Speaker 6: Good evening to you, sir, with community planning and development. This is a rezoning of property located at 4800 North Ray Street. It is proposed to be reasoned from I.B., an industrial zone district you are to which is an overlay allowing billboards to seem x three, cm x five and c MSA which is urban center mixed use three , five and eight story. So the property is located in central north central Denver in the Elyria Swansea neighborhood. Oops, I went the wrong way. And it is about 264,000 square feet or six acres. There is an existing warehouse, industrial warehouse on the property. The property owner is requesting to rezone to redevelop the site. And again, the request is to go from I.B., which is an industrial zone district use overlay to which allows which creates an allowance for billboards to urban center mixed use three stories, five stories and eight stories. So as I said before, it's in the Elyria Swansea, a neighborhood three blocks east of Brighton Boulevard and the National Western Transit Station that will be built two blocks north of Interstate 70. And two blocks west of York Street. Current zoning is that industrial zone zoning. Current use is an industrial use. It is a 1 to 2 storey industrial warehouse that is within a half mile of the National Western Stock Show and Transit Station. So existing context, the zoning is surrounded on the north by that industrial zone district, a city park to the west, and a recreational recreation center, and then two unit zoning to the south predominantly. So again, existing industrial land use mostly to the north and residential to the south across 48th Avenue. This gives you an idea of what the property looks like. It is a huge warehouse at this point. Bottom picture is the residential to the south. Picture on the right is the Park City Park. And then the industrial land uses. So this was that planning board on March 16th and was recommended unanimously to support the rezoning. It was a neighborhood plan and planning committee on April 6th and passed out of committee then. So we are here for the public hearing that has been properly noticed. These are all of the RINO's that were notified of this hearing. We have no R.A. letters, but one letter of opposition that should be in your packet. The last page of your packet. So the plans that apply our plan 2000 Blueprint Denver and the Illyria Sponsor Your Neighborhoods Plan that was adopted in 2015. Blueprint Denver Land use concept is transit oriented development because of the proximity to the station. It is within that half mile, if I hadn't said that before. And our transit oriented development in Blueprint Denver should be a balanced mix of uses and mid to high density development. And of course, it's an area of change where.
Speaker 0: Citywide.
Speaker 6: We want to direct growth. So the Elyria Swansea Neighborhoods Plan did amend areas of change, but not for this property. So it is remains in an area of change. It is remains in the transit oriented development land use type in the Elyria Swansea, a plan. And it does give us more direction on the heights of the development on the property. You'll notice it is three, five and eight stories, the same as being proposed. So this diagram gives you a little bit of information on how we. Drew the lines of where the three, five and eight story should occur. Basically, we tried to treat the property as if it were next door to a protected zone district, because that's the gist of what the Elyria Swansea plan wanted us to do. Step down to the existing residential on the south side of 48th Avenue. So we started at the front property line as if it were directly adjacent to a protected zone district. We went back the 25 feet. That would be a step back in if it were a protected district and then up the three stories. Then we went for a 175 feet back from the line. That is the actual boundary between the protected zone district and the property. And that's another standard in the zoning code that within 175 feet of a protected zone district, you can't be higher than a certain height. So we use that horizontal distance as the five story height, and then the remainder of the property is the eight storey height. So with that, staff finds that this application is consistent with the applicable neighborhood plans and that we will further the uniformity of district regulations by sticking with our regular zoned districts. And we are, by implementing our plans, furthering the public's health, safety and welfare, justifying circumstances changed conditions. The property will be redeveloping with a new owner. It is located in an area of change within half mile of a trans, a new transit station and the redeveloping National Western Center. The local plan does call for it to rezone or redevelop from industrial to transit oriented development, industrial mixed use and then still accommodate the industrial in the neighborhood. So we believe this is a correct justifying circumstance. And with that, staff recommends approval.
Speaker 1: Thank you. We have seven speakers signed up. I'm going to call up the first five. You can make your way up to the front pew and you can begin your remarks. Toni Pickett. Nolan McGill. Kirby Battelle. Candy. The Baker and. And Elizabeth. So you five can make your way up to the front, Mr. Pickett. You can begin your remarks.
Speaker 14: Hello. I'm Tony Pickard, vice president of master site development for the Urban Land Conservancy. And I'm actually here representing, you will see as the applicant and just here to answer any questions that might come up during the discussion. Thank you. Thank you.
Speaker 1: No, let me go.
