Speaker 0: Direct your comments to council as a whole and please refrain from individual or personal attacks. Councilmember CdeBaca, will you please put Council Bill 526 on the floor for final passage?
Speaker 6: Yes, I move that council bill 21, dash 526 be placed upon final consideration and do pass.
Speaker 0: It has been moved and seconded. The required public hearing for Council Bill 526 is open. May we please have the staff report?
Speaker 6: Hello. All right. I don't remember how to do this, so I'm going to use yourself. I started. I'm Ellis TV, and I'm here to present the staff report. 440, 12, 40, 40, 40, 46 and 4058 Foch Street. All right. So we are in Council District nine in the Globeville neighborhood and the subject properties on Fox Street between 40th and 41st AV in the Fox station east area. It's just over an acre. And the proposed rezoning to see MZ eight Urban Center Neighborhood Context Main Street up to eight storeys is to reflect a trend the intended transit oriented development character of the area and to facilitate redevelopment. Main Street zoning allows a mix of uses in the townhouse and shopfront building forms. And the current zoning is you oh two, which is light industrial with the billboard use overlay. It's adjacent to more i i aew oh two with CMC's eight to the East and some instances of CMC along Fox Street to the north and south. The current land use is industrial parking and single unit residential. It's adjacent to industrial, single unit residential and vacant uses and it's across Fox Street from the 41st and station and parking lot. So the middle image shows the subject property the you lucky dog dog day care. The other images are some of the residential and industrial buildings in the area. So this rezoning is within the area governed by the 41st and Fox Station East rules and regulations. So these were adopted in 2018 to limit trip generation to an area with a constrained vehicle network through requiring transportation demand management or TDM plans. By capping development and by capping development once the current trip capacity has been reached. So CPD recommends that rezonings in the area governed by these rules and regulations reserve their trips against that capacity before proceeding with the rezoning. The applicant has reserved 854 daily vehicle trips based on an eight story mixed use development with assumed TDM measures. The applicant has been working with host staff who are here tonight to answer questions on a voluntary housing affordable housing agreement. The agreement is for the planned rental product, with 20 units serving households with incomes up to 80% AMI over 60 years. And actually, since I submitted the staff report last week to you all, the applicant has signed that agreement. So the CAP amendment of an application was unanimously recommended for approval by Planning Board in May. There are several articles in the area. CPD has not received any comments on this application. So now we'll jump into the review criteria. We have five plans to consider in this area. So the proposed MAP amendment is consistent with several strategies from Comprehensive Plan 2040. It would allow for housing options near transit and other mixed use developments, which is consistent with the equitable, affordable and inclusive strategies shown here. And it would allow for a mixed use infill development near transit, consistent with the environmentally resilient strategies listed here. In Blueprint 2019. The future neighborhood context is urban center, which typically contains a mix of uses. The future place of this area is called Community Center, which typically provides some mix of office, commercial and residential with heights up to 12 stories. Buildings orient to the street. Fox Street is a mixed use collector adjacent to the site, transitioning to a mixed use arterial at the southern edge of the site. The proposed C eight applies primarily to arterial street corridors or may be embedded within larger commercial shopping center or mixed use area. According to the Blueprint Growth Strategy, the site is within community centers and corridors. So these areas are anticipated to see 25% of new housing growth and 20% of new employment growth by 2040. The proposed Map amendment to see MSA eight will focus mixed use growth to an area where it has been determined to be most appropriate. The 41st and Fox station area plan was adopted in 2009. It includes a vision for a diverse transit supportive urban center. This area is mapped as pedestrian shopping district 2 to 8 