A bill for an ordinance accepting the Future Places 2020 Plan Map in Blueprint Denver (2019), a supplement to Comprehensive Plan 2040, to reflect the change in the Overland Park Neighborhood in Council District 7. Adopts the amended Future Places 2020 Plan Map in Blueprint Denver 2019, a supplement to Comprehensive Plan 2040, to reflect a change in the Overland Park Neighborhood in Council District 7. The Committee approved filing this item at its meeting on 3-10-20.
Hi, Madam Secretary. Please close voting. Announce the results. 3939 as comfortable 107 has passed Council member say debacle you please put council bill 228 on the. Floor I move that council bill 20 dash 22 to 28 be placed upon final consideration and do pass. Thank you. It has been moved and second in the required public hearing for council bill 2 to 8 is now open. May we have the staff reports? Okay. Thank you. Got the president council members Dave Gaspar, who's principal city planner with community planning and Development. Let me just switch out our presentation here quickly. With a blueprint. Denver Future Places 2020 Plan Map Amendment. And so with the new blueprint, Denver, there's two major ways to update and evolve the plan. Neighborhood Context and Future Places Map. And so one of them is how we're typically more familiar with, I would say, and that's with a small area plan such as an MPI plan like for Northeast or a master plan like the Stadium District or Lateral Heights. Those are three small area plans that were adopted Post Blueprint Denver in 2019. And we typically see slight map changes when we do a small area plan, such as those with the new blueprint. Denver We did propose this consolidated updates approach, which directs CPD to exploring it and approach to update the Future Places map on a regular basis. And so that's found on page 59. And in fact, we had an opportunity to do that right away here in 2020 with this proposal, which is in District seven. And so this could either be a CPD led process where we identify something that is amiss with the map and want to make a change, or could also be brought to our attention by city council. And they could lead the process to to update that, that map. And so I'll run through the city. The Council district led process will be very similar, of course, with the city, except the responsibilities more rely upon the council district office itself to engage the community. And so in this instance, District seven identified a possible map change in Overland Park. And I think this could be brought to this attention through neighborhood groups, business districts, property owners, etc., in this case. District seven really noticed it somewhat on their own. It was little bit too late in the Blueprint Denver adoption process, but they had heard for several years that property owners and residents in the area that may be that a more mixed use industrial designation made more sense. We just didn't catch it in the initial adoption of Blueprint Denver. So District seven brought that to CBD attention and we were able to utilize that as a pilot program to develop the process to do this annual update of the map outside of a small area plan. So what we have in front of you tonight here is this Future Places Map Amendment proposal in Overland Park, generally bounded by west Louisiana on the north and west, Colorado to the south, the right of the railroad, right of way to the west and Broadway Acoma Alley to the east. And it is a change from value manufacturing in the future. Places map to innovation flex in the future. Places map critical here. This is not a zoning case like you, just the last three cases in front of you. This is just a change to the map in Blueprint. Denver Right. So there's no entitlement that is attached to this directly. And you'll notice there on the slide that the change from value manufacturing to innovation flex is there both in the district, uh, column there and are adjacent. It's a relatively minor change. There is an important difference there, though. The Innovation Flex does allow residential component, which the value manufacturing currently does not. And so CPD has developed some considerations to to review a proposal such as this. First of all, the timing of future and recent small area planning in the neighborhood, very important that we're not trying to kind of circumnavigate the need for a small area plan. And timing is the first thing we want to review there. So there has been no recent plans done in this area and it is not identified in any of the near-term next NPI phases. Secondly, as I mentioned, you shouldn't circumnavigate that need first malaria plane. So we want to look at the scale and complexity of the request that is in front of us in this situation to maintaining the manufacturing uses that are in it. But it does not add additional places. So it's a it's a simple one for one designation, right? We're not multiplying and and making it more complex. The geography is about five blocks in size, which is not typically the size and scale that a small area plan would would require and appropriateness to adjacent future places. There is adjacent community corridor and center places that allow the mixed use residential development, which would be the new component of the innovation flex. Also when look at the overall impact on completing creating complete neighborhoods, meeting the equity concepts and citywide population employment projections in Blueprint Denver And so with complete neighborhoods, this does allow the residential component, the key equity concepts, the scoring is in the middle