Speaker 11: Hi. My name's Nolan Miguel. I'm the director of Global Elyria. Swansea. Right to live. Well, I'm here today in overall support of this project, the global response. The neighborhood leaders have called for additional rooftops in the neighborhoods. For as long as I can remember, the CMC's 358 is in line with our neighborhood plans, although a slight detail is that there is a little asterisks next to that and that. Asterix When we were in the steering committee for the Illyria Swansea, a plan was saying that community needed to be involved in that process of the rezone. So I think that's the sort of sticking point is that we, the community would like to be involved and have some set of commitments to to continue to be involved during the whole process of this property. This it's important to point out that globally responsive are our affordable neighborhoods, not affordable housing neighborhoods. These neighborhoods have been traditionally affordable. So affordable housing doesn't necessarily meet the same qualifications as what we need for our neighbors that are being displaced. They may not qualify for under affordable housing terms. So that's something to really keep in mind. Also, the I know some other people are going to speak about this as well, but this is going from 150 housing units that are currently in Illyria to potentially 550 units, which is quadrupling, almost quadrupling the amount of housing in this one little neighborhood of Illyria. So this is a huge, huge impact to this neighborhood. There's also a bunch of infrastructure issues. You know, you guys have heard about the sewer pipeline. Also, there's no sidewalks on 48th or 49th. There's no pedestrian bridge on 47th in York, which is how these children would get to elementary school if they lived here. There's no the street the 49th street doesn't go all the way through, which is supposed to be in the two C funds funded. So we're looking for a set of commitments. We've talked to Tony about it, hoping to meet more about that. But that involves community residents being involved in the actual decision making process, including choosing who this developer is. We would like a percentage of the units to be under community control. We'd like every resident of 150 homes in Elyria to be informed about every stage of decision making during this process. It's only 150 homes. It's not that hard to talk to everyone, and there should be entry points into the process. We overall just displacement is very real right now and globally response. Yeah, it's happening every day and when you hear about a rezoning, sometimes it can escalate those feelings when we don't have guarantees from the city that that gentrification is going to be addressed. We heard that there's a study, you know, don't know when that's coming, if there's recommendations. I know you guys are asking for that also, but it's really important that we know what where the city stands on gentrification, how this is going. We need community controlled land that maintains.
Speaker 1: McGill.
Speaker 11: Affordability.
Speaker 1: Ethereum into the thank you. Next we have Kirby Beutel.
Speaker 2: Thank you. I'm Kirby.
Speaker 13: Boutwell. I live in Frederick, Colorado, and I work for Eaton Metal Products.
Speaker 2: And Eaton is located at 4800.
Speaker 13: York Street, which is directly.
Speaker 2: East of the 4800 race.
Speaker 13: And the company that I work for is zoned industrial. I be, I guess, is.
Speaker 2: The the verbiage you guys use.
Speaker 13: We've operated out of this property for over 90 years and have not considered relocating or anything. But our products that we build are large industrial.
Speaker 2: Products, large tanks, pressure vessels. So we've got a lot of heavy plate steel moving around.
Speaker 13: We have tractor trailer rigs with large trailers, construction companies. We also run services. So our initial concern when we heard about this is, of course.
Speaker 2: The population.
Speaker 13: And the addition for the residents.
Speaker 2: In traffic and I guess short and sweet of it. The compatibility and the proximity of this project just does not coincide with what we do as a company. So I'd like you guys to.
Speaker 13: Consider opposing the proposal.
Speaker 2: That's all.
Speaker 1: Thank you. Thank you. Can you see the bucket?
Speaker 7: Hello. My name is Candy Suthep aka I am a resident of Swansea and I'm representing my neighbors who are part of the cross-community coalition, an I.R.A. in the Swansea Elyria area. I support 216. I echo a lot of the sentiments expressed by NOLA. I think that for our community, displacement right now is a real concern. It's happening because of a lot of the investment and projects that are going on in our neighborhood. And to not take a first step in this process that is simply moving towards fulfillment of our neighborhood plan would be a mistake. I think that while this development would add 400 units to the neighborhood, a neighborhood of currently 150 units, well, it's good, but we need to focus on maintaining the culture of that community. And we're working with ULC and those set of commitments mentioned earlier to ensure that we maintain a culture and maintain representation in that development of diverse neighbors. We have high need elderly folks in our neighborhood who don't have a senior living option. This could definitely be an option for them. We have people who, like Noela said our neighborhood has been affordable, so we have people who want to buy and people who want to rent. And we need to maintain a continuum of options that are affordable for neighbors in the community. But above all, we need to make sure that the neighbors currently in the community are the priority for this development. Right now, with all of the developments, they should be on list. We should be tracking them. We should be making sure that they get a first crack at the options that are becoming available. This project, in short, is in alignment with the neighborhood plan that was approved in 2015. We'd like the set of commitments that neighborhood neighbors are the first priority. Community wants to be involved in all decision making, and we want community control over this land trust. So that's all I have to say. And I hope you guys will support this time.
Speaker 1: Thank you. Next, we have an Elizabeth. And as Anne is coming forward, I'll call the last two speakers, Drew Dudgeon and Flossie O'Leary. You can come up to the front for you. Go ahead.