stories. These areas are intended to accommodate a mix of uses with continuous street frontages. So this plan also includes recommended recommended improvements to the transportation network. While some of these recommendations have been implemented, some have not, which leaves the area with a uniquely constrained vehicle access. As detailed in the staff report, the 41st in Fox Station East rules and regulations were adopted to ensure that the new vehicle trips generated by development do not exceed capacity. The applicant has completed the concept review with development services to preserve the trips a development under the proposed rezoning would be expected to generate. The proposed CMS eight would allow mixed use development with a maximum height of eight storeys and an emphasis on street level activation. And since the mobility improvements recommended by this plan have not yet been completed, the applicant has ensured that the expected impact of this rezoning can be accommodated by the existing transportation network. Therefore, the proposed rezoning is consistent with the 41st and Fox area plan. Then the Globeville neighborhood plan was adopted in 2014, and the plan reinforces the 41st and Fox station area plan recommendations in this portion of the neighborhood. The site is mapped as transit oriented development, which includes housing, services and employment, and facilitates pedestrian and transit access. It's also in an area of change which is defined in this plan as the most desirable and beneficial location for growth. So staff found that the proposed rezoning is consistent with adopted plans. Because the applicant has worked with house to house staff to reach an agreement in principle for voluntary affordable housing agreement. The staff report also references housing in an inclusive Denver, which was adopted in 2018. The plan includes recommendations to promote development of new, affordable, mixed income and mixed rental housing. As I mentioned, the proposed rezoning already meets the first criterion. So the inclusion of a voluntary, affordable housing agreement further strengthens an already consistent application. The proposed rezoning will result in uniform application of zoned district building form, use and design regulations. It furthers public health, safety and welfare through the implementation of adopted plans and other mechanisms detailed in this draft report. The Application and staff report detail change or changing conditions in the area that justify this rezoning and the requested CMS eight is consistent with the neighborhood context description, zoned district purpose and intent. So based on finding that all review criteria have been met, CPD recommends approval. Andrew Johnson is here from Host and there are two members of the applicant team attending virtually. Mike Francona and Isaiah Salazar. And so they'll all be available as well for questions. Thank you.
Speaker 0: All right. Thank you for the staff report. And this evening, we have two individuals signed up to speak this evening and they are both joining us virtually. And our first speaker is Jessie Paris.
Speaker 2: Yes. Good evening. Now, for those watching at home, those that are in the council chambers. My name is Justin was here. Some representative for Black Star Action Movement for Self Defense, Positive Action for Social Change, as well as the Unity Party of Colorado and frontline black males. And I will be the next mayor of Denver in 2023. I am against this redevelopment that is going on. This area is being rapidly gentrified. Many other residents have been displaced as a result of this gentrification. So to hear that you're going to put an eight story building in a rapidly gentrified neighborhood is not a good sign . I wanted to know what if there is going to be house and built here with the am I level? It's going to be for the house and. Also, I want to know if there has been a traffic study done because Box Street is a very narrow arterial. I've known over the years it's been trying to expand it to make it wider, but it's pretty narrow. And where are people going to park? In this area to go to these shops, as was suggested earlier, the presentation. So if the or somebody from the CPD can answer that question, I would greatly appreciate it. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Jesse. Our next speaker is Tess Storti.
Speaker 8: Hi there. Oh, sorry. Okay. So I hope there's an echo.
Speaker 0: There is a little bit test, but go ahead and start out and we'll let you know.
Speaker 6: Okay.
