Speaker 0: 13 Eyes Council Bill 201 has passed. Or moving on to 20-05, four or five. It's an ordinance changing the zoning classification for 4228 Kalama Street and 40 to 60 Kalama Street in Sunnyside. Councilmembers say to Barker, Will you please put Council Bill 545 on the floor for passage?
Speaker 5: I move that council bill 545 be placed upon final consideration and you pass.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Oh, can I get that second? Thank you. The required public hearing for Council Bill 20-054 or five is open. May we get the staff report, please?
Speaker 2: Certainly. Good evening, counsel. I'm Brandon Schaefer, presenting the official map amendment application four 4228 and 4260 cattlemen streets rezoning from PD 240 and um x2x2 you are x three. The subject property is located in Council District one in the Sunnyside neighborhood. Again, this request is for you or X3 that is urban neighborhood context residential mixed use three storey maximum height. The subject property is currently an industrial storage lot and a residential duplex measuring just over an acre of land area and is requesting a rezoning to allow for future residential development. Existing zoning on the site is primarily 50 to 40, which I will detail on the next slide. And um, matched to X which stands for urban mixed use two storey maximum height with limited commercial uses. Many of the uses allowed in this district are tailored to ensure compatibility with the established residential neighborhood. Adjacent zoning is new to you. See, you are age 2.5 and industrial mixed use across the alley in the form of I am x three. So Peabody through 40 was approved in 1988 and it is based on the former Chapter 59, a07 zone district that contemplates the construction of a building of no more than 15,300 square feet for light manufacturing and office uses. This beauty also includes maximum floor area ratio and height, a minimum primary street setback, as well as requirements for parking, sidewalks, landscaped areas and building coverage. Current land uses of the subject properties are industrial and two unit residential adjacent land uses include single and two unit residential, industrial and office. These photos give you a sense of building form and scale with the subject properties on the left, residential structures across columns on the bottom right, and a mix of residential and industrial structures across the alley that are pictured on the top. Right. This table shows a side by side comparison of the existing zone districts versus the proposed zone district. The proposed zone district three provides the townhouse and shopfront building forms and allows for an increase in height of 15 feet for a maximum of three stories and 45 feet. Speaking to the process. Informational notice of this application was sent in February and a revised application was submitted in late April. Planning Board voted unanimously to move this case forward at their meeting on June 3rd. Notice of today's meeting was sent on July 20th. So after the preparation of the staff report in this presentation, we did receive three letters from nearby property owners in support of this rezoning. Now moving to the criteria. These are the four plans that impact the subject property, starting with comprehensive plan 2040. The proposed rezoning is consistent with many of the strategies in this plan, which are organized by vision elements that would allow for an increase in allowed housing density near the 41st and FOX stations, consistent with the equitable, affordable and inclusive goals and strategies. Similarly, the proposed zoning would allow for a broader variety of uses that in intensity consistent with the desire for an urban, walkable, mixed use community which fits into the strategies and goals in the strong and authentic neighborhoods. Vision element. Lastly, the land use patterns mentioned are consistent with the number of strategies and the environmentally resilient element, and therefore staff finds the request consistent with Plan 2040. Moving to Blueprint Denver. The subject property is mapped as part of the urban neighborhood context. This context is described as containing small multi-unit, residential and low unit, low intensity, mixed use buildings embedded in single unit unit residential areas. As the proposed zone district is primarily intended to accommodate residential uses, the request is appropriate and consistent with the blueprint context. The Future Places MAP designates the properties as low, medium residential. These properties are. This designation, rather is described as having aspirational characteristics of the low medium residential area. Having a mix of low and mid-scale residential options and limited mixed use is allowed along some arterial and collector streets into intersections. Consistent with this guidance, the proposed district provides for a variety of residential options and allows for limited commercial uses. All the streets that surround the subject properties are classified as local or in designated. And my street, which is one block to the west, is classified as.
Speaker 1: A residential collector.
