A bill for an ordinance changing the zoning classification for 10050 & 10150 East Harvard Avenue and 2570 South Dayton Way in the Hampden neighborhood. Approves an official map amendment to rezone land at 10050 East Harvard Avenue, 10150 East Harvard Avenue, and 2570 South Dayton Way from R-2-A to S-MU-5 and S-MU-8 (residential in the former zoning code to suburban, mixed-use) in Council District 4. The Committee approved filing this item at its meeting on 6-26-18.
I. Madam Secretary, please close voting in those results. 3939 as comfortably. 688 has passed. As amended. Kalsoume Gilmer, will you please put Council Bill 699 on the floor? I move that council bill 18 dash 0699 be placed upon final consideration and do pass. It has been moved and seconded. The public hearing for Council Bill 699 is open. May we have the staff report? Thank you so much. Effort with community planning and development. So we have a reserve request for two parcels in southeast Denver. I'm going to walk through staff's analysis of the request and our recommendation. So the two parcels are located in Councilor District four near our border with Aurora. In the Hamden neighborhood. So the following slide has a visual of what the request says because it's different by parcel. But this is kind of the overall. So it's a 22 acre to two parcels that include 22 acres, and it's a self-contained block. And the rezoning request is to go from R to A, which is an old code for Chapter 59, multi-unit zoned district. And I'll talk a little bit about what our two A means to go to SMU five and SMU eight. And I'll talk about what that means, of course. And the purpose is to accommodate an expansion, a rehab investment in the two parking garages that serve the multi-unit building and the sort of straddle the two parcel boundaries. Here is a visual of the of the actual request. So you'll hear throughout the presentation and your staff report the terms Wood Stream Village and Dayton Crossing. So that's what this means. So what stream village is the Eastern Parcel? And that is a request to go from R to A, so again, a multi-unit old code zone District two, SMU eight, which is suburban context, multi unit eight stories and then Dayton crossing of the properties outlined in yellow. And that request has to go also from R to A and to SMU five so suburban multi-unit five story for that parcel. So the existing zoning in the areas are to a and the surrounding properties, many of them are to as well. And then closer to Parker Road on this property is right off the Parker Road corridor is B2, which is also an old code zone district that's a nonresidential zone district. And you see some SMU three and you see OSA, which is open space, a city owned park nearby. So ah to a like I said, is an old code zone district. And so just some high level standards of what are to a mean. So maximum height is 110 feet and that zone district and there is a residential density cap built into that zone district of 1500 square feet of lot area per dwelling unit. And one funky thing that was going on with the R2 zone district you see prevalent in this area is that basically any development of any size had to do a plan building group. And so that is the case on these properties and surrounding properties. And I'll talk a little bit about what that means. So so there is a it's called the Wood Stream Village Plan Building Group. So essentially a plan building group is a sort of the short version is it's a site plan. So it's a site plan that sets forth building footprints, building heights, number of parking spaces, location of parking spaces. Basically everything that would go into a technical site planning exercise is contained in these plan building groups. So I think they work for the city for a while. And the and these were done around 1980. But there is some challenges with them because you really get locked into a specific development type and can't do a lot with the with these properties without amending the plan building group. So in terms of existing land uses, subject properties are multi-unit. Most of the surrounding properties are also multi-unit. But then you look closer to the Parker Road corridor. Then you get into the office uses and then the park certainly nearby. So have some images of both properties. And so just looking at kind of a 3D of both of them, you see the existing wood stream village property has, like I said, built in about 1980, has two and they're all connected, but it's essentially two 6 to 7 storey multi-unit buildings. And you look at the Dayton Crossing parcel built at the same time, 1981, I believe those are similar architectural style, but mostly four storey multi-unit buildings. I believe there's nine of them on those on the Dean crossing parcel. So images I've got an image library here that I'll go through, but images of the existing properties. So I'll start with Wood Stream Village. That's the six and seven story apartment building. So this is kind of the main entrance to Wood Stream Village. So you come in off of Harvard and there's access. You can get to it from Park Road and off of Dayton as well. And then just images on both sides. And you can see looking east and west on this public property, the this is the parking garage that is the subject of the Arizona request requesters that serves these adjacent multi-unit buildings. And they're looking to expand and rehab those parking structures. So just another image looking the other way. So this is behind the multi-unit building. And so images of Dayton crossing. So that's the Western parcel we were requesting to go to SMU five. So similar architectural styles. This is the main entrance coming in to that development. Mostly four story multi-unit buildings with tuck under parking and then looking on the side. And so on to some images of. So those are existing images of the existing castle. These are the surrounding properties we're about to look at. So for Wood Stream Village, in terms of what surrounds it. So this is looking east toward the Parker Road corridor. So it's immediately adjacent to a fairly large office complex. So you see the parking garages that serve the office complex that fronts on Parker Road actually doesn't have access of Parker Road. You have to come off of Harvard or Dayton. But you see a pretty large office building up to nine stories, and it transitions down from there, down to four stories of a Parker Road. And then the images of the surrounding context really reflect the suburban development pattern in the era that these were built in and in the 1980s. So mostly four storey and three storey multi-unit buildings. So looking west and most of these have that are to a with the plan