? Are not protesters, but the folks that were rallying for immigration reform. How do we do this in a safe way in the first two people to come to the table? Or Lieutenant Lopez and Commander Quinonez. And they say we will do everything possible to make sure that this goes peacefully to help you, help you know, help you get your point across in a peaceful way and without having to because we had threats of the Minuteman coming and, you know, they antagonized people. They spat at people they, you know, did all kinds of stuff to really antagonize and really try to. Not one incident took place that whole day. And you know what? In a community, when there was an issue, you would call your district one officer, your commander, your lieutenant. And there is front and center was Commander Lopez. That's community policing. Always treated. You and always treats you. With a level of courtesy. It's really high disrespect and dignity, no matter if you're a council person or if you're a person on the street or somebody in the back of a squad car. Always treated you with respect. And he emulates a lot of what our officers are today. And that's the exact training they go through and to have that kind of a leader to look up to. That's your standard is a is a is a Tony Lopez. That's a heck of a standard. That's a very high bar to strive to be. And I could say that, you know, you know, having developed into those days from a young man to doing the activist stuff that even now, nine years into it as a city councilman, working with you, working with the department has has been a great pleasure. And I, I know this is not you. This is not a bye bye. You're just continuing to a different assignment. And here's the thing. You have the respect of the city and the community behind you and so many. This man is in District six, I think Robert Chief Robert White gave you a very good assignment, a very tough one, one of the hardest ones in the city. And you've done it well. But may I say this in Spanish, we have a saying not quite as bad or not, but a sad look and not quite as bad. You can't be, which you can't see. And just a moment ago, my nine year old daughter was here. She has this cute little name badge that you made for her as a last name on it. Her name is Lopez. My name's Lopez, right? She walks up to Commander Lopez and went right for his name badge. Your name's Lopez, too. And the look on his face. Yeah. My name's Lopez, too. Well, there's a lot of little Lopez's out there. Not mine, but just one that I. That Tony's other Lopez. But there's a lot of them. And you know what they see? They see you. And they see what they can be. Right. And that is super important. And now I'm proud, too. I'm proud of our department because they have a Lieutenant Lopez, they have a Chief Quinonez, and they have Chief Robert White, who's the first African-American chief of this department. And if there is no other time where you can't be what you can't see, this is it. These kids, these young people, this community can now see you in a lot of salutations around the world. It's not just hello or hi. It's. I see you. And they see you. So thank you for being something that they can see. I appreciate it. Thank you, Councilman. Councilwoman Black. Thank you, Mr. President. Very brief your remarks. Thank you for your service. Congratulations. Wish you good luck. But I also want to thank all the officers who are here. Thank you for your service. And thank all of you who spent ten days attending neighborhood picnics all around the city. All of us went to a lot of picnics and many of you were there. And the people and the community appreciated it so, so much as did all of us. So thank you for coming, and thank you for your service. Thank you, Councilwoman Gummer. Thank you, President. Commander Lopez. I have not had the pleasure of working with you very closely, but I look forward to that changing with your new assignment at Denver International Airport. But I have to convey a much thanks to you. You know, your house, your name is spoken with reverence in my house. If there is a phone call or something happening downtown and Commander Lopez was on the phone. Somebody was going out the front door to have a conversation that I knew was very serious. And so, you know, you're very respected as far as your work. And I just look forward to building a relationship with you and a DIA before you go and play on your retirement. So thank you for your service. Thank you, President. Yeah, thank you, Councilwoman. Councilman Hurd. Thank you, Mr. President. Commander, I just want to say, you know, the adage rings true. Nobody cares how much you know until they know how much you care. And there's never been a question how much you have cared for the community that you serve and the officers that have served with you and that has served you well over your illustrious career. The airport is in good hands, well done. And as someone that has worn a uniform, I know it is not just the individual that wears the uniform the family does as well. And so that's figuratively and actually literally in your case, too, with your son. And so to the family, I want to say thank you, because he could not be the successful man that he is without your support. So thank you as well for for being a part of this journey with him, because he would not be the excellent man that he is without you as well. So thank you. And congratulations to you, too. Thank you, Mr. President. Yeah, thank you, Councilman. Councilman Espinosa. Good. I'm glad Chief White is here. Did you hear that whole track record? Why you're not allowed to make this decision? Come on. I'm just. Just. I wanted to take my opportunity from the constituents of District one to thank you for your years of service and commitment to this community. I really appreciate it. And I'm glad we get to continue seeing you out there at the airport. Thanks. Thanks, Councilman. Councilman Clark. Thank you, Mr. President. I can't say it any better than my colleagues have, but I just wanted to make sure to add my thank you for your service and your sacrifice to you and to your family for everything that you've done for our great city. Thank you. Thank you, Councilman. Madam Secretary, roll call. Mr. President. I. Black I. Clerk i. Espinosa, i. Flynn, i. Gilmore. I. Herndon. Cashman I. Can. Lopez I. Ortega. Absolutely. Assessment I. Police Kosovo to announce the results. 12 Eyes. 12 Eyes. Proclamation 590 has been adopted. All right. I'd like to invite Chief White to dance now in. Just over. I want to see that, please. And then Commander Lopez, please come. First, let me say this. Let's keep that dance little thing between you and I. And congratulations, Mr. President. And I'm so glad to see you. And I know that you have a good appreciation about the miracle of prayer. Yeah. Thanks, Tony. And I, too, will be brief, because I know it's important to get about the business of the council I have made. I first want to acknowledge what the president I'm sorry, former President Herndon has stated. None of this would be possible for Tony. And I don't think I have to speak for him, but I'm going to if it hadn't been for the support of his family. So I would ask that all the members of the Lopez family please stand so we can acknowledge you. And I'm going to actually pass to Mike to Tony. But I will say this. I mean, obviously, I think everyone knows that doing my short time here, I've made a lot of changes. Some of them are certainly been questionable in the minds of some. Some have been really good, some of it very good, and very few have been great. And one of the few great changes that I did not make was retaining Tony Lopez and keeping him in District six. Tony, on behalf of all the members who wear this uniform and maybe more importantly, the members of this community, I cannot thank you enough for the dedication and the tireless effort that you have made in the six years that you've been the commander of District six. And Tony is not retiring yet, but Tony is close to retirement, and it was critical that we transition someone in to replace him. I'm going to be honest with you, that was not an easy task, but I think we found the right man in Ron Sonya. So Tony's going to spend his last. According to Tony, he's counting his last one year, 11 month and three. Days at the airport. But doing I think Maggie's wife is probably counting more than Tony, but during that time, he's going to continue to transition. I'll command you, Sonya, to make sure he can pick up the ball or where Tony left off. So with that, I give you Tony Lopez. Well, I don't know where to begin. I just want to thank the council for recognize me. This is an amazing honor. When I began my career in 1983, I would never have realized or imagined that 33 years later, I'd be standing in front of city council and I'd be getting recognized for being allowed to wear this uniform , being allowed to wear this badge and to serve the city and county of Denver, because that's actually what it boils down to. I came to this country as a political refugee from the island of Cuba, received my citizenship in 1977, a product of Denver public schools. And I gave I had the opportunity to give back to the community and to serve the community that I grew up in. I can't tell you what an honor it is. My son has followed in my footsteps and I can't tell you how proud I am. My chest swells when I talk and I think about Tony. And as you all know, we had a we had a bump in the road in December. But he's strong, he's good, and he's looking forward to coming back and serving our community. I celebrated my 59th birthday on Saturday and I think I got my birthday present back in December when the good Lord gave us our son back. So on behalf of my family, my wife and and my good friends and my my good friends, Chief Quinonez, and everything that he's done to support me through the years, through thick and thin, we've been together and and I think we've done an amazing job together in in the community in northwest Denver, working side by side. And my mom is working directly for for the chief. I've got a wear I've got a very special place in my heart for him are almost like brothers. It was a tough transition, but mom and I talked and in the last couple years, I've got to start slowing down just a little bit or or I won't get a chance to enjoy my retirement. But I'm just honored. I'm just absolutely honored. So on behalf of my family and myself, thank you. Thank you very much. I'm very humbled. Thank you, Commander Lopez. All right. Resolutions. Madam Secretary, we read the resolutions. From business development 530 resolution approving a post contract city and county of Denver in Swanton and Boulders concerning construction services at Denver International Airport 531 A resolution approving a post contract between City and county of Denver, Hazleton Construction, LLC, concerning on call construction services at Denver International Airport 532 a resolution approving of his contract between city and town. Denver Hensel Phelps Construction Company concerning Uncle Construction Services at Denver International Airport 533 A resolution of a new post contract between City, County and Emery MCI Constructors Inc. Concerned Uncle Construction Services at Denver International Airport. 