Speaker 2: As your x three is primarily residential. Request to district is consistent with the future street types at this location. The subject property is also located within all other areas of the city and blueprint Denver. These areas are projected to account for 10% of jobs and 20% of new households in the city by 2040. The proposed rezoning will provide additional housing units and offered the opportunity for additional jobs, which is an appropriate change given these growth goals for the rezoning is consistent with the blueprint. Denver Future Growth Areas Plan Direction. Moving to the station area plan. This was adopted in 2009 and sets forth the vision for the creation of a diverse, transit, supportive and environmentally sustainable urban center in the Land Use Concept Map. Subject properties are mapped as urban residential 1 to 3 stories. These areas are intended to create an improved edge for the adjacent residences and calls for a range of housing types, including single unit accessory dwelling units, duplexes, townhomes and small condominium and apartment buildings. Therefore, this rezoning request is consistent with both the land use and building types. Recommendation and station area. The last plan is the Sunnyside Neighborhood Plan, adopted in 1992 that identified the subject properties as industrial and estates, the need for increased or improved buffers to separate the industrial and residential areas. At the time this plan was written in the nineties, the subject property was owned up to 40, which allowed for the industrial and office uses and b one on the corner of 43rd and Kalama, which allowed for limited office. Therefore, the proposed district is consistent with this plan as it follows allows for a range of residential building forms and improves the buffer between the local neighborhood to the west and the industrial areas to the north. And to these. Staff also finds the requested zoning meets the next two criteria, as it will result in the uniformity of district regulations and will further public health, safety and welfare for the implementation of adopted plans and facilitating increased housing density near bus and rail transit services. There are two justified circumstances for this rezoning. The first being changed and changing conditions in the surrounding area. Recent physical changes include the opening of the rail station in 2019 and the multi-use path along the street that connects the neighborhood to downtown. The second justifying circumstance points to the majority of the site, which is currently zoned 50 to 40, retaining former Chapter 59 zoning after the city adopted the Denver Zoning Code in 2010. Overall, the proposed rezoning is consistent with the urban neighborhood contexts that exist in the surrounding area and with the purpose and intent statements. City staff recommends approval based on planning that all review criteria have been met. I'm happy to answer any questions.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Brandon. Tonight Council has received two written comments on Council Bill 545. There are two submitted comments in favor of the application and no submitted comments in opposition of the application. All council members that are present have certified that they have read each of the submitted written comments. Do any members need more time in order to read all of the written testimony that has been submitted? Seen none. Madam Secretary, let the record reflect that all written testimony submitted regarding Council Bill 545 has been read by each member of council, and all written testimony has been submitted to the official record of the hearing. We have one individual signed up to speak tonight, Matt Giovanni. And I believe he is the applicant. And we were going to. See if he would raise his hand. There's one phone call. PARTICIPANT So we're. Trying to see if Matt is here. All right. It looks like we don't have Matt here, and so we don't have any speakers for this hearing tonight. Questions from members of council. We have Councilman Ortega. Well, your mutant. I. Okay. There we go. I wanted to ask Brennan a question about. Sort of where that line is. In the Sunnyside neighborhood, where the height and the encroachment of sort of ends, if you will, we know that the light rail stop shares, you know, both the sunny side and the Globeville side of that that rail corridor. But I'm just curious. When CPD identifies that the 20% has been met by a specific neighborhood, for example, some neighborhoods are growing exponentially because of their proximity to rail. But does that take into account that 20%? So help me understand those two things. Where's that sort of boundary line on the western edge of the rail? So really the sort of eastern end of the neighborhood, but the west end of rail, so that it doesn't just keep continuing to encroach into the single family fabric of the neighborhood. And then when is that 20% threshold met? Sure. So your first question.
Speaker 4: If you.
Speaker 2: Work at the stationary plan and then kind of as we see these resources come in piecemeal, I think that it's fair to say that the encroachments really stop that Chalamet Street, that's where we really don't have any plans to offer more guidance and free stories. And then it gradually increases as you move over a couple of blocks to the east. And I believe the most intense is along Inca streets.
Speaker 0: So does that include the west side of Columbus or does it end on the eastern side of Chalamet? The stationary plant.
Speaker 2: I believe ends at the Western. So that was east of Callum Street towards towards the rail track.