building group restriction. So each of them have their own sort of specific site plan that is pretty prescriptive. So that was Woods Stream Village. This is Dayton Crossing. Images of the surrounding properties so very similar. A three and four story, some two story multi-unit buildings. So this is looking west. You see some pretty generous setbacks with some landscaping buffers that kind of reflect the suburban context. Looking north. And looking south. So we have followed our normal rezoning process. Planning Board on June 6th unanimously recommended approval of the request and then Ludie on June 26th recommended that the request move forward. There is no neighborhood specific registered neighborhood organization and we have not received any public comments on the requests. So I'll go through each of the criteria briefly to kind of see stuff's analysis and recommendation. So there is no neighborhood plan, there is no area specific plan. So we only have citywide plans to guide us here. So that means comprehensive plan and blueprint. Denver. So looking at the conference plan first. So staff started to policies in the comp plan one related to the policy to encourage redevelopment. So the evolution of these housing developments to meet the diverse needs of Denver's present and future residents. And then also to look at encouraging infill development that's consistent with the character of the surrounding neighborhood. So staff finds their requests consistent with these policies, mostly because through this rezoning request and through getting sort of getting out of that old code custom zoning framework, that's been really challenging for them. It would encourage the, you know, the reinvestment and the rehab of these properties. So these buildings being about 38 years old probably need a little bit of a facelift. And then in terms of the character of the surrounding neighborhood, looking at the existing conditions of seven story buildings, four story buildings on the properties, and then looking at the surrounding context closer to Parker Road in particular, where you go up to a nine storey office building staff finds that consistent with that character. So in terms of blueprint. Denver So the designations are one area of stability into a single family duplex feature land use concept. So the purpose of the area of stability designation is to maintain the character of an area while encouraging some new development at appropriate locations. And in the single family duplex does include some language addressing that some apartment buildings may be appropriate in that land use. So looking at its location too, in terms of it being an appropriate location. So you have Parker Road right there, which is an enhanced transit corridor with pretty good bus service. And then Dayton Way is a residential collector. Staff does find the request consistent with Blueprint Denver in the sense that it is encouraging reinvestment at an appropriate location relative to those corridors. And then there are some blueprint Denver policies related to essentially promoting getting rid of a lot of these custom old code zoning scenarios that would create some challenges. So staff finds it consistent with those policies. So in terms of the second criteria, uniform of district regulation staff finds it consistent in that it will result in uniform application of standards under the new zone districts across the across the site. Criteria three staff finds the request consistent with the policy to further public health, safety and welfare because it will implement adopt plans by supporting reinvestment in a approximately 38 year old multi-unit complex for residential development. And so in terms of a justifying circumstance, we actually just passed a code change some of you may know, whereas going from an old code to a new code zone district in itself is a justifying circumstance. So that finds it consistent with that criteria. And then the last criteria staff also finds the request consistent with the suburban neighborhood context. Because when you look at the description of the the suburban neighborhood context, it speaks a lot to large setbacks, mid-rise building forms, and then a separation of these multi-unit residential developments from single family. And so that's consistent with what's there today. So I think the zoning would would better match what's there today than what's currently on the on the ground in terms of zoning. So staff does recommend approval of the requests and I'm happy to answer any questions. I know the applicant is here for questions as well. Thank you very much. We do have one individual signed up to speak this evening. Richard Sidorov, you have 3 minutes. My name is Rich Cicero if I'm the architect applicant for coal rich communities, American Institute of Architects. The owner originally pursued this rezoning because the two existing structured parking buildings there are two stories apiece and have 200 cars. These are dilapidated and need to be either heavily rebuilt, rehabilitated or removed. So as part of that process of design exploration that they will be interested in exploring potentially rebuilding those two parking garage structures and putting apartment units on top. Happy to answer any questions. All right. Thank you very much. That concludes our speakers. Are there any questions from members of council? Councilman Brooks? Yes. Thank you, Mr. President. You know, this is actually a question for Councilwoman Black, for since I've been on here, this is the first time we've had three public hearings for my council District four. And I just wanted to know, are you finally happy that you're getting more for four? That's actually a question. It's not a comment. Mm hmm. I'm happy to support all of these this evening, but there are other things I'm told when I say I want. More, I'm sure. I'm sure that it comes from Brooklyn. All right, Councilwoman Ortega. My question is for city staff. I'm sorry, I forgot your first name. Yes, chef. So to do something with the garage is why they had to go through this process. Yeah, I think in the applicant could speak to it more, but I think that's what spurred the request. In terms of looking at so I mentioned that plan building group that really restricts the parking garages to their current footprint. So I think that was part of their exploration is realizing they need to amend or eliminate that plan building group. And as part of that, just getting out of the old out of the old code into the new code is something that we support. So. So an applicant could speak more to that, probably, but. Okay. I'd like to ask you, if you wouldn't mind, coming up. So is the plan to only deal with