534 A resolution approving post agreement between city and county different Ludwick Electric Company Concerned Uncle Miscellaneous VHS Mill Write Services for Denver International Air Services 535 A resolution approving post agreement between City Encounter and Precision Industrial Contractors, Inc. concerning alcohol Miscellaneous B B Millwright Services for Denver International Airport 536 A Resolution for Universal Agreement three In City and Town Different Western Industrial Contractors, Inc. Concerning Alcohol VHS Miscellaneous Mill Rite Services for Denver International Airport 537 E Resolution Improvement was agreed to in city in Town Denver in Cactus Communications Inc. Concert Communications for Denver International Airport from Governance and Charter Review Fy23e resolution approving the mayor's reappointment, says Stapleton Development Corporation Board of Directors by 26, a resolution approving the mayor's appointment to the Denver American Indian Commission. Infrastructure and Culture FY 20 Resolution Revenue based Contract 2018 City and County Denver and Goodland Construction, Inc. for workplace culvert rehabilitation at Third and Hooker. If I do anyone a resolution I step in improving the platters tables and filing number 49 Fy22 resolution establishing improving the platters tables and filing number 51 FY 29 A resolution is improving the planning of Denver Connection West filing number one safety will be to 60 resolution proven Evos lease in agreement between City County Denver Waste Waste Management, Colorado and Asphalt Specialties Company, Inc. for operation of a concrete asphalt recycling facility and batch plant at the Denver Rapid Disposal site. 441 A resolution approving a proposed agreement between city and town Denver and work options for women to provide cafeteria and catering services for 90 and 490. A resolution approving a proposed agreement between City County Denver and Arche Enterprises, Inc., doing business as Independent Sales Inc. are to provided community correction services. Thank you, Madam Secretary, will you please read the bills for introduction. For Finance and Services by 24 April for an audience of any serious plan for the creation of Midtown Metropolitan District by 25, a bill for an ordinance approve any service plan for the creation of the first Greek Village Metropolitan District 527 Bill for an ordinance to appropriate funds from the Reno General Improvement District for the streetscape enhancements along Brighton Boulevard by 28 before an audience to appropriate funds from the amended funding agreement for the Levitt Pavilion Amphitheater 542 A bill for an ordinance to provide funds to the revenue base, Winter Park, Parks and Recreation, Capital Fund, Governance and Charter Review VI 67 and bill for an ordinance many to a vote of qualified register electors of the city and county of Denver, and a special municipal election to be held in conjunction with the State General Election. November eight, 2016. A proposed amendment to the Charter, the City and County of Denver concerning Office of the Independent Monitor 569 A bill for an ordinance many Section 2-3 of Chapter two of the Denver Business Code regarding electronic signatures. Infrastructure and culture. And I know a bill for Norton speaking a portion of right away bounded by Julien Street was 25th Avenue, Irving Street and West 26th Avenue without reservations. Five of four bill for an audience for any of those intergovernmental agreement your hills village in County of Rapa regarding Coasteering on the High Line Canal Underpasses Project at Hampton Avenue, Colorado Boulevard, FY17 bill for an ordinance relinquishing five easements established by the board, one filing number four subdivision plat recorder with the Denver Clerk and recorder of reception number 201515370 to locate along the rear line lot lines of lot 15 through 20 block one and bounded by South Quebec Street, East Archer Drive and Oneida Court 518 A bill for an ordinance relinquishing the easements the easement established by the easement for right away record with Denver click and recorder at reception number 2011051715 and located at 155 Steele Street 519 A bill for an ordinance relinquishing the easement assessed by the permanent nonexclusive easement record with a Denver click and recorder at reception. Number 2012129620, located at 27 nine Uinta Street, 530 before an ordinance featuring a portion of the alley bounded by Steel Street, Second Avenue and St Paul Street without reservations and 503 bill for an ordinance approving and providing execution prose intergovernmental agreement between City and County. Denver, Colorado Department of Transportation concerning the Highline Canal, Hampton and Colorado Project and the funding there for OC Councilmembers. This is your last chance to call out an item. So I'll give you a little bit time to do that. Look down the road, make sure everybody is good. So we'll start with resolutions. See here for resolutions. ORTEGA All right. We have 530, 531, 32 and 33. ORTEGA Is that correct? Correct. Come from. Okay. For Bill for introductions we had of Ortega for 542. We have Lopez for 567. We have Ortega for 569. And we have Espinosa for 908. So. All right, everybody. Okay. We'll look on our bills for final consideration. We have no bills called out for pending. We have no bills caught out. So, Madam Secretary, will you pull up? Council Bill 530. And first, let me ask Councilman Ortega, these three these three bills, would you like to deal with all of them? Surely there should be four. And yes, we can deal with all of them. Okay, let's deal. And what would you like to do with these bills? I'd like to call them up for a vote. Okay. Councilman Flynn, will you make the calls tonight? Yes, Mr. President, I will. Okay, great. Madam Secretary, can we put these? Yes. On a block. On a block. Thank you. All right. And we have a move in a second when you do comments here, uh. Councilwoman Ortega. Thank you, Mr. President. You know, I've been raising questions about our use of on call contracts. And tonight we have four bills. These are all for Delia that equal $100 million. And, you know, I know we need to get work done in the city, but I think uncalled contracts have been used as a way of just. I don't know. Trying trying to move things forward. But in in each of these are $25 million. And I think all of these move forward on a consent calendar. But my concern is that we don't know the details of the work that will be done on any of these. And typically for a contract the size of each of these, we receive pretty, pretty grave detail about what the project might be. And I know in in the case of each of these there to have these contracts available to do work as may be needed at DIA. But I think for $100 million in contracts, it should require them to come back and tell us exactly what we're being asked to approve in each of them. They're basically for. You know what? What it says is they're for a wide range of construction projects from general remodel and exterior construction to both airside and landside. That's pretty broad. And I know the administration has has talked about kind of, you know, giving us an update of of how they're going to continue using on call contracts. But in some cases, it's a backdoor way of circumventing compliance with our minority in business minority and women business contracting to ensure that goals are being met and that we are not left out of the process. Normally it's a half a million dollars that this body has to approve contracts for and to do each one for 25 million. I'm just not comfortable with allowing them to go forward without knowing the detail of what we're being asked to approve. So I'm going to be voting no tonight. Thank you. Thank you. Councilman Ortega. Councilman Hernan, do you mind? We have not put this on the floor. Oh. I was actually gonna say, Mr. President, and then I was going to make the comment. Okay. Yeah. Yeah, I know. It's a rookie mistake. Okay. Councilman Flynn, please put this the four resolutions on the floor to be adopted in a block. Thank you, Mr. President. I move that the following resolutions be adopted in a block. 535, 31, 532 and 533. All series of 2016. All right. Spin moves in a second. It kills my. Hernia. Thank you, Mr. President. I wanted to give someone from the airport. I see. Aaron, if he wanted to come up to the podium. And as you are coming up, Aaron, if you could just briefly talk about any calls. We've we've done this before. This is certainly not new. Our mayor represented the airport and to, uh, to imply that he doesn't care about AC, DC and MWD eagles, I think that that's something he does. So I want to give you the opportunity to come up and just talk about this is something I do support, but I just wanted to give the airport the opportunity to come and speak to it. If you if you so chose. And also to it's up to is no guarantee that you spend the 25 million to I think that's important to note as well. That's correct, Aaron. But as a Denver International Airport, so I actually have one of my colleagues here. He's the senior vice president of Airport Infrastructure Management, and he can speak to those to that in detail. Well, first of all, thank you, Mr. President, and council members. It's an honor and a privilege to stand in chamber and defend the work that we do at airport on behalf of the city and county of Denver. We like to think that we're good stewards of the resources you provide us, and we welcome the opportunity to explain kind of what we use those resources for and how they're accounted for on the contracts. To Councilman Herndon's point, this is a cap. This provides us coverage against for contractors that allow us to resource them as a service at the airport when we experience a mechanical or construction type of breakdowns or failures that require immediate access, where a 24 seven 365 operation, we are Denver's gateway to the world. We are the access point through which international and national travel occurs in and through our region. And so we take great pride in being able to respond when incidents occur and be able to reach out to these contractors to provide that service by seeking to put four contracts in place. It gives us the opportunity to kind of spread the wealth among a variety of local construction companies who have greater resources and greater reach into the than maybe we be the ability there's 30%, I think, on this contract that we cover through minority and small business operations to ensure we can provide that service and opportunity out at the airport. And none of these actions whenever something occurs and I'll give you an example this past winter season, when we experienced the blizzard that kind of shut the airport down for a couple of hours, we had catastrophic failure of the canopies, the ability to kind of call out resources to respond to that , to clear that, to keep commerce moving and the traveling public safe is a valuable resource to us. So I give you assurances that we think long and hard when we exercise these contracts that we have for to kind of spread the wealth. And we watch very closely to ensure that they're executed in the best interests of the city. Great. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. President. Thank you. Why don't you guys stay on this? Councilman Flynn, did you have any questions? Do you want to make comments? Okay. Councilman thing. Go ahead. Thank you, Mr. President. First of all, I didn't catch your name. Could you give us your name? I'm sorry. I'm Mark Baker and currently the acting senior vice president at the airport for airport infrastructure management. And I do understand and sympathize with Councilwoman Ortega's position, because we don't normally send $100 million out the door over the next three years and not know what we're getting for it. But I understand also the need for long haul contracting for the type of services that you're that you just described. Is there a way to report back and maybe this is better for Aaron? Is there a way to report back to us? Maybe through the the the business committee that oversees airport. Yes. When maybe on a quarterly basis, when you do issue contracts under this long call? Yes. We would certainly welcome the opportunity to do that. Mr. President, could I suggest that that. You know. Warm allies that. I am going to invite Councilwoman Gilmore, who the chair of the committee, in on this conversation. So thank you. Thank you, Mr. President. That is a wonderful suggestion, Councilman Flynn, and I think Councilman Herndon as well for his questions. You know, over my year in office, I have to say, you know, the folks at DIA, they are top notch and they are not doing anything that is going to impede or affect the effectiveness of Denver International Airport. It brings in $27 billion to the region and that is going to keep moving. And it is a three 6524 hour operation. And so I'm fully in support of this. And your suggestion, Councilman Flynn, is very well taken and we can go ahead and do a quarterly update at committee. Thank you, Mr. President. Craig Councilwoman. Yep. Thank you. Just one more. Just a second. Councilman Ortega, do you have a question or comment? Just a quick comment. Okay, you guys get set. Did you were you going to ask a question? No, go ahead. Okay, sir. I just want to say I appreciate the conversation and the commitment to do quarterly updates. I know we've been waiting. I've been asking for an update on the final closeout on the hotel and transit center, and I haven't seen that that's been scheduled yet. So I think it's important that this body that has to approve the contracts is better informed on the big projects that are happening out at DIA. I mean, we know you guys are going to be bringing forward a $300 million contract eventually on the build out of the Great Hall. At some point I've been told that it's imminent that we're going to be moving forward with runway number seven. You know, so when we start talking about the fiscal health of DIA, I think we need to understand the big picture and not just the piecemeal projects that keep being brought before us that don't give us the opportunity to understand the impact to the fiscal health of our airport. So anyway, I thought it was important to make that statement. Thank you. Thank you. And thank you all. You guys can have a seat if there are no other comments. Madam Secretary. Raquel. ORTEGA. No. Sussman. Black eye. Clark. I. Espinosa. Flynn. I. Gillmor. I. Herndon. I. Cashman. I can eat. Lopez. All right. Espinosa. Hi. Mr. President. I closed voting as the results. 11 eyes, one knee. 11 eyes, one day, one day. Council Bill five 3531, 532 and 533 pass. Councilman Lopez on a bill for introduction. You have called out council bill 567 regarding the Office of the Independent Monitor. What would you like for us to do with that? Thank you, Mr. President. I would like to request a one hour courtesy public hearing on Monday, August 15th. That's next Monday. Great. Would you like to make? That is thank you for for making that comment and we'll make sure that we put that in the record so that we have a when our public here. Would you like to make any comment? No. This is just the the. I proposed about an amendment that I am moving forward concerning the Office of Independent Monitor. This would move a couple of provisions which would, you know, make more permanent the Office of the Independent monitor itself and the Citizen Oversight Board. This doesn't, you know, expand his powers. Or the powers of the board. This just simply would like to ask the voters. Well, hopefully more voters in November the whether they would like to see whether we would like to see. This office and this board be more permanent. In the charter rather than just in code. All right. I just want to remind everyone that this is on first reading and we will have a courtesy public hearing August 15th. Thank you. Thank you. I almost got you, Commander. Thank you, Councilman Lopez. Four bills for introduction. We have Ortega with 542. COUNSEL Marcelo, what would you like to do with this? I just have a question. Actually, it's not a question. It's a comment. Okay, so this is approving half a million dollars from winter park funds. It's to go into the Confluence Park Project, which I support. I think it's really important that that work take place. I am on the Winter Park Advisory Board and this project should have gone before the advisory board before this body takes formal final action. And it's just to raise question about procedure in terms of making sure that, you know, we don't always do things after the fact. I know that it's it's something that will be coming up. And Laura, I don't know if you want to come forward and just clarify that. I mean, to a expressed a concern about the procedure when this came to committee. But the advisory board looks at the. Recommendations on expenditure of the dollars that come out of the Winter Park Fund for capital projects as the recommended to the manager of Parks and Recreation. And again, I support the need for this. It's work that has to happen. But I'm just raising a procedural question. Sure. Good evening, Councilor Perry. Capital program manager in the Budget Management Office. So the advisory board that council and. Ortega is referring. To is the Winter Park Board of Trust Trustees, and they are. Tasked with three, three, three things. Annually, essentially to verify that the dollars are received from Winter Park to support. The capital program. Two To confirm that the projects recommended via the annual budget process do meet the ordinance. Requirements set. Forth for use of winter park funds, which are the. Rehabilitation and rehab of existing parks. Capital assets. They do meet once meet once a year during. The annual budget process, and we doing so within. The next month. The third item that they verify is the maintenance of effort calculation for Parks to ensure that Parks is receiving a base amount of capital funding annually to maintain their assets. The Winter Park Board of Trustees has previously reviewed the Confluence Park project. There are several preparations that have been made over the last couple of years out of Winter Park for this project and have verified. That this project does meet all the. Requirements. The Board of Trustees currently does not review any contingency requests, which is this. Bill in front of you today. Thank you for that clarification. Thank you, Mr. President. Thank you. Councilwoman Caswell, we have 569 called out as well. I do. Would you like to do with that? This one? I just wanted to ask that. I'm not sure who the appropriate person would be, but I would like to learn a little bit more about what the security measures are that ensure that as we move to electronic signatures, that the various city agencies have the protections in place to ensure that there is no abuse of this. This new policy that we're moving to. So I'm not sure I'm looking to Gabby. Who? Gabby, do we have a representative in here for? Uh, 569. Gabby Carrick The mayor's office, as I understand this, is a council initiated bill. Regarding. Compliance with the upcoming. Granicus transition. Oh, but it is not for all the city agencies as well. Can you clarify that for me, please? David Brower, city assistant city attorney. And I'll come in as D.A. coming to the mic. A number of years ago, we adopted a provision in the Denver Revised Missile Code authorizing the use of electronic signatures. Shortly after the state law was changed to recognize the legality of electronic signatures, we adopted an ordinance for modifying it slightly in this bill to recognize the fact that the alleged star system is coming online, which will allow for electronic signatures to be affixed to bills for ordinances and resolutions, so as to tweak the longstanding language a little bit to make sure that we reflect legal authority and our own ordinance similar to the state authority. Now, whether a particular software system or a particular computer system has adequate security measures built into it relates to that system. And I and Diana, I ask you to come in as well. This was brought forward to help implement the legislature proposal, which is coming forward to help further automate the processing of bills and ordinances. And I don't believe we have anybody from tech services here. Right. Pardon? Would you like to comment? In addition to what I said. Absolutely. Diane Durfee, City Attorney's