Speaker 0: Hello. Thank you for the opportunity to speak on this project. My name is Anne Elizabeth. I'm in Globeville and I'm speaking against the passage of this with the hope that it would be passed in 30 or 60 to 90 days. Instead, as a strong proponent of affordable housing with a very rigorous revisit to the community engagement that has happened. I feel like there's some fiduciary due diligence that needs to happen. When the funding was originally given to this, there was a mention that in the original request that it had a relationship to mitigating the loss of roofs . And then I think it was at the neighborhood planning meeting, it was mentioned, I think by Urban Land Institute excuse me, Urban Land Conservancy, that that was no longer a part of it. And I want us to understand from the beginning what is the fiduciary structure of this? And I want us to make sure that the dots or the dots are connected around what the benefits to the community are relative to the overall integration of the neighborhood plans, the National Western Center push, the transit oriented development. I think that the community engagement process needs to be directly with a town meeting to be called in the next 60 days by the neighborhood and planning meeting in Illyria with a special invitation for the new North Denver Cornerstone Collaborative Administration to come in. And for the folks that are working on affordable housing, I'll just call it a strategic plan to look at this from the larger picture of neighborhood impact. I do not feel as much as I agree with what Karly CdeBaca just said about the people that should have priorities here, that we can adapt an illusion that the affordable housing, because of its timeline, is really going to be helpful to the folks that are being displaced by the National Western Center and Court and by economic forces. We need to act much more quickly on that, and I think that we can incorporate that into a town meeting at Swansea Rec Center where we bring in our council people, we bring in our mayor's office, we bring in folks from the neighborhoods. All you have to do is go door to door. It's very frustrating to me that there are organizations, there are organizations, nonprofits that have received in excess of $1,000,000 in Globeville or Swansea. The neighborhood planning, community planning and Development has been out there doing neighborhood plans since the end of 2012. We've been working in the National Western Center for a plan for several years, and we still don't get more than 30 or 40 neighbors. And I think the city needs to step up and do leadership. The I went to the design meetings by there where there were some nice creative conversations, but pictures of a few. People can be deceptive. How are we really creating a neighborhood amenity there? What does this do to the current homeowners? How does it feel to live next to it? And is it the best use of the plan? This came very late in the Elyria neighborhood planning process to the table. So I would just ask, with that rigorous relook, that we support affordable housing, but let's also evaluate it relative to the management of affordable housing and how that has to be done at a much higher standard than some of them are happening in Denver for the future. So that's more of a yes and no, but let's do it the right way.
Speaker 1: Thank you, Ms.. Elizabeth. True dudgeon.
Speaker 12: Hi. Good evening. My name is Drew Dutcher. I live at 4653 High Street. I've owned a home in Elyria. I live about two blocks from this project. I've lived in an area since 2007, and I've been very active in community engagement and planning and representation at all levels since about 20, 2010. I'm the president of the Clarion Swanson Neighborhood Association, which formed in January of this year. And I was on the steering committee for the Elyria and Swansea Neighborhood Plan that was passed by City Council in January of 2015. That was just one of the things I wanted to quote from the neighborhood plan. I think it's page 88 is that this this area of the of Elyria is referred to as a traditional residential area where it says, quote, Residents value the intimate quality of the quiet local streets with modest single family homes, do duplexes and smaller apartment buildings. I support this project because I think in principle for us, for that transit station to be effective and viable, we need density around that station, the station where, you know, to require investment. I think that's a that's something that is very good and I support in principle that but I, I wanted to talk about the density of this project. 400 units on six acres is is roughly 67 units per acre. Just by way of comparison, the density of Manhattan, which is the most concentrated urban area in the United States, is 105 units per acre. But that was built up over 250 years. They have parks, they have subways, they have an infrastructure. It's a modern urban center. And we're I guess some of my concern is that we're going to do this well, not instantly, but over two or three years. I think we have to do it intelligently and sensitively and with community involvement. And just so regarding the process, I was at two of the three meetings. I don't remember density or building heights, eight stories being discussed. We discussed eight storeys during the neighborhood plan, but I don't remember that really being discussed at the three community meetings . But I do want to just say that that the the affordable component of this project is absolutely essential. It's my understanding it's 50% affordable that that's that's that's essential to be part of it. And also to underscore NOLA and Candy's point, community involvement going forward is absolutely necessary, including in the choice of the developer. And this is is essential to guarantee the city's use of it's the city that the city funds are being used for this. So we have to you have an obligation to include the neighborhood in those discussions.
Speaker 1: Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Dutcher. Flossie O'Leary.
Speaker 4: Good evening. I'm Flossie O'Leary. I'm a resident of Sunnyside, but I'm here tonight representing a clinic at their back where a federally qualified health center that serves patients throughout the metro Denver area but happened to be located in Globeville and provide behavioral health or mental health services and health education. Illyria, about two blocks from this facility. I wanted to start with a little bit of a context that I think is helpful. First of all, I attended like and Elizabeth did some of those community meetings last summer where a smaller number of Elyria residents engaged in design and creativity, including children, which was fabulous. I think that's important. And I want to echo what my colleagues have said, what we need more of that. In fact, a couple of the nonprofits and agencies, including and DCC, have been talking about kind of building on the health impact assessment that was really spearheaded by former Councilwoman Monteiro. And we're going after funding to do that, to further engage the community members in what their perception of how they could be there and their families be healthy and thrive in the community. But those neighbors that participated last summer were really intuitively right on because what they were sharing in terms of services and opportunities they wanted are exactly what you see in health research and really what all of us in Denver have been able to see by the great success of the Mariposa Center. And that's when you mix jobs and transportation and training and health services and healthy food and opportunity, integrate with that park and connectivity to transportation. Then families and individuals see their health and well-being improve. And we'd like to see more of that. And also the challenge of the accelerated level of displacement is something that can't be discounted, but others have spoken to that. So I would say the rationale for why I'm here supporting to 16 is that although it's not an immediate way of addressing the displacement, it is part of that long term solution. And those affordable units in an affordable community will help families that want to stay in that community, be able to stay and possibly even own. I think what you heard from the planning of the tiered approach is going to create almost like a buffer to some of the industry in the north and to the east. That really allows more integration. It gets closer to the residents and lower on the south side and creates almost like a safer, quieter campus community that then integrates with the residences and the park. And then lastly is the more that we can increase those multiple services and opportunities, the more likely we are to help improve the health and wellness of the community. So in closing, I just want to say thank you for the support that you have already provided in helping the ULC secure this location and to ask for your continued support in terms of the infrastructure, community engagement and just the approval of 216. Thank you.