Speaker 8: Once again. Okay. Sorry about that. So I agree with Jesse that it seems like we're still using the same standards that we've already brought up multiple times about the issues with these with the with the, you know, criteria. And when we're talking about affordable housing and we're still using an 80% AMI benchmark that is not affordable for the people who this is going to displace. So I don't understand why we continue. We've been talking to you guys about this since November or October, and it's now July. And we're still using the same standards that at certain certain hearings, you guys have even acknowledged that it is not that they are not adequate to to be evaluating these things. So I don't know why the planning department and you guys have not been pushing the planning department to to update the standards. There's a problem with the standards. So I don't know why the criteria. I mean, there's a problem with the criteria. I don't know why the criteria that this outdated and not adequate to meet the needs of the city are still being used to evaluate rezonings for the city. So it's just like it also the fact that you that there that you didn't hear back from, you know, any of the of the neighborhood organizations, what other kind of outreach is being done? Because, you know, I don't know that the the the make up of Globeville is and how many how like how little parking there is there now. It's already been it's already been identified. And and then, you know, you have the underpass going from from like coal in five points into Globeville and that I used to teach at Coliseum Science Academy that, you know, right there is so it gets so backed up. So like when when are we going to expand that right there? You know, when is there going to be infrastructure put in place that can that can support these rezonings? Because until that is done, it doesn't really matter what the developer says they're going to do. You know, we already can see the impact this is going to have. We don't need a developer promising so that they can get a rezoning passed. We don't need that. We need to know. We need to really be like evaluating and using our brains. And this, you know, it's just we continue to see rezonings like this and it's not effective. It's not like this is going to displace people. And until we can address the displacement going on in the city, I don't want to see any more of these rezonings get just passed through. I mean, do you guys ever deny anything like I haven't seen once that that happens. So I'm just curious, like, what is the you know, the only thing I saw denied was the 7 to 7 news historical preservation proposal. That's the only one. And, you know, since then, like, it's just like everything else is just free for all. It's just a developer's playground. And I'm not anti-development. It's the kind of development that we are allowing in the city that is displacing people. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Tess. That concludes our speakers questions for members of Council on Council Bill 526 Council members say to Barker.
Speaker 6: Thank you. I have several questions for both the applicant and host. So whoever makes it to the podium first we can start with. The applicant is on virtually the same. Awesome is going to win that one. Then we can start with the department. I didn't see an equity slide in this one. We've been seeing some of the equity analysis and other rezonings, and I'm wondering why the equity side wasn't in there and also didn't see any details about the the agreement with host. Can you go through the voluntary housing agreement and what levels were included in that?
Speaker 3: Sure. Thank you. My name is Andrew Johnston. I'm with the Department of Housing and Stability and the Equity Analysis. It is a newer thing that we are putting into the staff reports, and I. I don't think it was done for this particular project. Okay. Thanks.
Speaker 6: Yeah, just to speak to that. So this this case kind of started a while ago. There was quite a delay with the getting it scheduled for city council. So when it was going through planning board and the staff report and everything, that was before we started adding the equity slide to all rezonings that are in these neighborhoods . At the time that this was going through, it was just if it was five acres or more. So that's kind of a this is probably the last one of that that that you'll see. So do you have a rough analysis of the equity issues in this one, given that it is in this neighborhood? I don't have the like the blueprint equity metrics analyzed for this. So can you talk a little bit about how you guys worked directly with the applicant and the community to come to the affordable housing agreement?
Speaker 1: Yeah.
Speaker 3: And so the affordable housing agreement, I'll tell you that the terms are here first and then we can go for the next step as the agreement calls for 28 units. A lot of times you see a percentage in these voluntary, affordable housing agreements, because, remember, they are voluntary and they are calling for 20 units to be built there because they haven't gone through the site planning process. So they're not exactly sure and they felt better about making a commitment towards units. So they're doing 20 units, which are going to be up to 80%. Am I? And the term is for 60 years.
Speaker 6: And no specifics on the potential breakdown.
Speaker 1: Of the units.
Speaker 6: Of of the 20. Do we know if we know it can go up to 80%? But given that it's in this neighborhood and there are significant equity issues and we know 80% doesn't meet the mark that we need in that neighborhood, have we had a conversation about what is needed in that neighborhood and how those 20 units could be at the right army level?
Speaker 1: Sure.
Speaker 3: And we did have several conversations with the development team. They chose that they wanted to be at 80% AMI they also expressed that they had done a lot of other things in the area for affordable housing, as well as developing a student housing in the area. And I believe they had a transaction just across the street that I'm not familiar with, but included some affordable housing there. Perhaps the developer team could give you the details on that. It would be a good follow up. We do have the breakdown that line unit types it 20 breaks down to seven studios, nine with one bedroom and two over for two bedrooms. So the two bedrooms are the ones that we always like to see that bring in family size units. So it pretty much the mix mirrors what they're anticipating. Essentially 10% of the project to be okay.