essentially across all of those different categories. Of course, any large scale rezoning zoning would be subject to a full equity evaluation and the growth strategy. There's new jobs in housing could be directed to this location, which is not included in a manufacturing preservation area. That's another key aspect here. This is a manufacturing district, but it was not included in the manufacturing preservation areas identified in Blueprint Denver. The third step is engaging the community on the proposed future place map change. So District seven hosted two community meetings back in November. Written notice was done consistent with the larger development review process. We had around 40 attendees at those two meetings and overall comments were very supportive. We did have an accompanying online survey, 19 responses strongly supported the survey. There was no dissenting responses and neighbor outreach district seven flier the area and in your packet Overland Park Neighborhood Association did send a letter of support. So at that point when we have that engagement process and we feel like we can move forward with this council, District seven submitted the future place map change to CPD officially and we incorporated it into our process of the annual report, which we are in front of the Ludy subcommittee in early March. So staff does find that that the blueprint Denver 2020 future places map amendment using an inclusive public process is consistent with comprehensive plan 2040 and the plan takes a long term view and staff recommends approval. Thank you very much. We did not receive any written comments this evening, but we do have one individual signed up to speak in person. So if you would, David, create a little space there. And Jesse Pearce, you are a. Oh, good evening. Members of council, those in the audience also watching at home. My name is Jessie, the sound person. I ran for city council at large last year and I got almost 15,000 votes with no money. And I'll be running again in 2023 to be your next mayor. And I'm representing for Denver Homeless out loud, black star action movies for Self Defense, Positive Action for Member for Social Change, as well as the Unity Party of Colorado and Mile-High News. So all this is. A change in what is being displayed. For the Overland Park in reference to this comprehensive plan 2040. I guess I can support this. I see now that it's an opposition and I didn't see anything that made me want to question this so much. My question is what? Why is this so essential? And if this doesn't pass down, where. Thank you. Thank you. That concludes our speakers this evening. Are there any questions from members of council? Councilmember Ortega. Yeah. Dave, would you mind coming back up? How many property owners are within that five block area? I don't have an exact number on that. And Council District seven may have a better estimate. I'm not for certain. You know, we fly every single place, but I don't have that number right in front of me. It has been many months since we fired all of that, so I apologize. Are there any single family homes in the area or is it all strictly. Know it is. It's a fascinating part of Denver that looks like it. It sprung up before there were any rules. And so you have single family homes, you have warehouses, you have everything you could kind of imagine happening all in that area. And sometimes one of one single family homes, sometimes a row of four or five. Okay. But that yeah, that was one of the things that came up at the community meetings was people were people who owned the single family home saying, hey, we're not even allowed to do this technically under this. And this mapping does, you know, provide some residential options, not just industrial options. Yeah, I know. One of the challenges is if you're in an industrial area and you want to get a mortgage loan to do some upgrades on your home, your bank typically is not as excited to loan you money. We had that problem along the 13th Avenue corridor sometime ago before they had part of their area resold. So I guess I was just trying to understand what percentage of the property owners are actually on board. It sounds like you did an extensive outreach effort of the two meetings, generated 40 people, but just not knowing exactly how many of, you know, property owners are within that area, it's it's hard to really gauge what that yeah. The participation rate was. And there are also there are lots of parcels. There are some large landowners who own lots of different stuff over there. And, you know, I think that the it's always hard to get people to engage, especially in something that doesn't actually change anything on the ground. There's no change in zoning. There's no change in current uses. It does not change anything for them today on what they have at all. And so most of them got the information they wanted and then were like, This doesn't actually change anything for me. So, so didn't provide a lot of feedback beyond that. But again, we were satisfied that everyone who we could get to provide comments that we didn't have anyone saying that they were opposed to it. And it sounds like it just creates the opportunity for more flexibility in what can happen in the future by changing the the designation for this area. Yeah, the only thing that changes is on the future places map. So it is only things that could happen in the future and only with further action from this body for those things to even occur. So this is like a precursor that still, again, doesn't change a thing on the ground for any of these property owners today