Speaker 1: Thank you. That concludes our speakers. Now time for questions from members of council. Councilman Brooks.
Speaker 9: Thank you, Mr. President. Teresa. And. Teresa, I'm going to ask you to I think I think it's page nine.
Speaker 6: Of.
Speaker 9: Of your in your slide deck.
Speaker 6: Okay. Me get there.
Speaker 9: I'm just going to ask you to, you know, and the neighborhood plan, it calls for different heights. And we had this discussion within our our planning committee. And let me if you. Yeah. Go to the neighborhood plan where it shows the the different heights. I think you got to go down a couple more. And so, yeah, there it is. Perfect. So again, we know that plans help guide us, you know, use for guidance towards zoning. And I know my colleague would probably ask the question about this, but I wanted to kind of head this often. C and allow you to articulate based on this guidance in the plan how you came, how CPD came to work with. You see the applicant on the exact break up from the three to 5 to 8 step down because, you know, obviously in the plan, it looks like the lines are a little different. But I wanted you to write. Go ahead and talk about that.
Speaker 6: Well, so what we did was pay attention to the language of the plan that tells us to step down to the neighborhood and this guidance that tells us we are stepping down from eight stories to three stories. So that other illustration that I was talking about, we started as if we were directly adjacent to a protected district because that's what we were trying to do with the language of the plan was step down to the residential and protect the residential from the density of that eight stories. So we started with that and stepped up from there.
Speaker 9: Yeah. And in the plan it uses that the lines are a little greater. It would, it would almost seem like the plan is calling for the middle of the property to be stepped down and. Well.
Speaker 6: We didn't it's not a scale drawings. So if there were some measurements in the drawing that tell us the first 50 feet or the first 150 feet have to be three stories or five stories or eight stories. We would have worked with the Urban Land Conservancy to better fit the legal descriptions to that. But given that it's an illustration and not a scale drawing, we just trying to use our best judgment and the standards that are already in the Denver zoning code.
Speaker 9: Thank you. I just wanted you to say it for the record. I appreciate it. Tony Pickett, can you. Tony, please describe the process that you went through with the neighborhood to incorporate some of the neighborhoods ideas into the vision of what this could be.
Speaker 14: Sure, we actually convened a series of meetings last year, both large scale and some smaller, more intense workshops. We actually had workshops on two different days, different times, morning and evening, as was mentioned earlier. One of those work groups was Kids within the Neighborhood. We actually had those at facilities within the neighborhood, the Valdés Perry Library, as well as the Colorado Miners Recreation Center there in the neighborhood. We actually did things like attended the Swansea Elementary Festival and solicited input from the attendees at that festival as well, and came up with a listing of things that were repeated as themes throughout the input that we received. Certainly affordable housing was one of those things. Things like commercial kitchens and health clinics and very typical things that you might hear in any neighborhood were things that people desired in terms of the input that we received. We also participated in some of the Elyria, Swansea and Neighborhood Plan development meetings themselves, and actually this illustration was the subject of an evening, a meeting conversation about the distribution of heights across the site as well as the station area itself, the larger station area. So you see that same variation in heights extending over toward the station as a result of that meeting. Okay.
Speaker 9: You know, you've heard the concern of folks from the neighborhood. And I think, you know, and I've witnessed kind of the Holly area redevelopment that you guys have done, which was a very tense environment, but bringing the community together. But what really brought that together is that committee, that harp committee that helped guide their process. Are you willing to work in this neighborhood, develop a steering committee to work with the developer on some of the needs that they're looking at?
Speaker 14: Yes, we are. In fact, I think most of the speakers that you heard tonight, we had a recent meeting and we agreed to have them designate representatives for that very committee that you're describing in order to work with us throughout the selection and development process.
Speaker 9: Great. And then, you know, I follow back up because this had come up but already questions. But I'll follow back up. I want to I want to say because I think Nola mentioned it, the gentrification conversation already will be having in the Business Development Committee Committee 10:30 a.m. on Tuesday. Next Tuesday. Just to let you all know.
Speaker 1: Thanks. Thank you. Councilman Brooks, Councilwoman Kenny.