Office. As David Broadwell. Already. Explained, we. Already had. This particular ordinance on. The books here for the city of Denver. What this. Does as a. Result of the implementation of the Granicus. System. Is it also. Adds a piece of the electronic seal. So as it is right. Now, although electronic signatures have been allowed and we've been doing electronic signatures for quite some time, this allows also. For the court clerk recorder to affix her seal to all of the city documents electronically so that we don't. Have to hand stamp those. Great. Very helpful. Okay. Thank you. Is that okay? Yes. Great. Councilman Espinosa, you called out Bill 908. What would you like to do with that? I'd like to call out the bill and order it published. Okay. Call it out for a vote. Councilman Flynn, will you please put Council Bill 908 on the floor? Yes, Mr. President. I move that council bill 908 series of 2015 be ordered published. Correct. It's been moved. And second. Councilman Espinoza. Yeah, I. I sort of apologize to everybody. I thought this was this I mean, this was normally going to be this is on first reading, and I was waiting for it to come up on second before I commented on it. But I realized that I'm going to be gone next week for my last youngest cousin's wedding in California. So I'm sort of advancing this. And it just this is an early vacation that that I commented on in mayor council. This is an early vacation in my district. And when the city previously granted a vacation request, half of an existing alley serving the bordering property was lost. And so within the last couple of years, the vacation requester built a fence on part of that well on that property that encroaches into an access easement intended to allow cars to access that garage, the existing garage. And while the requester has resisted, I mean, refused him to remove the fence, that property owner took the time to ask the city to grant him additional land through vacation free of charge. So while the city may not need to retain this land at this time, I'm not comfortable vacating this land when such an egregious concern remains unresolved. So by voting this down, and I hope my colleagues will vote against this vacation, the alley configuration will just remain as it always has, and allows the vacation request for an indefinite amount of time to either fulfill obligations or otherwise address this community concern in good faith. Okay. Councilman Flynn. Thank you, Mr. President. Like Councilman Espinosa, my. My information on this particular vacation is that by vacating the the right of way that that is in this council bill, we will actually be making it that much more difficult for the adjoining property owner to access his garage. And until unless and until that dispute is is recognized, I don't believe that we should pass this. I believe that we should wait until there's a resolution. And I would ask other members to consider doing the same. So I will be voting no also. Thank you. It's a good question. Okay. Thank you, Councilman. Councilman Clark. Thank you, Mr. President. I just first wanted to thank Public Works and Angela and everybody who worked on this. You know, I think that this is a great example of there is a formula of how we work through these processes. And I just want to start by saying that I think the public works did a great job of working through the process and the steps to get it here to council. I don't think that because every one of these comes before council means that we have to approve them. We reflect and look at this each one. But I didn't want to get lost in the mix that I think the public works did a great job getting this to us and going through this. So with that being said, I you know, I am always hesitant when we relinquish land, whether it's selling it or vacating it, and especially land that is serving the public. And part of that consideration for me is looking at will disposing of the land, vacating the land, can, you know, will it adversely affect our citizens? And it's serving a public function. I do think that at this time this land is continuing to serve a public function. I think that there are issues there are issues with getting in and out and access for a citizen. I'm not convinced that that problem was created by this vacation request, if not by a previous one. And I don't think anything was necessarily done process wise wrong there either. But it has led to an interesting predicament where I believe that this vacation, as brought forward, will create significant negative consequences for this owner. And so for that reason, I think that right now I do think we should retain this property for the public good until we can resolve those issues further. Or if we can't, then, you know, that's the the, I guess the point of having public lands so that they can serve all of these needs. So I also will be voting no today based on that. Thank you, Mr. President. All right. Thank you, Ms.. Clarke. Councilwoman Ortega. I'd like to ask David Broadwell a question. David, can you clarify if our process and if you're not the right person, then I'm not sure who else should answer that. But my recollection is that when we vacate, only half goes to the property owner on one side and the other half goes to the property owner and the other side. And understanding what Councilman Espinoza said, that a particular property owner went and put their fence in part of the alley. And I don't know if this is in North Denver where we have these strange carriage lots, but that I'm not sure if they're claiming they had adverse possession of the the the alleyway. But can you just clarify if that's the process that. Again, David Broadwell, Assistant City Attorney I'll come in. Generally, I'm not really the best versed on this particular request and I would refer many more specific questions to public works. But in general, we follow state law with right of way vacation, whether it's an alley or a street. If the entirety of the width of the right of way is being vacated, advanced 50, 50 and the adjacent owners. But there are situations where when less than being the entirety of the right of way is being vacated, it will vest in the property to which it's the closest. Right. So the answer to your question is it depends if the whole thing's being vacated is 5050, but you do get into these other scenarios and that's all per state law, per case law, which we adopt and follow in terms of our procedures. But any more specific questions about this one? I think public works would be better able to answer. Thank you, Mr. Bravo. Can I make one more comment? But fortunately, people cannot adversely possess against the city if if every single fence built out and our right of way was adverse possession, we'd be in trouble. Right. So. So there's very strong. That's a good clarifying point. Yeah, I think you have to. Absolutely. I know that was part of the point of your question, but someone just building out into our right of way doesn't create squatter's rights. It's the public's property, and we can require encroachments to be removed. Okay. Thank you. In this case, the fence. This was built on their property. Okay. That's just a clarification. Okay. Councilwoman Ortega, do you want to further. Have anything further to add to what David just shared with us, Angela? Just that this was the case for this particular Ali vacation. The Valley vacation that we're talking about is the one that was that happened in 2008 when they vacated that alley in question 50%. Half of it went to 25, 24. Julian The other the other piece went to 25, 26. Julian Then an easement, a permanent easement. Was filed. With with the city in order for them to have access to their garage. 2524 Julian They have an easement there, a 12 foot alley way to access their garage. Okay. Thank you. All right, Councilman Espinosa, I see you've already talked and Herndon's in the mix. I want to pop over to him. Councilman Herndon thing is the president and and and you just kind of get into it. But I wanted to afford you the opportunity to speak to why public works feels that this is a valid. And so I think. That. All we want to say is we. Just want this. Alley, this particular application to have its process. We've been holding it for about ten months now with no real technical issues associated with it, with the application. And so what Councilman Espinosa is is talking about is an issue between two private property holders, which public works cannot speak to, that it has to be worked out between the two private property owners. If their if someone is, in fact, encroaching on a permanent easement in the alley, that's between the property owners and public works. Can't can't address that with this application. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. President. Okay, Councilwoman. Thank you. I am having a very difficult time following because we had some debate at mayor council about this, and we had an email exchange where public works said there is no letter of protest from any neighbor. And Councilman Espinosa disagreed. So can you first clarify, do we have a letter of protest from an actual. There is. So there is no letter of protest that has technical merit. So what that means is once you put that letter up against our criteria, if there's nothing that public works can do to address that, that protest within our rules and within any sort of ordinance or anything, it doesn't it doesn't have to be technically addressed by us. Okay. So I just that's a very lawyerly answer. So, you know, there is a person who is unhappy. Yes. Okay. So what we do. Within public works purview, what we did is we. Required. The applicant to provide a 12 foot or a. Permanent easement. On this on. This particular alleyway. So they would have they currently have access to a 12 foot alley to access their garage. That's a permanent easement. That can't be revoked. Me May I, may I, I guess I have this is very difficult without a picture or a map. First of all, because I can't follow these 12 foot descriptions that you're describing without a visual. Second of all, sent. Out visuals to all of the. Council members. Is that in our entire system here? Um. Let's pull it up. All right, so that'll help me if we. I don't know if we can walk through the visual on the screen up there. But the other question I have is, is it your opinion that we have to folks who are unhappy with each other and the one party is trying to use this vacation to get leverage over a dispute over private property? Is the dispute on private property and they're just protesting the vacation because they