Speaker 0: Okay.
Speaker 2: Okay. And then to the question about observing, you know, growth and and housing and and jobs, that really I think is more of an aspirational number. And it's something that we try to keep track of at a city wide bubble every year. And we do an annual update or report to blueprint number. I don't really think that there's it's not really meant to serve as a calculation of when the neighborhood gets there that will stop, you know, supporting rezonings in that area once we see that magic number get set.
Speaker 0: So for me, part of part of why looking at the 20% by neighborhoods where we're seeing a lot of growth happen becomes important is because historically KPD has looked at the project. Piecemeal project by project, not at a neighborhood holistically and looking at the cumulative impact and whether or not this results in major infrastructure issues that have to be addressed. This is along a corridor where we have the Utah Junction outfall, which is a storm drainage corridor, where a lot of that water sort of flows down towards this area. And so, you know, understanding how the city's looking at the infrastructure, not just roads, but what, you know, storm drain and any of the other issues where upgrades need to occur. And we don't wait and then just expect the city to foot the tab where we should be looking at the areas a little bit more holistically like we're trying to do at the 41st and Fox area. So that's why I bring that up and just wanted to kind of hear what the thinking of CBD is as we sort of bump up to that ceiling of that 20% or really start to exceed it significantly in certain neighborhoods. So thank you. I have no further questions or comments. Thank you, Councilwoman. Councilwoman Sandoval.
Speaker 5: Thank you, Madam President. So, Brendan, did you say is the applicant on the line?
Speaker 2: I thought they were. Can we try to look for him again, Mac?
Speaker 0: We can. Matt, if you are in the attendance, please raise your hand. All right. It looks like we have Matt and we'll get him. And you did. Okay, ma'am.
Speaker 2: Good evening.
Speaker 0: Hi. Good evening. Councilman Sandoval had a question for you.
Speaker 2: Could you repeat that again, please?
Speaker 5: Hey, Matt. How are you? Councilman Tannenbaum.
Speaker 2: How are you?
Speaker 5: Good. Thanks for joining us tonight. So can you talk to us a little bit about the community process that this site has gone through and what the plans are for it?
Speaker 2: Sure. So we started back in October of 2019, really looking at what the neighbors wanted out of the site before we made any plans to the. We sat through several of the meetings. And neighbors Councilwoman Sandoval and that the community organization at large. We held a couple of conversations with outside and looking at what we could do with the project itself, really trying to create that transition neighborhood as we step towards the to the library and to the overall community, what was going to be better served with a stepping up of buildings versus jumping up to five stories? So we also heard from that the number of streets for the second or third work are stronger piece for this because of people moving through the neighborhood to get to the. So what we've we've done extensive outreach and met with the RINO's multiple times and will continue to do so as we move through the SDP portion. Our intent is to develop the property and we will be taking those next steps after this decision.
Speaker 5: And did I miss it? Did you see what you were developing the property into?
Speaker 2: We currently do not know what the project will become given the time of COVID. We have reevaluated some of the offerings as well as look at what is coming in the next several months from projects around the city to consider, condos to address, and larger spaces and potentially larger apartments to offer a diversity of product to to the neighborhood.
Speaker 5: And then it was good. Remind me. Are you doing that for the affordable housing? Are you paying the linkage fee or did you guys come to a decision with the neighborhood about building an on site and affordable?
Speaker 2: We have opted to go towards the addressing that at the time of SDP. We don't yet know what the final metrics of the building are because of the square footage. And we reach out to both and financing companies to understand how we could cover that affordable housing piece. But we have not yet at this time figured that financial aspect of this project out.
Speaker 5: And is there one owner or multiple owners of the proposed site?
Speaker 2: There are multiple owners. We the the LLC that is we were representing controls 7/8 of the block. The last corner piece is a single family owner duplex property that we do not control, but we felt that was necessary to come into the council with a complete thought for the entire block so that there was not a small to parcel remnant of older zoning with the. Amex property.
Speaker 5: And have they discussed about wanting to redevelop or are they okay with their use by right what they have going on.