Speaker 11: Thank you, Mr. President. I, too, was going to ask Tony. You were very brief, you know, just offering questions, but you didn't really tell much of the story of the project. So now I'm kind of we certainly want to follow up on the questions we heard from the community. So can you say a little more about the affordable housing? Someone mentioned a percentage. I didn't know if that was accurate. And if you could just update us a little bit on the affordability mix.
Speaker 14: Sure. And just a little bit of the back story you will see was approached by the city's Office of Economic Development, understanding that there was a willing seller of this industrial property, which is within two blocks of the future station at the stock show. And so it would be an opportunity for equitable transit oriented development. So once the negotiations about the purchase price were completed, it ended up that the city provided you will see a $1.5 million loan that we would at favorable terms that we would have to pay back over time. But again, in combination with other financing that we were able to secure, we paid that $5.5 million purchase price for the six acre property as part of the city's loan requirements. We're required to provide 51%. You heard 50. It's 51% of the units, the total units developed on the site as affordable housing at folks at less than 80% of area median income. And also, we were to provide 26 full time jobs as part of the buildout of the development, which will happen in multiple phases over multiple years. I do want to be very clear. The 400 unit number that has been stated over and over again, it's really up to 400 units. That's our own internal preliminary concepts have determined that we could probably have up to 400 units. But I can. To tell you that, as was mentioned earlier, the existing infrastructure throughout the neighborhood, beyond the boundaries of the site, the main sanitary sewer line that would connect over to York is inadequate to provide 400 new units on the site. So we're beginning to have conversations with in DCC, OED and other city departments about the timing and providing some of those infrastructure improvements that we'll need in order to fully realize the potential of the site.
Speaker 11: Thank you, Tony. And if I may ask a question of Theresa drew, I appreciate he flagged this for me about six, eight months ago. We him and I talked on the phone about the question of infrastructure. You know, was there going to be a general development plan for this site? And how is it that infrastructure happens after the zoning? So can you please share with us what kind of infrastructure planning? So we already know about the sanitary sewer, but the residents have good questions about the rest of the infrastructure to support the site, what kind of process will use, and whether that process involves public notice or meetings or as requirements or encouraged so that we kind of can all live here. Understanding what city processes continue, it's great to know there's a committee that's forming, but we want to understand the city process that will follow this.
Speaker 6: Okay, but I am not the infrastructure person, so I have limited knowledge of that. I do know there have been some discussions on roads. Typically when we're talking about roads, we're also talking about what's underneath the roads, which are the drainage systems and all of the other systems. And that's really the extent of my knowledge on this. I know that we have discussed. The roads. The infrastructure that.
Speaker 11: Sorry, I did not prepare you, that I was going to ask that question. So I'm sorry about that. Tony, do you have can you answer with a better. Yeah, sorry about that, Teresa. I didn't warn you. I was coming.
Speaker 14: I believe it's just a matter of coordinating the timing of the improvements. In fact, again, the Elyria Swansea plan and the National Western Plan call for things like sidewalks and extending 49th Street through what is currently today the DPS bus, bar and site to actually reach the station from our site. So there are a number of pedestrian and roadway improvements called for in the plan as well. What I've been hearing in the meetings that I've participated in is it's just just a matter of the timing of implementing those in coordination with everything else that has to happen around the stock show itself as far as its infrastructure improvement
Speaker 11: . Can I just clarify, though, Tony, some of these pieces of infrastructure are on your site, so they would go within the purview of your development. It wouldn't be so much a question of when the city is putting sidewalks across the street. It's it's about what kind of sidewalks you're putting in and what kind of lighting accompanies those sidewalks, whether, you know, there's interior open space or, you know, those kinds of questions are the ones that I'm referring to, things that are and this was Drew's call to me is typically these are things done in a general development plan . We won't I it's my understanding this site does not meet the criteria.
Speaker 6: And again we may need to go those in that case we would be looking at those kinds of things. When we are doing a site development plan, we typically ask developers to put in the sidewalks, to put in as much open space as we can get them to put in and those sorts of things all of course , according to what the zoning code says we can require.
Speaker 11: Great. I just I guess I would ask Tony whether or not you are committed to making sure that whatever committee you establish to talk about the some of the issues the residents raised in, Councilman Brooks asked about, you know, the culture of the community and the uses and those questions, whether that community can also be closely related involved in the conversation about infrastructure. Sure. You see that that committee has purview over both those areas.
Speaker 14: We'd actually welcome that level of input.
Speaker 11: Okay. Thank you. And we may just want to follow up a little more with public works. They they gave me a slightly different answer than you guys have about there's something between site planning and general development plans that that and actually it wasn't public works, it was CPD might have been someone else in CPD, but there is another infrastructure planning process that we've used. So I want to clarify if that's happening or not. We can do that after the meeting. But thank you.
Speaker 1: Thank you. Councilwoman each. Councilwoman Black.
Speaker 10: Thank you, Mr. President. Tony, I have another question for you. So, first of all, I want to thank you, L.Z., for all of the great things you do, just for our purposes and for anyone who may be watching, can you just sort of lay out a general timeline, approximately, of when we might see something there and just summarize the steps it's going to take to get there just so people are realistic?