want leverage in this dispute over private property, it seems it appears that way. So there is no dispute over the land in question in this precise vacation? No. Okay. That's a really important distinction. And so I'm going to look some more. I still Councilman Flynn has this visual that I'm trying to get there. Yes. Councilman, can can that can you keep looking for that? I'm going to go to Espinosa and I see a couple other folks who have, um, have the diagram pulled up as well. Councilman. Councilman Espinosa Yeah. Said to help you a councilwoman can each if you go to 11 page 11. I mean ten of 11 on the signed packet. That's the area of the of the easement on a few pages prior though on page five of 11. Is the is the requested vacation. So you'll notice that the two actually only touch corners. But what's key on this is the area that says Ali vacated by ordinance in 286 and Series 2008. So the you see the big 2524. That parcel has a garage across the entirety of the back of that of that property that faced the former Ali. And when the vacation request was originally made in 2008, we probably should have I don't know if this is a question for public works. If if if a concern had been raised, would that have been would that have met technically? Would that have been would that still would we still have would that I don't know if that seems weird that we would have granted that vacation back then. Basically allocating half of that, Ali, to another property owner that might have had technical merit back in 2008. I don't know if it does. Well, I can't speak. Basically, what I know is that there was a gentleman's agreement between two property owners when this when they vacated the Ali and they did not put the permanent even in place at that time. So what happened is so half of that 12 foot Ali went to 25, 24. The other half went to 25, 26. But in the in a split. So a six foot section and a six foot section. So now that that that property owner then only had six feet of alleyway to access his garage without going over the adjacent property owner. And unfortunately, the property 2524 changed hands and the adjacent property owner then built a fence partly on that. I mean, to shorten that, to truncate that 12 foot access with Ali with. And so there isn't a there is an easement. And so we are borderline into private party. I mean, if we were to sort of try and compel them to to move that fence as a city, we would certainly be entering the private party agreement. All I'm saying is there was massive opposition. There was I think we had eight letters that don't meet technical merit. But the original request was actually for part of both the North and the South. Ali's on that each lot. The applicant did revise his request to just that southern portion and did truncate chamfer the edge but still maintains the fence inside of the inside of the property that was formally granted. And so that's been going on as stated for ten months. Okay. All right. Thank you. Thank you, Councilman Espinosa. I'm going to go back to Councilman Kennedy and see if you got the information that you're looking for. Okay. That face did it. So let me let me ask a couple questions here, because it looks like some folks have kind of made up their mind that they're against this to me. Let me ask you a question. Have we ever entered into I know that we deal with this time and time again on other issues, whether it be zoning, but have we entered into some kind of, you know, negotiation or a mediation that we go into with with neighbors on an issue like this? Do you guys ever move forward on that or is this ever been done? My understanding is that if public works has any purview over offering some sort of solution, we will negotiate that. We cannot negotiate to private property owners issues. Okay. So that's I mean. And I deal with this all the time in District nine, and that's where we come in because we represent the folks, both of those neighbors. And so we typically bring in a mediator on a situation like that. And so I understand public works viewpoint, but this is coming before the council. And so, you know, if there is an issue, we would love to kind of talk it out. So you have not done it before. Let me just speak. To speak one point. We spoke with Councilman Espinoza today and we did agree to hear Brant izing did agree to speak to the attorney of the private property owner who the applicant in. Order to help kind of. Get that conversation started. Okay. Let me we have some more people in the queue here. Let me. Councilman Ortega, did you already chime in? I have another question. Yeah. Let me two others. First, let me get out of this real quick. Let me get Councilman Cashman and then Blake Cashman. Thank you, Mr. President. Angela, is there any problem that would be created for the Department of Public Works if we were to vote this down and give the property owners time to resolve this? No. Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. President. Okay, great. Councilman Black. Thank you, Mr. President. Angela, what is the purpose of the proposed vacation? Why does the applicant want it? I do not know that answer. I mean, basically the any property owner can request a vacation for any reason. We don't know of any development or anything happening on that property right now. Let me let me just chime in here real quick. Is the is the representative or the property owner in the room right now? We did request that the property owner come this evening here. My understanding is that he is a monolingual Spanish speaker. He chose not to attend. Okay. All right. Council. Council. Oh, I'm sorry, Councilwoman Black. I had one more question. So if this doesn't pass, will the applicant have an opportunity to come back and re apply for it? You know, I don't I don't really know the answer to that question. I could use some. Help on that one. The roll. There is no black out. There's no no nothing to restrict or reapplication when something like this is voted down, which I don't recall occurring in the past. But. But Council has the prerogative to vote no. But nothing would stop the applicant from coming back. Okay. You know, typically, if it's a rezoning, they can't apply for a year or something like that. Is there some sort of time? Right. That's my point, is that some laws do have a blackout period following a denial, like a rezoning denial. But there's nothing like that related to a request for a street vacation. Great. Okay. Councilwoman Sussman. Thank you, Mr. President. If we were to vote this down, would we be inadvertently giving an advantage to one of the two parties in a negotiation that is a completely private negotiation. I couldn't answer that. I'm not. I don't think so. But I'm not really sure I'd have to talk to either the surveyor or our technical team about that. Okay. Thanks. Okay. Councilman Espinosa. Yeah. The real the original reason I chimed in second is Councilman Clark reminded me and I'm sorry. I did want to thank public works for the work and for caring and holding on to this for as long as they did. Trying to hopefully, you know, see that these two parties made it out. And and so I'm I'm glad actually that we actually are at this point and hopefully we do vote it down, because I do think that it will actually help address this issue. I think we you know, by granting half of this, Ali, previously in 2008, we sort of created this situation. And and so I think I think the time to properly addressed it was back then. But now I think we I don't think we should. I think I think well, I just really wanted to just think I'm rambling and I just really wanted to think public works because this is not this is a difficult situation. And I did want to acknowledge that, yes, the the property owner does speak Spanish and they're actually two property owners. And and the wife has sort of not been a participant, but that's just getting really, really muddy. I think they they do, in fact, need time. I think everything's there with the city attorney being willing to convey what his reading of the situation to proper counsel is appropriate. Thank you, Councilman. Councilwoman Ortega. I think. Councilman. Espinosa just made part of my statement that we created the situation by approving this, knowing that, well, maybe not knowing at the time that we were creating some access issues for some of these folks to be able to get into their garage. And I think, you know, this will make a bad situation worse. So I'm going to be voting no tonight. Thank you. Okay. Thank you. All right. Seeing as we have no other members city council with a comment, we are going to vote on this. So, Madam Secretary. Rocco Espinosa No. Flynn Much as I hate to vote against a vacation, I vote no. Gilmore No. Herndon, no. Cashman no. Kennedy. Lopez No. New Ortega. No. Susman No. Black No. Clark. No, Mr. President. No. Councilman Clark. Oh, nice. Okay. All right, Madam Secretary, please. ANNOUNCER Results. Zero 12 Nays. 12 Nays Council Bill 98 fails. All right, Councilman Flynn, will you please put the resolutions on the floor for adoption? We are ready for the block votes. Yes. Yes, Mr. President. Okay. Once they are. Yes, we are putting them on right now. And I want to include I want to also say all other bills for introductions are ordered, publish. And and now we're going to give our secretary a little bit time to put all the block votes. There you go. Thank you, Madam Secretary. I move that the following resolutions be adopted in a block. All series of 2016. 534, five, 35, five, 36, 537, 523, five, 26, five, 25, 21 522 520 9268 441 and 490. Great. It has been moved in second to it. Madam Secretary. Raquel Herndon. I Cashman. I can eat Lopez. I knew Ortega. I Sussman. Black eye Clark. All right. Espinosa. Flynn. Hi, Gilmore. Hi. Mr. President. I close the and announce results. 12 ice. 12 eyes resolutions have been adopted. Councilman Flynn, will you please put the bill and final considerations. The bills for front of consideration on the floor for final passage. Yes, Mr. President, I will. I move that council bill 511 series of 2016 be placed upon final consideration and do pass without a block. That's right. The bill. It's been moved and seconded. Madam Secretary. Roll call. Sussman Black. I. Clark. Espinosa. Flynn. Gilmore. Herndon. Cashman. I can eat. Lopez. Hi. Ortega. Mr. President. I. Close vote announced the results. 