Speaker 6: I'll ask the developer to go in depth on the affordability agreement. But real quick, can you tell me a little bit about how long the trips are reserved in the transportation plan? I know if they don't get the development done in a certain amount of time, those trips expire and they go back into the pool for someone else to draw from. Do we have a timeline on how long they have?
Speaker 3: It's a little bit outside.
Speaker 1: My wheelhouse for that one, unfortunately. I don't know what that term is.
Speaker 3: Do we have anyone here who does know that?
Speaker 6: I'm I'm pulling up the rules and regs right now. I think you're correct, though, that if you if you haven't used your trips at a certain point, they do you lose them and they do go back into the pool for somebody else to lose. I think the timelines, it's my understanding is it's based on like the where you are in the process and they're kind of different based on different steps. So they're a couple different checking points to make sure that people are moving along at a reasonable level. But I know that there's a there's a lot of working closely with development services staff. So, you know, if somebody is is getting it, you know, it's there's some flexibility to make sure that they're not being lost for just because, you know, someone was gone for the weekend or something. So so there's a lot of working together to make sure they do move along, but they can't be just like sat on by someone who's not doing something. How many trips did we entitled this development to? This one has 800. I want to say 854 and that was based on sorry, I'm going to grab my too many things. That was based on an eight story mixed use development and that is also factoring in the required TDM reductions. I will go to the applicant. I think I'm good with you guys. Thank you.
Speaker 0: And Councilmember CdeBaca, did you. We have both Isaiah Salazar and Mike Francona.
Speaker 6: Mike Francona.
Speaker 0: Okay. I believe he's in the queue. Go ahead with your questions.
Speaker 6: Or this can be.
Speaker 2: I'm sorry, I couldn't hear that.
Speaker 6: Can you tell us a little bit about that? Do and how you plan to build those 20 units to an appropriate EMI. We heard up to 80%, but I imagine if you spoke with any community members, you would know that 80% is way beyond the range that's accessible in this nice neighborhood. So can you tell us a little bit about your plans for those 20 units? Why you went with 20 units, what your anticipated total units are? And a little bit about the parcel across the street.
Speaker 2: Sure. You know so by Mike Franco and Denver. From Denver. The just talk a little bit about our history this this project is and this property is owned by the Salazar family. And we currently have over 600 beds over at the assembly student housing. Those beds are below the 50% AMI level. In addition, we've got over 360 beds at the villas next door to that that are also below the 50% AMI level. With that. Last year, we sold a property to the Denver Housing Authority who plans to put. Affordable. Right across the street from this project. So when we started looking at this project, we chose to look up to these 20 units and. Looking at around the 80% AMI level. Now, that being said, there there's a chance that they're priced lower than that. But that is what what the agreement was for was the the 20 units around the 80% AMI. I do know that VHA had talked about putting 200 affordable units across the street as well.
Speaker 6: Or are you guys looking for general population housing?
Speaker 2: You know, as with any project, we you know, we're we're looking to fill the building with with. Whoever wants to live there. I mean, we we are more than happy to. You know, for for us to provide the affordable and and, you know, that's. Well, we don't want to discriminate.
Speaker 6: I bring it up because student housing is not the type of housing that is typically catering to the neighborhood. And when there is development in this neighborhood, there are several risks of displacement for the people in the surrounding area. So trying to figure out if you guys plan to make this an extension of the student housing. Sounds like it's not keen on the property. How how big is that parcel and what was. Can you guys disclose what you sold it for?
Speaker 2: I'm actually not not privy to the numbers on that. As far as the. The the dollar amount that it was sold for. I think the property, if I remember correct, is around 35,000 square feet. So, you know, just ten, you know, about 8000 square feet shy of an acre.
Speaker 6: Can you talk about the people you all engaged in the community to do your community outreach on this project?