Speaker 14: Well, let me say, the best thing I can do to illustrate that is to compare it to our development at the 40th in Colorado station on the 9.4 acre site that we purchased there in 2013, we actually had a grand opening for the first 156 units on that site, the first phase the day before the A-line opened in April. So it took nearly three years just to develop one phase. What we are anticipating here for race, if we can quickly get to some understanding about infrastructure, we would likely solicit for a vertical development partner. Around September, October of this year, have a very definite plan for phase one in place and be able to submit for low income housing tax credits for a first affordable residential phase next year. If we're lucky enough to be awarded tax credits, which is a rare occurrence, we would be in a position to be able to start that vertical development by the end of next year. But again, that depends on a lot of variables coming to fruition in a very short period of time, including having the community committee formed and actually participating with us throughout the process.
Speaker 10: And you said if all things align, you will start in 2017.
Speaker 14: Yes.
Speaker 10: Okay. Thank you. And then I don't know if this is just a rhetorical question, but in light of what the man from meat and metal brought up, we have had some discussions about issues with zoning in this part of town and industrial zoning next to residential. And are we and I don't know for you for you are anticipating any problems around those residential and industrial zone districts abutting one another.
Speaker 6: But this might be the best picture you see that outlined in red is the transit oriented development of the site we're talking about. But the blue right next to it is industrial mixed use, which is an attempt in the plan to step back to the industrial, which is the lighter blue in this picture, and still maintain some of the industrial uses but in between and have a transition area of industrial mixed use before we step up to the transit oriented development. So that's the direction that the plan gives us.
Speaker 10: But this blue clad court, is that where Eaton medalists.
Speaker 6: My understanding of Eaton medal? Well, it is directly to the east of the property. So my understanding is that the owner of that property was on the steering committee, supported this vision for the plan, and that we this is all secondhand that was told to me. So my understanding is that for their manufacturing portion of their business, we left them in the industrial portion and then for their storage yard and office, it would be the mixed use area, but actually they still have their industrial zoning and unless they come in and rezone, they'll stay in that industrial zoning.
Speaker 10: Thank you.
Speaker 1: Thank you, Councilwoman Black. Councilwoman Ortega.
Speaker 6: The first one is for Teresa. So Illyria is one of our historical neighborhoods and I want to know what the requirements are for scale and impact. Directly across the street from residential as it pertains to the historical nature. Well it's that looked at is part of the rezoning for this project so it's not subject to review by the landmark commission. So I. So that really wasn't factoring in, in looking at the scale project. The plan really talks about it being a traditional residential area, and we should respect that and step down to that. Okay, Tony, if you could come up for a minute, please. Thank you, Teresa. So you talked about timing and looking at low income tax credits from a. I'm assuming, given the scale of this, that you're looking at some commercial as part of the project?
Speaker 14: Possibly, yes.
Speaker 6: Okay. Have you broached the subject with thorough to look at any tax increment financing for the project?
Speaker 14: We haven't had a direct conversation about it, but it certainly has crossed our minds that this might be an avenue to pursue, to accomplish some of the infrastructure improvements that are necessary.
Speaker 6: And I know in other there are rare instances that there are examples where a housing development has access to financing, particularly where it's not contributing to the. Volume of tax revenue that the site could generate. So I think that's certainly in line with the discussion that can take place with the neighborhood. Yeah, I appreciate the discussion and the questions that have been asked about process and engagement with the community. As you could see from the presence here tonight, that is a very clear expectation. So I'd like to go on to Drew and ask you if you would come up for just a minute. To you. You talked about the scale of this project, Drew, in terms of, you know, it's a six acre site. We're talking about 67 units per acre. Where? Give us an idea of where else we have that scale in Denver where we're developing on site.
Speaker 2: Wow.
Speaker 6: And I know you work in this arena to some degree, but are you familiar with any locations?
Speaker 12: I should have something better at my fingertips, but I think I, I off the top of my head, I can't think of 67 units per acre. I was recently the project manager of Phase four of the Mariposa Development for Denver Housing Authority.
Speaker 6: Which was near 10th and Osage.
Speaker 12: Yeah, I worked at 10th and Osage, which was about two and a half acres. And that density I think, was about 25 to 30 units per acre. And there was considerable there was surface parking, there was an interior courtyard, there were this quite a bit of site stormwater management. So there's all these. So it was a lot and it went from four stories to three stories to two stories. But that is at a TOD that was two blocks from the 10th on Osage State Station Derby. I'm honestly I can't.
Speaker 6: Think of 60 question though, about that development sort of as a comparison. I'm familiar with that area. And there's there's one high rise building in that area. I don't remember what the zoning is in that area, but there's a senior high rise building. Right. And then the rest of that scale is basically four stories I think is right.
Speaker 12: There's a mid-rise for senior housing. Right.
Speaker 6: Okay. I know the scale is a little bit of a concern. I mean, people in the community I'm just making a quick comment here. People in the community know that they need density in the neighborhood. But I think there's a concern being expressed that going to the maximum of what is allowed on the site is is a little bit much and it's concerning. And so the community process that you're going to be engaged in, I think, is extremely critical to really laying this out in the right way, that it truly is an asset and benefits the neighbors. So thank you.