12 Eyes 12 Eyes Council Bill 511 has passed and final consideration pre recess announcement tonight there will be a required public hearing on Council Bill 415, changing the zoning classification from 16161 East 40th Avenue and require public hearing on four for two. Changing the zoning classification for 351535253535 and 3545. South Tamarack Drive. Anyone wishing to speak to either of these must see the council secretary and receive a speaker cart to fill out and return during the council. If there are no other objections, we'll probably take 10 minutes. Good luck. 10 minutes. Members. City Council, please be back by 715. Coverage of this week's council meeting will continue once the public signs up to speak on scheduled agenda items. We'll take this time to look at what's still ahead, as well as preview additional meetings for the week and share some other items of interest. We'll be back with more meeting coverage in a few moments. There are two public hearings on this agenda. Council Bill 415 free zones property at 16,000, 161 East 40th Avenue and Council bill for 42 reasons. Property on South Tamarack Drive. Action on this agenda is just ahead. In the meantime, let's take a look at items in other meetings. Denver will also cover this week. Every Tuesday morning, the mayor presents agency proposals and invites council to discuss policy. Join Denver eight as we bring you this meeting live at 9:30 a.m.. The schedule replays that evening at nine. And again Friday at 8 a.m.. Tuesday morning's coverage continues with the 10:30 a.m. meeting of the Finance and Services Committee. Watch live at that time or catch replays Tuesday evening at 8:30 p.m. or Friday at 9 a.m. and Sunday afternoon at 1230. Wednesday morning begins with a session of the Infrastructure and Culture Committee at 10:30 a.m. This meeting will play again Wednesday evening at 630, then Friday afternoon at 130 and once more on Sunday afternoon at 3:30 p.m.. Wednesday afternoon brings a special session of city council members meeting as the Sidewalk Working Group, where they'll discuss Denver's sidewalk challenges . This meeting is at 130 watch or replays Friday at 10:30 a.m. and Sunday at 2 p.m. each week. Watch for replays of the legislative session of Denver City Council each Monday at 830, following the live coverage or Thursday afternoons at 1230 and Saturday also at 12:30 p.m.. You may view the City Council agenda meeting minutes and committee summaries at Denver gov dawgs city council council committee meetings may be canceled or agenda items added or dropped to confirm a meeting time. Call the council office at 720337 2000. Now stay tuned for the rest of tonight's Denver City Council. Get outside with a thrilling bike ride you and your calves won't forget for a long time. The 64 mile ride weaves through Colorado's front range, including Morrison, Red Rocks, Park and Dinosaur Ridge. All proceeds from the race go to the Tennyson Center for Children so you can test your biking mettle under the warm glow of philanthropy as well as some serious climbs. Learn a traditional method of plant dyeing that, unlike onion skins or so many other naturalist methods, results in a rich and satisfying shade that even writ day would be proud of. In this, for our class, you'll learn harvesting and preparation techniques of locally grown indigo, and you'll go home with dyed samples and a detailed road map for your future color journeys. Join the Denver Astronomical Society for this week's biggest show. The Pleiades meteor shower. The Space Society's open house this month happens to coincide with the annual light show. Peak nights are predicted to have up to 200 meteors an hour, and there's no better company for astronomical events than a group of people who have their own telescopes for best viewing. Face northeast look about halfway up the sky and wait for shooting stars to streak by. Warm cookies of the revolution continue their neighborhood tours with this Saturday's Choose Your Own Adventure in Whittier and five points select from themed quest rapids scavenger hunts seeking stories more than any objects or a walkabout tour to learn the backstory of these historic neighborhoods. Like any warm cookies event, there are bound to be lots of good times. Community and of course, cookies. A magical musical mashup of alternative country and nostalgic strings. Don't miss Brandi Carlile with Old Crow Medicine Show in the perfect venue for their brand of collaborative Americana. In addition to separate sets, Carlile's achingly sweet melodies will intertwine with the six piece band as they perform together. Hit up your wagon wheels and head down to Red Rocks to keep the eye on this pairing. And in the spirit of Imagine 2020, that's a quick look at some of the events in Denver this week. Next time on downtown, an insider's guide to DIA will show you free public events at the new plaza. Great ways to shop, dine and relax selfie stations. And we'll take you on an awesome behind the scenes tour of operations and the airfield, the ramp tower and those secret tunnels downtown only on Denver TV. This week on our season will feature youth. One book one Denver found art with Mark Friday Women of Abstract Expressionism, My Performance, Poetry, and much more. By Fifth. To stop. This. I think. Scientific studies prove that binge watching TV can result in spontaneous, eye curdling, restless couch syndrome and phantom remote hand. To protect your health, take a break from a binge, but watch a rama. Put loads of on all your favorite Denver shows. All your favorite episodes all month long. Reduce your risk for channel surfing along with Denver rates. Watch a rama palooza for four out of five announcers agree it's better for you then the binge democrats watch a rama palooza fun. Ground rules. Each speaker will have 3 minutes unless another speaker has yielded his or her time, which results a total of 6 minutes on the presentation. Monitor on the wall. When the yellow light comes on. We don't have Councilman Flynn here either. Okay. Uh, Councilman Herndon, please make the calls. Okay. Speakers must stay on the topic of hearing and must direct their comments to council members. Speakers should refrain from using any profanity and making any personal attacks during their comments. Councilman Flynn, how are you? Will you please put Council Bill 415 on the floor? Yes, I will. Mr. President, thank you. I move that council bill 415 be placed on the floor and do pass. Thank you. It has been moved. And second to it, the public hearing. Council Bill 415 is open. May we have the staff report? Good evening, council president. Welcome back. Members of the city council ryan winterberg with community planning and development here to present a rezoning at 16161 East 40th Avenue from Gateway with waivers and conditions to S-Max eight, we can see that our subject site is in Council District 11. Zooming in a bit. It is in the Gateway Green Valley Ranch statistical neighborhood near the interchange of I-70 and Pioneer Boulevard. And zooming in a little bit further, we can see that it's near the intersection of East 40th Avenue and North Kittredge Street. We can see Adams County located just to the south, and our site is about 1000 feet. That's walking distance from the Gateway Park Station on the East Quarter. Now the A-line. The request. We are looking at one parcel today. It's about four acres. It is a vacant site. However, it has been permitted for the construction of a hotel. That site development plan was approved in 2009, a six story hotel. And the rezoning request before you is rather unique. So the property owner and that's WP Hospitality LLC is requesting a rezoning to bring the approved site development plan into conformance with Denver's zoning code zoning standards. You will notice today as we'll go on that the site development plan that was approved in 2009, unfortunately, does not conform with the existing gateway with waivers and condition zoning. And as you'll see, the waivers and conditions are highly customized. So in districts that have unfortunately led to unintentional errors in development review and permitting, and these zoning issues were actually discovered in context of the site next door. So which will look very familiar to you? The site located just to the west that you see called out as SCC five X and the site. The zoning issues at this particular site were identified in a comprehensive analysis of the entire area to identify additional zoning errors and bring them into compliance. So you see that the request before you is to rezone from Gateway with views and conditions to Smc's eight. So we're looking at any suburban neighborhood context, any mixed use zoned district permitting buildings of eight storeys and height. It's about 110 feet. And the proposed X eight zone district acknowledges both the existing entitlement as well as the hotel that has been permitted through that approved site development plan. And it will fully conform with the zoning standards proposed in Smc's eight. And now on to existing context, we can see that our site is currently zoned gateway with waivers and conditions, which is a former Chapter 59 zone district that was applied to areas generally in Denver's Gateway. And the subject site was rezone to the zoned district in 1999 as part of a 96 acre rezoning. So that broader area that you see on the map and the gateway with waivers and conditions there, it includes use areas so we can see that our subject site is called out in the mixed use to AMU to use area which is a general mixed mixed use general purpose zone district. And that zone district includes a maximum floor area ratio of 0.6 with bonuses up to 1.2. And the maximum height is 75 feet in height. And interestingly, that is not measured in stories. That is just a maximum building height. And you can see as articulated in your staff report that maximum heights in this gateway with waivers and conditions area generally increase in height and intensity moving to the east towards Pennant Boulevard. So I want to dove into just the issues with the current zoning a bit. There are more details in your staff report. But there are three major issues that we are attempting to solve for today by the proposed rezoning. The first is that our subject site called Out in Red, has approved a site development plan for the construction of a hotel, unfortunately, where hotels are not permitted in the waivers and condition zoning. So the hatched area that we can see is that area where hotels and restaurants were not permitted by the waivers and conditions which generally aligned with the anticipated future construction of a road. So that's that blue dashed line that you see. But the road in its actual construction and existing context today was shifted up where that solid line is. So for essentially 76 