A bill for an ordinance changing the zoning classification for 5350 Leetsdale Drive in Washington Virginia Vale. Approves a map amendment to rezone property from B-1 WVRS to S-MX-3 (former chapter 59 to suburban mixed-use), located at 5350 Leetsdale Drive in Council District 5. The Committee approved filing this item at its meeting on 8-10-21.
Direct your comments to council as a whole and please refrain from individual or personal attacks. Council Member Hines, will you please put Council Bill eight for nine on the floor for final passage? I move the Council Bill 20 1-0849 be placed upon final consideration. And do pass. Thank you. It has been moved and seconded. The required public hearing for Council Bill 849 is open and I see we have Jason here and so we'll go ahead and get the staff report. Great. Thank you. Council President Gilmore. Good evening. Members of Council Jason Morrison, senior city planner with Community Planning and Development. I'll be presenting the proposed rezoning at 5350 leads. Dale Drive with a request is from B one with waivers to smx3. The Post rezoning is located in Council District five, which is Amanda Sawyer's district. It's in the Washington, Virginia, Vail neighborhood. The proposed rezoning is intended to facilitate redevelopment of the site. The applicant is interested in reusing the existing building, which was formerly a drive through bank to develop a drive thru coffee shop. The proposed zone district S-Max three, which is suburban mixed use up to three stories, allows for a mix of uses in building forms, including drive through services, general and shopfront building forms up to a maximum height of three stories. The current zoning of the subject site is B one with waivers. The B-1 Zone District is a former Chapter 59 Zone District, and it is a limited office district other than banking and financial services, retail uses are not permitted. The approved waivers restricted building heights to a maximum of 35 feet and limit gross floor area of the structures. Surrounding zoning in the area includes a mix of commercial office and multi-unit zoning districts. The existing land use on the subject site is commercial. It's surrounded by mostly multi-unit, commercial and office uses. This slide shows the existing context surrounding the subject site with the proposed rezoning on the top left. Nearby, you see examples of multi-unit and commercial uses, as well as the existing office complex to the south and east of the subject site. The Map Amendment application was unanimously recommended for approval by Planning, Board and Forward by committee. Since the staff report was published, we received two letters of support from community members who are excited to see this type of use and building farm improvement on the retail corridor. I'd also like to note that this particular application was reviewed for large development review, and because any redevelopment on the site does not trigger complex infrastructure planning and or additional level of coordination beyond our existing site development and permitting procedures, an LDR is not required. As you know, there are five review criteria when analyzing the appropriateness of a request. The first criteria is consistency with adopted plans. There are two plans applicable to this rezoning. That's comprehensive plan 2040 as well as Blueprint Denver. The rezoning is consistent with several strategies of the comprehensive plan, and it can be found and detailed in the staff report. When switching to blueprint the future neighborhood context is suburban as this rezoning would allow a variety of building forms in a suburban setting. The proposed district is appropriate and consistent with the blueprint. Denver Context Description. The future place of this area is called Community Corridor, which typically provides some mix of office, commercial and residential. And heights are generally up to five stories. The proposed Smc's three district is consistent with this classification because the Zone District is in a mixed use district that allows a mix of civic, residential and commercial uses and buildings up to three stories served by both a local street and a commercial arterial. The subject property is located within the community centers and corridors growth area. These areas are expected to see 20% of new employment growth and 25% of new housing growth by the year 2040. The proposed rezoning is consistent with the growth strategy mapped in this area. Blueprint also has policy language around rezoning properties from the former Chapter 59 zoning code and out of custom zoning such as the site plan specific condition on a subject property. Therefore, staff finds that this proposed rezoning is consistent with Blueprint Denver. Staff also finds that the requested rezoning meets the next two criteria. The rezoning will result in uniformity of district regulations and will further the public health, safety and welfare primarily through the use of implementation of adopted plans and through improved design outcomes. This rezoning would bring the property from bar after Chapter 59 zoning into the Denver zoning code, and such a change is listed in the zoning code as an appropriate justifying circumstance. Lastly, staff finds that the proposed rezoning is consistent with a zone, district purpose and intent of the S-Max three zone district. And based on the review criteria, staff recommends approval of application 2020 i-00201. Thank you. Thank you, Jason. We have one speaker this evening, Jessie Parris. He. Good evening. Numbers for those watching at home. My name is Jessica Sampras. I'm representing for black star self defense as the best in command for social change as well as the Unity Party of Colorado and for a long black nose. And I'll be there next November and 2023. Shame on you. Denver City Council for allowing five white supremacists to speak against our unhoused neighbors. That is just shameful. In regards to this rezoning, tonight's. Um. I was initially against it because I thought it was going to be more redevelopments, more development, market rate development that people could not afford to live in. I'm seeing that now. That is going to be a coffee shop. I'm in favor of the rezoning. It meets all five of the criteria. So there's nothing I can tell you that's going to change your mind on this. So go ahead and do what you do in both. I as usual. Thank you. Thank you. That concludes our speakers questions from members of Council on Council Bill 849. Councilmember Sawyer. Thanks, Madam President. Just want to get a couple of