Speaker 12: Debbie. Thank you. I think that that's that captures very well the concern.
Speaker 6: I have no further questions.
Speaker 1: Thank you, Councilman Ortega. Councilman Espinosa.
Speaker 12: Just maybe this is something familiar as a reference. So the former baby knows Chili Peppers restaurants up on I-25 there and 23rd Avenue have five buildings there. That development is 45 units per acre, just about six acres. It's a very weird configuration. It's not a true rectangle in any way, shape or form. The. It's also over parked at 101.69 parking spaces per. So there's a little bit more there. Anyway, I do have questions. Teresa, could you go to slide 15? I will have questions, but actually I want to talk to Tony first. On Slide 15, you probably need a title. It's review criteria adopted. Consistency with adopted plans. Yep. So, Tony, I don't know if you can see that, but basically south of 48th to 46th between Brighton and York, there is a pretty established neighborhood there. What is the am I of that neighborhood?
Speaker 14: So I'm not aware of that number.
Speaker 12: Anyone have that information in the audience? Yeah. Like, what would that census census track MIB? Is it 80? Yeah, I figured I wish somebody had that because I would actually probably posit that 80% am-I is actually gentrification. This area does not. It has large households that would would reach down to some very low and high levels. 80% am-I are young professionals starting out.
Speaker 14: And you know that 80% is not our number. That's the number.
Speaker 12: That's old agreement.
Speaker 14: Up to 80%. It doesn't mean it will all be a fact. If we use low income housing tax credits, it'll be 60 and below.
Speaker 12: So what sort of unit breakdown are you thinking then? Right now.
Speaker 14: If you got not that far along in the process, we have yet to even solicit for a vertical development partner. And one other thing I'd like to kind of maybe say at this moment is if we're talking about 400 units in terms of density, again, the 51% affordable overall out of the unit total. If you keep reducing the overall unit total, you're in essence reducing the number of affordable units.
Speaker 12: So if we're trying to capture if we're if we're if there's a genuine concern about gentrification, how important is it to look at the image of the surrounding community and and make sure that the mix of unit and construction and amenity sort of balances out the needs of that community with your development.
Speaker 14: It's quite important. And I would say to you, the Urban Land Conservancy, we're actually promoting the idea of a more traditional community land trust to actually go in to control some of the single family homes in that neighborhood, to keep them affordable, to keep people in place so they do not have to move to a new rental community that we can't build in time to prevent the displacement, as you heard earlier in the comments.
Speaker 12: So how come some of those agreements and that those parameters aren't with us today? The reason being is that you said that you convened a series of meetings. Where's that output? How come that's not part of this? Why wasn't that shown to council? There is a significant public investment in this land and in your programs that you will see. It should be shared along with the specifics about what is desired and how it's incorporated.
Speaker 14: I'm not sure what was in the package that you may have seen, but we actually included all of those things in our application for the rezoning. So there was evidence required of us of those meetings and what the outcomes were.
Speaker 12: And what were those titled?
Speaker 14: I wouldn't be able to tell you that.
Speaker 12: So are there any firm commitments because you've spoken to them? Are there any why why were members of the community asking for your commitment to this community involvement? Were there any firm written agreements made so that it was it's that the community has confidence and assurance that they will be.
Speaker 14: I'll say this councilmember maybe you might want to ask about this. We actually proposed at one point a memorandum of understanding or something similar to actually document everyone's expectations. And I have not been able to accomplish that today.
Speaker 12: And what do you think's the sticking point there?
Speaker 14: I have no idea.
Speaker 12: No. And will the community have a role in the selection of the developer? Yes. Okay. And then lastly. Maybe it's people doing what they're not supposed to do. I don't know. But I have seen, in fact, a development proposal for this property concept. It was not obviously it predates this rezoning by some substantial amount. What is that?
Speaker 14: We actually generated multiple concepts as part of the process that I mentioned earlier last year. So you may have seen one of those. But I would say we were very clear that all of them were potential options and subject to us actually selecting a final developer and vetting those in terms of market feasibility.
Speaker 12: The reason why I'm concerned is that those proposals, the concepts that were presented all pretty much pretty close to what I think is is actually a sensible way of approaching this land. My concern is as I come from northwest Denver and when you show me a box like that that Teresa is that defined the heights, we tend to get buildings like that and this is obviously a different area. And those schemes spoke to the sort of difference. But 400 units really speak to more of that density that was shown. So how do I comport? What is what is that you guys have yourself admitted that you at least tested versus what I have seen conceptually versus the the fabric.
Speaker 14: The the diagram that you saw was generated by the planning department just to show exactly as you characterized it, the bulk that this zoning would accomplish on the site. But all of our building envelopes, which are smaller than that, both diagram fit within there. And it gives us enough flexibility so that if we have to change some of those as we go through this partner selection, we're able to do that.
Speaker 12: So what sort of commitment are you guys willing to make on those bulks that have been laid out before because they are substantially different?
Speaker 14: I would say to you that there has never been any intent to build out that diagram from our part. Our part.