feet of the northern portion of our subject site, hotels and restaurants are not permitted. The hotel that has been permitted by the site development plan also does not comply with certain setbacks as well as site orientation standards, including the location of surface parking. And these are the very same issues that occurred to the site that we see to the West that was resolved by this body in May of this year. So we can see to existing contact zoning in the surrounding area that gateway with waivers and conditions that was applied as part of the same ordinance in 1999 exists in a much broader area. We can see the SCC five X approved by City Council just to the West Adams County located to the south. And interestingly, only about 5% of the original gateway zoning that was applied in the 90 still exist today. The majority has been resound into the Denver zoning code or also other former Chapter 59 zone districts. Our subject site is also located within a general development plan, the Gateway Park for West Kittredge East. GDP again applied to that same 96 acre site as our rezoning for 1999. And it includes topics that you're fairly familiar with now in general development plans, including use areas, vehicular access, pedestrian circulation, location of roads and residential densities. But it's important to note that the majority of the infrastructure that was contemplated by this general development plan, including the alignment of roads as well as water detention, has already been constructed in conformance with the GDP. So it no longer serves a planning or development purpose for our subject site. So should the B rezoning be approved tonight? The subject site will be pulled out of the general development plans applicability and be allowed to proceed with construction within the Denver zone no longer within this GDP boundary. Looking to existing land use to consider see subject site is vacant and in area we have a large office structures located to the north as well as a mixture of commercial development and looking to the surrounding context. We can see that the site that was rezoning by this body in May of this year in the upper right hand corner. Our subject site in the middle that is currently vacant and the photo to at the bottom is is just to the south and Adams County pretty typical of some of the mixed use and commercial development that we've seen occur within the gateway. In terms of process, we did notify the following of five registered neighborhood organizations throughout the rezoning, and we have not received any public comment or any letters of support from registered neighborhood organizations. We did notify registered neighborhood organizations and City Council of Receipt of application on March 17th. I notice that the Planning Board public hearing was sent for the May 3rd public hearing excuse me, the May 18th public hearing and the Neighborhoods and Planning Committee move the bill forward on June 22nd. And of course, here we are tonight at the city council public hearing on August 8th. In terms of the review criteria. The following five will be discussed tonight, the first of which is consistency with adopted plans. We have three adopted plans that apply to our subject site. The first of which is comprehensive plan 2000. And we did find that the rezoning was consistent with comprehensive plan 2000 looking to strategies as seen here, and specifically a comprehensive plan 2000 calls out the gateway as an opportunity for mixed use infill development. Now moving on to Blueprint Denver, we can see that our subject site is called out in that purple category indicating that is intended for mixed use. So areas that include a sizable employment base as well as housing land uses that are mixed in buildings, areas as well as blocks. And our site is also called out within an area of change. So areas that blueprint, Denver recommends channeling the most growth where it will be beneficial to the city as a whole. And we do find that the requested x eight zone district is consistent with these land use category land use concept categories. Now in terms of street classifications. North Kittredge Street is called out as a residential collectors. That's the north south street that we see just to the west of our subject site. And East 40th Avenue is actually called out as an undesignated local. Given that it is the boundary with Adams County, it was likely excluded from a street classification, but in its built condition it is a four lane divided arterial, according to the public works classification. So these are higher intensity roads that balance a mix of both mobility and access. So we do find that it is appropriate to apply the same x eight zone district given this higher intensity street in its built condition. Next, moving on to the Gateway Concept Plan. It was adopted in 1990 and applies to our subject site. And the Gateway Concept Plan calls out the need for highly flexible planning areas needed to adapt to changing market conditions. Given that the planning horizon for the gateway areas 40 to 50 years, so a much longer horizon than we're typically used to in our small area plans. However, the existing waivers and conditions zoning that applies to the subject site does not implement the need for highly flexible and adaptable market conditions, knowing that these waivers and conditions have become outdated. Unfortunately, very quickly and we're tied to a very specific development concept. The Gateway Concept Plan also recommends the creation of activity centers with large scale hotel and office clustered at major, major interchanges like the interchange of I-70, as well as Peyton Boulevard, where a subject site is located, excuse me. And in 1999, the rezoning to gateway with waivers and conditions muta updated the land use and Building Heights map that was originally included in the plan. So you'll see that in your staff report recommending maximum building heights of 75 feet as well, a mix of uses. But again, seeing that building heights increase as we move farther to the east to the Pinion Boulevard corridor, and we do find that it is appropriate to apply the same x eight zone district at our subject site, recognizing that increase and tearing of heights, getting in intensity and height towards major, intense roads. So based upon our review of the three adopted plans, we do find the rezoning is consistent. Now looking to uniformity of district regulations, we find that the application of Max eight will result in the uniform application of zone district standards, as well as bring the approved site development plan into consistency with the Denver zoning code and allow it to proceed with construction. We also find that the rezoning will further the public health, safety and welfare through the implementation of adopted plans. Now moving to justifying circumstances that the land or its surrounding environs has changed or is changing. We can see an evolution in this gateway area consistent with adopted plans, both recognizing the mixed use development that is intended to occur and one that we have indeed seen to occur at this major interchange. So we've seen a mixed use node that has evolved over time. And additionally, the Denver zoning code has introduced new tools to us to implement the recommendations of our adopted plan, specifically looking to the Gateway concept plan that is recommending a flexible and adaptable zone districts over time to implement these plans. Moving on to consistency with neighborhood context, zone, district purpose and intent. We find that it is appropriate to apply zoning within the suburban neighborhood context, both in terms of recommendations from adopted plans as well as existing context. And we find that the rezoning is consistent with the intent statement for the zone district and specifically for the specific intent statement for the eight zone district, recommending the application of zoning districts served by primarily arterial streets where a building height of 1 to 8 storeys is recommended. Based upon our review of the five criteria, we do find that the rezoning meets all five and therefore recommend approval of the rezoning and are happy to answer any questions you may have as well as the applicant's representative is here this evening. Thank you. Thank you. All right. We have one individual signed up to speak here, so I'm going to call them up right now. Will Rogers. You have 3 minutes. My name is Will. Rogers and I'm the architect for the project. And we have offices in. Post Office Box 332034. Denver, Colorado. 80233. Great. I'm here to answer any questions. You might have. Great. Thank you. Appreciate you can. You can have a seat. And if if any members of council have questions, they'll call you up. All right. This concludes our speakers. Questions for members of council. Wow. We have no questions for members of council. So this concludes the public hearing for Council Bill 415 Comments by members of Council. I knew you couldn't resist, Councilman Espinosa. I just. I didn't say it earlier, but I just really am grateful. And thank you and welcome back. Thank you. Thank you, Councilman Espinosa. All right, Councilman Gilmore. Thank you, President Brooks. You know, this Councilman Espinosa had leaned over and said, didn't we talk about this one? And so, you know, I said it's right next to it. So this is really just a clean up in the zoning code to allow these folks to do what they need to do on this property. And so I just appreciate, Mr. Rogers, your patience working through the city with with this process, because I know it's taken a little bit just to get this corrected. But I will be supporting this tonight. And thank you, President Brooks. Thank you. Thank you, Councilman Gilmore. All right, Madam Secretary, Rocco Gilmore. I Herndon. I Cashman. I can eat Lopez. Ortega I. SUSSMAN Black Eye. Clark by Espinosa, I. Flynn Hi. Mr. President. I please close the vote and announce the results. 