other than what they might come in front of us for someday. As this area continues to develop with the light rail stations and in the light rail plans that have been adopted, this is the space that was in the gap between the Evan's Light Rail Station area plan and the Broadway stationary plan, which had robust engagement of the community of what they wanted and built a vision that just had a gap because that wasn't an overland plan. It was two different stationary plans. Okay. The only other thing I want to just suggest is that if and when you get to that next phase of talking about changes in the actual zoning that allow something different to happen, that the railroad conversation and the safety issue is front and center in all of that. Because what happens is as the development occurs and abuts adjacent to the tracks, you start seeing all this density and those neighbors start screaming about what happens, what's in place if something happens to make sure our safety is being addressed. So it is our responsibility as a city to make sure we're addressing that by the sheer fact that we're approving zoning changes that allow high density to go next to the tracks. So. Absolutely. All right. Thank you, Councilmember. Are there any other questions? I don't see anybody. All right. The public hearing for Council Bill 2 to 8 is closed. Comments. Oh, did I miss you, Councilman Flynn? Yes, you did. I apologize. We will reopen the hearing so that you can ask your questions and do it appropriately this time. Go ahead. Thank you. I just want to clarify the way I understand in reading through the staff report. David, that the primary change that we're looking at here is to include among the future places in this area, the possibility of residential mixed in with the industrial. The light industrial. Yeah. That I just wanna make sure I'm clear on that. That is correct. The value manufacturing right. That's today does not allow that. The zoning today does not allow that. And so change would allow a potential support for rezoning. Until if this were not changed, if the mapping stayed the same, if someone came in and wanted to include a residential component in a rezoning application, we would have to say that that does not conform. Correct. So this is correct. Okay. Thank you. Yeah. All right. Now, any other questions before I close? All right. Public hearing for 228 is now closed again. Comments by members of council. This one's in my district and I talked to some of it during the questions. But again, just as a reminder, there are no this is no zoning change. There are no new entitlements that come with this. This was something that as we were going through Blueprint, which was a multi-year process, we got to the 11th hour and look down at the map and in the office and we said, wait, that's not right. And so we checked in with the neighborhood association with some of the business owners, and they all said, Yeah, that's not right. But at that point, it was too late to go back in to see Betty's credit. They said, Hey, if we're going to go back, we get that you guys are all saying that it's wrong and maybe it is, but let's have that conversation and let's have a robust process and give people the opportunity. And we don't feel like we have that time to do that now. So even if we get it wrong, let's get it wrong and then do it right. And and I appreciate your your, you know, walking us through the first of these, hey, we might have got something wrong. What do we do about that? The neighborhood association has been supportive. Again, no property owners who were opposed to this money and in strong support and many just wanted to know what was going on and got their information and then went on their way. And again, this is just an area that the default because when there wasn't a small area plan that specifically called that out, the default was to stick with what the zoning currently is. What the zoning currently is is not reflective of what is actually on the ground right now and certainly not reflective of the community vision that's been built in this area around the ovens and the Broadway stationery plan. This doesn't get us to the point where that vision starts to spring out of the ground, but that vision is closed without this change, at least to allow the framework that someday we might be able to see that vision come out of the ground. So I will be supporting this this evening, and I would ask all of you to support it as well. Councilmember Hines. Thank you, Mr. President. I want to thank Mr. Jaspers for your work on this. You are one of the many Denver city employees that I have worked with in your capacity before I was even a candidate. So you and I conversed about Blueprint and who better to fix up the little guessing errors on Blueprint than you? Who was the principal liaison between the Blueprint Committee and the city of Denver? So thank you for all your work. Again, thanks to the city attorney's office as well. And thank you, Mr. President. Thank you, Councilmember. And I will say amen to that. And if anyone else finds a problem on their map there, there was a lot of hand-hold it needed. And you were very gracious in holding my hand through this process and helping figure it out. So thank you for all your work and your whole team who helped out with this. So I'm missing anybody. I don't see it. So, Madam Secretary, roll call on 228. Black. See the broker. Friends. I feel more. Herndon High five Cashmere High Kinney Ortega High Sandoval High Sawyer Torres High Council President. High I'm secretary Please close voting announce the results.