the garages and then build above them and keep the existing structures? The the intent is to build on the footprint of the two existing garages, which likely have to be removed because of structural remediation. And in doing so, there's an opportunity because the parking requirements under the new zoning afford additional multiple units to be constructed. They would research putting some additional multi units on top of the garage as part of the reconstruction of the garage. The garage, the lower levels of the garage are poorly planned and have poor circulation connections to the existing two towers. And as part of the garage reconstruction, there's an opportunity to enhance the quality and connections. So any of the other structures that are on the property are not being proposed to be level than redo the entire site? None. None of the multi-unit buildings, just the two precast concrete parking garage. Thank you for that clarification. Thank you. Thank you. Councilwoman Ortega. Councilman Espinosa. Yeah. Jeff, can you go to slide four? And this is because I'm not sure we're trying to connect. It's it's the one that shows that has in big, bold letters on the lower right corner parking structure. So it's go all the way to the very beginning right there at this point there. Yeah. Okay. Purpose to accommodate expansion of parking structures. So this is a follow up to Councilwoman Ortega's question, because I am struggling a little bit with your with your comprehensive plan justification slide. So is it or isn't it a foregone conclusion that you will be putting housing on top of the structures? Not if you could come up to the microphone, please. No, it's not a foregone conclusion. It's simply that they'd like to explore that through the rezoning. Okay. All right. Thank you. Thank you, Councilman Espinosa. Seeing no other questions. The public hearing for Accountable 699 is closed. Are there comments by members of Council Council woman black. Thank you, Mr. President. Jeff, thanks for pointing out that there's no neighborhood plan, so you don't have to get out, that there's no neighborhood plans. And Councilman Brooks, that's what I'm talking about when I say more for four. There is not one neighborhood plan in my entire district, nor is our neighborhood planning initiative coming down there any time soon. So that's what I'm talking about. So thanks for bringing that up. This neighborhood doesn't have a neighborhood identity either. It doesn't have a name. And I am affectionately calling it the Green Triangle, even though it is actually not a triangle. But it just sounds good. It's very cool. It does have Parker Road and Havana on two sides, but it also has the Highline Canal, the Cherry Creek Trail, which intersect right there. The Cherry Creek Reservoir and State Park is very close. Kennedy golf course is right there. Hensel Park is right there in Barre Park, which is an exceptionally beautiful park, is right there. That's all in that neighborhood. There's also a brand new school. It's got all kinds of housing at all different levels, at different price points. And when I say in committee meetings that we have, you know, more affordable housing or attainable housing prices in my district, this is one complex that has those kinds of rents that people can actually afford. So I'm happy to support it, of course. And who knows, maybe we will get some more housing down there also. Thanks. Thank you, Councilwoman Black. Councilman Brooks. Yes. I'd just like to say I'll be supporting this based upon the criteria that's in front of us. But what I really chipped in was to say, you know, I just contacted all the presidents in District nine and they'd be happy to give you some of our plans because of the development issue. So we're happy to support that. And I did hear from Councilman Espinosa that you have a lot of PBDEs, and so you got you got some good stuff going on down there. These are bad. Things. Thank you, Councilman Brooks. Councilman Espinosa. Yeah. What I meant by that is know, instead of neighborhood plans, what they have is very, very, very planned zoning that are very deliberate. Now we're trying to reverse that. The so just to my questions, I'm just going to comment on it because we don't. The way the plan. I mean, the rezoning was justified. Makes sense. If we smack on the early in the presentation that the purpose is for a parking structure and then our planning justification is about encourage housing. That's where it's a little bit discombobulated for me. You know, it's one thing to get rid of old zoning because they want to do a replacement structure and they want to break themselves free of those shackles that are there. But then we should just talk generically. You know, we always don't talk about specific projects. And here we opened with a specific project, but then justified it for the right reasons. But then, you know, and so I was really struggling the whole time until the property owner mentioned that there might be housing on top of it. And then I was like, Oh, there's where the housing comes in. But then to find out that that's really an afterthought and not a primary factor. I'm sitting here struggling with with how this is congruent. And so this is one of those situations where I wish I knew less about the proposal going into it, because it is ultimately the right justification and the right zoning to get to these outcomes. But now, without the TBG, Councilwoman Black knows less about the future of this property than she did with the PBGC. And so as restrictive as PBDEs are, they do lend a heck of a lot of predictability and did some 38 years ago, as you know . And now we're going into a situation we're giving carte blanche on zoned districts with the very, very limited, you know, limited things that form base zoning does, which could be all parking structures in filled here, you know. And so so so to her point, definitely in support future endeavors for planning efforts to help better guide how these new zone districts are used in her district. But so that is a long way to say what I just said. But I think you follow me on this one and I will be supporting it because because broadly speaking, it is the appropriate zoned district for this property. But in the specifics, I was sort of struggling with it things. Thank you, Councilman Espinosa. Seeing no other comments, Madam Secretary. Raquel. Black crooks. Brooks. Espinosa. Hi. Flynn. Hi. Gilmore. I. Herndon in Cashman. Carnage. Lopez knew Ortega. Sussman Mr. President. Madam Secretary, please. Because the voting announced the results. 3939 as Council Bill 699 has passed seeing no other business before this body. This meeting is adjourned. Kelly.