11 eyes. 11 eyes. Council Bill 415 passes. Councilman Flynn, will you please put Council Bill four 4442 on the floor? Yes, Mr. Risen. Thank you. I move the council bill for 22 series of 2016 be placed upon final consideration and do pass for 42. So I say for 22. I did. I meant for 42. Thank you for the record. All right. It's first and second in. Great. Public here in four, four, four, two, two is open. May we have staff report? Good evening, Mr. President. Members of Council Curt Upton with Community Planning and Development. Tonight we have a rezoning case in Council District four in southeast Denver, in the Hampton South neighborhood, right on the border between Hampton and the Hampton South neighborhoods. It's located at the southwest corner of Hampton Avenue and Tamarack Drive, adjacent to the Tiffany Plaza Shopping Center. So the request is about 1.72 acres. The property is requesting to rezone out of the former Chapter 59 zoning code into the new Denver Zoning Code to facilitate redevelopment. The proposed zone district is like the previous case that was just presented in the suburban context of mixed use and up to three stories in height. The current zoning is a mix of, again, former Chapter 59, District B one and B three, only a small portion. And as you can see in this map, in the northwest corner is B three, both commercial zoned districts, b one as a as a lower intensity category of commercial zoning than B three. And it's surrounded generally by suburban context of mixed use, multi-unit and single unit. So the current land use on the property is, is office building directly to the west and to the northwest are retail centers. There's multifamily to the northeast and directly across Hampton Avenue is also an office building. And as you can see to the east is single family residential gives you an idea of the existing character and context and the scale. The top left corner is the subject site. As you can see, it's a separate suburban office building today across the street. And the top right is the single family residential neighborhood. And as you can see, the character of the street going north and south is suburban, low scale in character. So the process we followed, our standard process, the planning board recommended approval. We have received no public comments on this case. So with that, I will get into our review criteria. There are two adopted plans for this site Plan 2000 and Blueprint Denver. We do find that it meets a variety of recommendations in the comprehensive plan and blueprint. Denver This is an area of change town center. The description of a town center. According to Blueprint, Denver is a a destination for multiple surrounding neighborhoods that has pedestrian friendly design features. And as you all know, an area of change is where we are encouraging redevelopment and growth. The Future Street Classifications in Blueprint Denver of Hampton Avenue is a commercial arterial. Tamarack Drive is a residential collector. Commercial arterials and Blueprint Denver are pretty self-explanatory. The recommendations for commercial development on a heavily trafficked street resident residential collector is a little lower traffic street and primarily a residential in nature. Significant for this location is both streets in this area are identified as enhanced transit corridors. So we do find that the proposed mixed use zoning of up to three stories is consistent with a blueprint. Denver's recommendations for a town center and for their street classifications of commercial and residential collector and commercial arterial and residential collector. Rather, because the yes and three zone district encourages mixed use development at a moderate scale of three stories with pedestrian friendly design features, we also find that it furthers the uniformity of district regulations, public health, safety and welfare. Through the implementation of adopted plans, it meets our justifying circumstances. Criteria the surrounding environment have in the surrounding environs have changed. Several adjacent properties have recently redeveloped in the past 5 to 10 years. There are two light rail stations in proximity to this location that provide connections again on the enhanced transit corridors to those stations. And the availability of a new zoning code is a changing circumstance. And as stated previously, the property owner would like to take advantage of the new zoning code. It also meets our consistency with neighborhood context and zone district purpose and intent. The surrounding character for this location is suburban in context, and the proposed zone district is in the suburban context and is the mixed use designation also meets the district purpose and intent. So with that, we do recommend approval and be happy to take any questions on this case. Thank you. Thank you, Curt. All right. We have three individuals all in favor signed up, and I'm going to ask them to start making their way. AJ barbaro, Carolyn White and John Haber. AJ Is AJ his first? You have. You have 3 minutes. You guys can have a seat right there. Thank you. Thanks, Mr. President. We just checked that. I'm going to have you introduce yourself, A.J. Barbato. Live at 3162 Vallejo. Street and the developer of the property. Great. And we're just here to answer any questions. Thank you. Carolyn White. Mr. President, members of Council, Carolyn White, land use counsel for the applicant and I too am available to answer any questions you may have. Thank you. John Hubbard. Mr. President. Council, thanks for having us. I'm John Hamburger. I'm with Kimberly Horner Associates, the engineer on the project available to answer any questions. Great. This concludes our speakers. You guys can stay in the front row and the members of council will have any questions. They're direct. You. Questions for members of council. It's not letting me click on it. Okay. Councilman Ortega. I just have a quick question and I'm not sure maybe, Adam, if you can answer this, hadn't noticed until tonight that on the zoning applications that the boundary of the map goes to the center line of the street. It's very evident in this in these drawings. But I hadn't noticed that on some of the others. Is that typical? Thank you, Councilwoman Ortega. Nate Russo, Assistant City Attorney. Good afternoon, members of Council. It is typical that we re zoned to the center line of adjacent right of way. And so you will see that on many rezonings that come through. Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Councilwoman Councilman Espinosa. And just a couple of questions. It is existing B-3 adjacent to that. And why is that? Why didn't it get rezone? So the adjacent zoning is a different property, a different a different commerce. That's a retail center. And this is an office an office building. Right. But is there a reason why we didn't move from 59 to 1 of the current zoning districts in this on both of these all these B parcels down here? So the if I'm following the proposal on this map is just the B one and then just a small segment of the B three, just because it's following the property boundary. Curve, I think I think he's talking about when we rezoning to ten this blueprint down here both under the legislative under blueprint Denver how come this was not zoned into. Oh gosh, you guys are. Still in chapter 59. Right? So when the when the when the city was resolved in 2010, this was left out because it was a there's a plan building group on this site and on the adjacent site. And so for those reasons, it was retained in form chapter 39. And then thanks for that clarification. Actually, now recognizing who the applicant is, I understand why I see me. That smacks three. Do we have any sort of plan, support for greater densities here or then mix three or. I mean, we probably just went this way because that was the applicant's request. But is there is this really what was the desired density for this area? I mean, there is some you can see on this map, there is some higher density zone districts to the north. The current site, the office buildings on site are about our three stories today. There is a there's a single storey building and three, three storey building. So it's consistent with the existing context and it is a suburban location. And so for those reasons, we do think that it's appropriate. It's an appropriate district. Yeah, I know. Just so you know. Yeah, I it's an appropriate district. And just given the sort of heights that were there and some of the other structures historically in this area, there's some of these things already exceed mx3. And so I was just curious philosophically as other other parcels in this PBGC sort of get investigated. I mean, what are what is our vision for the the entirety of the corner, but. Thanks. All right. Thank you, Councilman Espinosa. The public hearing and council Bill 442 is close comments for members of Council Councilwoman Black. Thank you, Mr. President. Councilman Espinosa, we don't have a vision for Hampton. Remember, you went on the tour. That's right. Anyway, thank you. Wow. This is, like, the best zoning night we've ever had. I have met with these nice people. They met with me when I was just elected about a year ago. The property they're rezoning is a commercial corner. It has a Whole Foods in a Petco. And Kevin Flynn's favorite restaurant, the fast first company, Chipotle. Hey. Hmm. Asia. Yes. And some office buildings. It's a very appropriate corner for this kind of development. But the thing that I'm really happy about is when they met with me, we talked about the fact that the Goldsmith Gulch trail mysteriously ends right behind these properties. And I asked them if they would be willing to build a path that would continue the trail to Hampton. And not only did they agree to that, but they agreed to put in some sort of bike facility with a bench and water and air or something. So we really appreciate that. And with that, I will be supporting it. Thank you, Councilwoman Black. All right. So, you know, for the comments, Madam Secretary, roll call. Black eye. Clark. All right. Espinosa. Hi. Flynn. Hi. Gilmore. I. Herndon Cashin. I can eat Lopez. Hi. Ortega. Sussman. Mr. President. Ortega. Sorry. For some reason. My screen is okay. Mr. President. I closed voting as a result. 12 eyes. 12 Eyes. Counsel will for 42 has passed on Monday, August 15, 2016, there will be a required public hearing for Council Bill 524 approving a service plan for the creation of the Midtown Metropolitan District and a commission and the required public hearing for Council Bill 525 approving a service plan for the creation of the First Creek Village Metropolitan District. See no other business before this body. This meeting is adjourned. Thank you, sir. You know, the lunchroom. And this was open 24 hours a day, seven days a week, because back in those days, that's the way the train traveled. Both going and coming was a grand experience, and people today would have a hard time believing that people actually used to go to Union Station for the sole purpose of having dinner or having cocktails. It was a lively place. Despite growing competition from commercial airlines and busses, the railroads maintained their reputation as the most glamorous way.