Speaker 2: So early on, we had sent emails and letters out to the the neighborhood groups in the surrounding area. And so we we reached out to the neighborhood groups essentially to see if they had any interest in in the project.
Speaker 6: Rudd groups did you gain support from?
Speaker 2: None of well. Only. Only one. That I recall even responded. So at this point, the answer would be none, because there was only one that even responded to us.
Speaker 6: One that did respond. What was their response?
Speaker 2: They had asked some questions of us. Asked to set up a meeting with us. So back in January I had responded and sent out several days where I could meet and then never heard back until May again. And then there's emails back and forth between May and today.
Speaker 6: Did you all end up meeting in person or.
Speaker 2: Would it not?
Speaker 6: What was that?
Speaker 2: I'm sorry. We know we did not end up meeting in person. No.
Speaker 6: Some concerns came to me from the global neighborhood. And while I understand it's a process that started quite a while back and maybe stopped and started and stopped and started. It's important to engage the most affected community, especially because this is an extremely vulnerable community. The community group that did reach out to you, they wanted to meet in person. They wanted to have a discussion about this property. And unfortunately, they feel that they were denied that opportunity. And so for that reason, it's hard for me to draw the conclusion that this does meet the criteria, because a significant part of of the criteria is that it advances the health and wellness and safety of the neighborhood. And in my perspective, that should be determined by the community and the criteria that they hold you all to. So so for this rezoning, unfortunately, I do not believe that it does meet the criteria because community was not engaged and they did try in good faith to engage. And so that concludes my questions. I do believe this is a place where we should be driving development. But I think that community has a right to determine what happens in their neighborhood, and they should be the first ones who we talk to or consult with when we're deciding what a development agreement should look like, what community benefits should look like, and what a development overall should look like. So if this does pass tonight, I strongly encourage you to directly engage with the global community and especially the ones who reached out looking for a meeting to make sure that we don't have these stumbling blocks in the future. Thank you.
Speaker 2: Can I speak to that real quick?
Speaker 0: To Baka Councilmember Cashman, we had you in the queue.
Speaker 3: My questions were answered. Thank you, Madam President.
Speaker 7: All right.
Speaker 0: Very good. Seen no other questions by members of council. The public hearing is closed. Comments by members of Council on Council Bill 526 Council member Sayed Abarca.
Speaker 6: Thank you. Just when we look at a development that's shifting from one story or two stories to eight potential stories, 20 units out of 80% am I is missing the mark on a community benefit and advancing the welfare of this community. And we have a duty here, especially as we're recovering from COVID, to make sure that we're building or driving development that meets our city's needs. And we've heard over and over and over that the development that we're supporting across the city is not meeting the mark of the most vulnerable among us. And while I wanted to postpone this tonight, we were unable to do that. And I do want the community that's watching to know that I heard your requests. I heard that you did want to meet with this developer and did try in good faith to do so. And I do stand with you guys tonight. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Councilmember CdeBaca. Seen no other hands raised. Madam Secretary, roll call on Council Bill 526.
Speaker 6: CdeBaca a reluctant no.
Speaker 7: Flynn.
Speaker 1: I.
Speaker 7: Herndon. Cashman. I. Can each. I. Sandoval. I. Sawyer. I Torres. I. Black I. Madam President.
Speaker 0: I. Madam Secretary, please close the voting and announce the results.
Speaker 7: One Name nine eyes.
Speaker 0: Nine eyes council bill 20 1-5 26 has passed. Moving on. Council members say to Barca and thank you for the staff report and the city agency folks and community members that joined us for that last public hearing. Council member state of Barca, will you please? Per council bill 553 on the floor for final passage.
A bill for an ordinance changing the zoning classification for 4012, 4040, 4046, and 4058 North Fox Street in Globeville.
Approves a map amendment to rezone property from I-A UO-2 to C-MS-8 (industrial to urban center, 8-stories), located at 4012, 4040, 4046, and 4058 Fox Street in Council District 9. The Committee approved filing this item at its meeting on 5-11-21.