quick clarifications on the record. So this is the front piece of the parcel. It's not the entire parcel, is that correct? Correct. So it is it is the entire parcel, but it's the smaller parcel on the corner of forest. And we'd still. It's not the entire passel that's there. They're not two separate parcels. They are. So there's the larger parcel has the existing office structures. Yeah. So that is a separate parcel. And then this is a parcel that has that old bank building. So the bank is just a separate front. Correct. Right. Sorry if I didn't understand it. No, no, that's great. I just I don't I didn't understand because originally when we looked at it on the zoning map, it is one person. Okay. So. Okay, cool. So that's two separate parcels. So we are not done rezoning only half or the front third of a parcel out of chapter 59. Correct. Okay, great. And then in terms of the kind of discussions around the surrounding area, because there are somewhere between four and 500 units going in between next door and across the street into large developments that are being built. There weren't infrastructure improvements that you know of. Have them. Have there been any that have been planned along the way? It's still quarter. It's off the top of my head. I don't have an idea of what has currently been planned. I do know that across the street, I believe it's at 5301 we'd still drive. That is an older application. And so I know that CPD staff is looking at kind of the holistic, you know, kind of 30,000 foot view of how that will impact we'd still drive including that for and these intersection. I also know that and working with our colleagues and Dottie there is an existing study that's out there. It's a ghost spirit still study. And so I know that that's always kind of at the forefront of our thinking and daddy's thinking as well as we're , you know, we're looking at leads still avenue. And so I know that that was brought up during the initial concept meeting with the applicants. And then I think finally I as you know, there is the near southeast area plan which is currently underway. And so we will also be kind of looking at we'd still drive in terms of improvement, any improvements that could be made along the corridor. Okay, great. And then as I understand that, the applicant is also going to be doing some safety upgrades, because the the way this parcel works, the, the drive through bank is on kind of like the northwest corner and there's a parking lot behind it where people access the building behind that. Is that are they have they committed to doing some kind of safety upgrades for those pedestrians, given the number of cars that they expect to be going through this area? Yeah, great question. This is something that we've talked to them about and I believe it came up during the concept meeting with them as well. And they do have a, you know, for lack of a better term, I guess it's like a pedestrian plan. And so looking at improving the safety for pedestrians that are on the site as well as how they kind of interact with the vehicles that are going to be queuing in line to get their coffee in the morning and in the afternoon. So there is a plan and that involves, I think, better signage, improved striping and I think a couple other items as well. So very, very happy to see that from the. Yeah, definitely. Thank you. Thanks so much, Madam President. No further questions. All right. Thank you, Councilmember Hoyer. Next step we have Councilmember Flynn. Thank you, Madam President. Jason, I'm trying to understand the waivers on this site, 5350 leads to the waivers that from the staff report. It looks like the waivers are. You can only have banking and financial services and no retail uses are permitted. Is that correct? Correct, yes. And as I mentioned, there's also the height limitation, right? Yes, 35 feet. Now, that applies to the entire. PASSEL They're correct. The B-1 with waivers also applies to 50 to 50 lead still drive, which this is part of the same overall site. Right. So it's you're correct. So the B one with waivers will still apply to the larger the larger parcel that's to the east and to the south, the existing office buildings. Right to the south and to the east, correct of it. So do are there retail or non-banking and financial services uses in those office buildings or are they all. They're all office offices. As in banking and financial services. You know, I don't know. Okay. Hundred percent. All right. I'm just curious why the entire site wouldn't be brought out. Now, the justifying circumstances, I sometimes have an issue with using the fact that it's not. It's an old chapter. 59 is a changed circumstance. It's always been in Chapter 59. I'm I'm prepared to to support this because of the waivers issue and the changing nature of Leach Dale Drive. But to use the fact that it's not in Chapter 59 alone as a justifying circumstance, I'm not sure that I would would support that on in other instances. But in this one, I will. Thank you, Madam President. That's all I have. All right. Thank you. Councilmember Flynn. The public hearing is closed. Comments by members of Council on Council Bill 849. Councilmember Sawyer. Thanks, Madam President. I appreciate the conversation and I appreciate Councilman Flynn's question. This is a bank that has been closed for a decade. It's an empty building where nothing has been going on. The idea of bringing some some new and changing commerce to the area and providing a service to the residents who live around the area, particularly with residential apartment complexes directly to the west, directly to the north, directly to the east, and then single family homes directly to the south behind that office building. This is, I think, a great adaptive reuse, and it's something our community supports and I support it as well. I think it does meet all the criteria and I would request that my fellow council members find that as well. Thanks. Thank you, Councilmember Sawyer. And see no one else up in the Q. I do agree that it does meet the rezoning criteria and I'm happy to support it this evening. Council Bill 21, Dash 849 is on the floor for final passage. Madam Secretary, roll call on Council Bill 849, please. Sawyer, I. Torres. I. Flack I set about that. I. Clark I. Flynn High. Herndon, High, High. Cashman All right. Kenny Ortega. I. Sandoval, I. Madam President. I. Madam Secretary, close the voting and announce the results. 13 Ies 13 Ies Council Build 20 1-849 has passed. Councilmember Hines, will you please put Council Bill 881 on the floor for final passage?