Speaker 2: Currently there are in use by right. And we've not made any overtures to take that property. We don't. We're not we're not trying to force them out of that property at this time.
Speaker 5: And is the developer the funder is the developer or the person who's doing the building or would they sell it to a different developer? I mean, is the property owner the developer sorry.
Speaker 2: For a property owner is intending to develop themselves probably with a junior partner to help with the vertical.
Speaker 5: Okay. Thank you, Madam President.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Councilman Ortega. That raised a couple last last minute questions. So the single family property that is included in the red zone application and they were fully aware and okay. Being included. Can you clarify that?
Speaker 2: Yes. So we've met with several times at the beginning, back in October. We also looked at the adjacent properties on to the east on the other side of the alley to join us. At that time, they chose to not join us, but it was by the owner of that small parcel that they accepted. To join our our rezoning.
Speaker 0: Okay. So we're up zoning their property, but they're not part of the assemblage of what would be developed. Correct.
Speaker 2: Correct. The assemblage today is effectively a vacant parking lot that's used for industrial storage. So not of use really fitting within the neighborhood as it stands today, as it transitions to a more residential commercial district. But there is no displacement of existing homes and no change of that. We just need to move from the existing PD that limits us to effectively only building a warehouse building and move that to something more suitable for the neighborhood today.
Speaker 0: Okay. And can you tell me if you all have pursued conversations with the Colorado Housing Finance Authority about low income tax credits as part of a way to do either? The affordable is that would be required under the city's linkage fees or to just incorporate more affordable housing on the site.
Speaker 2: So we did reach out to hosts to see what funding mechanisms they may be able to offer. The current construct of host only allows for 100%, 30% AMI so the entire building has to be serving some very low to no income product. So it's really funding things like DHEA and other avenues that development is occurring.
Speaker 0: So just interrupt. Host and the Colorado Housing Finance Authority or two completely different entities. And yes, oftentimes the city does have money into projects that go before. But that the question was about whether or not you had approached Chapel about the possibility of looking at an application to secure some income tax credits for the project.
Speaker 2: So we haven't gone very far with. A lot of them want to see our final project to understand what kind of gap they can provide for us, because we are so early in this process and we don't know what the final configuration of the building will be. It's very difficult to even show this to a lender to say, can we can we get financing right now?
Speaker 0: And just the last question. So what prevents you from getting the zoning and then just flipping the property for highest and best value?
Speaker 2: There are no mechanisms that stop us from that effort. But being that we've put through and worked diligently with the neighbors to establish this and in good faith, we. We intend to develop this project.
Speaker 0: Great. Thank you. I have no further questions. Appreciate your answering.
Speaker 2: Your.
Speaker 0: All right. Thank you, Councilwoman. The public hearing for council bill 20 dash zero five, four or five. It's closed comments by members of council. All right. So, you know, comments by members of council or councilwoman. Okay. Just wanted to make sure I didn't miss anybody. Madam Secretary, roll call, please.
Speaker 5: Sandoval, I.
Speaker 4: Sawyer.
Speaker 5: Now.
Speaker 4: Torres.
Speaker 0: I black.
Speaker 4: I see tobacco. President. Clark.
Speaker 2: All right.
Speaker 0: Flynn.
Speaker 2: I. Herndon, I. HINES Hi. Cashman Hi.
Speaker 5: Can I.
Speaker 4: ORTEGA All right. In double check. CDEBACA Yours was an eye.
Speaker 5: Abstain.
Speaker 4: I stayed. Madam President.
Speaker 0: Hi, Madam Secretary. Please. Because of the Iranian announced the results. One nay, one abstention. 11. Nice. 11 is council bill 545 has passed. Up next, we have 20 dash 0550. A bill for an ordinance changing the zoning classification for 516 Newton Street in Farnham.
A bill for an ordinance changing the zoning classification for 4228 Kalamath Street and 4260 Kalamath Street in Sunnyside.
Approves an official map amendment to rezone property from PUD 240 and U-MX-2x to U-RX-3 (mixed use, to residential mixed use), located at 4228 and 4260 Kalamath Street in Council District 1. The Committee approved filing this item at its meeting on 6-23-20.