Speaker 12: Great. But please don't let me see here about permits coming for that, because there's something intrinsically different between that in this. So then now back to to Teresa. I wasn't going to talk about this, but my my colleague here brought it up. And the reason why I was going to talk about it is I do understand that we have the latitude as members of council to sort of, you know, pass zoning Arizonians that we see meet the meet our criteria. And part of that, when we when we're granting essentially latitude relative to small area plans for affordable housing, that seems like a worthwhile endeavor to me, a good reason to grant additional development potential. That said, there there is you said you used your best judgment when you've read the text of the code. So going back to the slide that has well, let's stick on this slide. Right. So you already moved there. I want to go back to the slide. We were just at that. We're probably going to go back in number 15.
Speaker 6: Which you're talking about. Okay.
Speaker 12: Because this if you look at that, those lines, what you have is you have an area of five story development that is clearly greater than 50% of the block. And we now go back to the slide. You were at 18. When you look at that eight story section, it is far less than 50% of the block. And if we're going to say that, we're going to rely on that on the text, why not just call that all residential between 3 to 8 stories and give it one color, rather than define these steps with the public and then get voted on and passed by council? If the language is of that 3 to 5 area, that it should step down closer to a particular street. Because that would then solve my dilemma here, which is that it clearly shows where those steps should occur and what you're clearly using your best judgment is sort of ignoring what was already agreed to by community and past council.
Speaker 6: I think that it's a long standing tradition to look at illustrations in plans as simply that. An illustration, not a. Definition of proportion unless there's a proportion defined in the drawing.
Speaker 12: So help me out here. This is a illustration on Slide 18, but if I roll back to say Slide 15, that seems to indicate why not just show those lines sort of anywhere? Again, I mean, we try when we're illustrating things to convey what we're showing.
Speaker 6: But this.
Speaker 12: I mean, it's it can't be a cartoon in one sense. And then it lost representation another.
Speaker 6: You're showing the whole neighborhood and we're talking about one property in that neighborhood. So when we're illustrating the plan, that little property is, you know, like a fingernail size on the map that we're creating. And so it's very hard to get an accurate picture of what we're talking about.
Speaker 12: I just and.
Speaker 6: That's a blow up of a plan on whatever page in the planning document, I took that little piece of property and blew it up so you could see it better. But that's not how it presents itself in the plan that you adopted. I mean, it does, but it's all cropped to show just that piece of property. So it's it's very you know, we're talking about sort of graphic scales.
Speaker 12: Okay. Then go to page 14.
Speaker 6: Page four, slide 14.
Speaker 12: By 14.
Speaker 6: Okay.
Speaker 12: At the corner of Claude and 47th. Okay. It appears to me that there are two individual parcels in these C of single family duplex. Mm hmm. That are.
Speaker 6: That are weapons of change.
Speaker 12: Yeah, I mean, that's pretty specific mixed use.
Speaker 6: Yeah. According to this map.
Speaker 12: And represented at this same. Nearly the same scale.
Speaker 6: Mm hmm.
Speaker 12: I mean, it seems like we pass this language to suit our whatever.
Speaker 6: Actually, that map that we were talking about was developed after the plan was adopted. Again, using our judgment on what the language said and what we thought that illustration was depicting, that this would be a step down from eight to 5 to 3, the primary motivation being to step down to the existing residential and protect that. That's why we use that protected zone zone district standard to to work with urban land and come up with the boundary of those areas.
Speaker 12: Yeah. So just for future reference, see that is in fact putting there drainage for I-70 if it goes through, which is another sort of not merely great idea on clod. On on clod, which is one block went one block through there. So they'll be digging up and they're going all the way to the full depth of the lowest point of that thing right there. So, you know, let's don't put the infrastructure on top unless we know that they're going to replace that. But we can coordinate with them if that happens. Thank you.
Speaker 6: Yes.
Speaker 1: All right. Any other questions? 216. Seen on public hearings, not closed time for comments. Councilman Brooks.
Speaker 9: Yeah, thank you, Mr. President. First, I just want to thank Councilman Monteiro, who, you know, early on had this vision to work on this with Paul, Washington, with Aaron, Paul with Tony Pickett. And I remember when the idea was first floated, I didn't think that we could get it done that soon. And we did. And so kudos on the purchase of this property and moving forward on the merits of the zoning. I am supportive of this. This, you know, we just passed our guess neighborhoods plans and it's so exciting to see implementation happen just over a year. And so this this zoning meets the plan and in the context and it is I think it's it fits right in plans to counter my colleague over here plans are meant to guide they are not meant to be over prescriptive. And so we've had this conversation before in Cherry Creek. What they're doing is having gradient lines to provide that flexibility. And if that helps, maybe we should look at that. But to me, plan's guide we cannot over be over prescriptive in it to the actual implementation and development of of all of this. I want to just say a couple of things. One. Councilman Ortega, you're exactly right. Tax increment financing can finance affordable housing. It's being done right now at 2300. Whelton is being done right now. 2460. Welton is being done right now. 2560 Welton and 23 Welton is all housing 30 to 60% AMI affordable housing. So that's a great idea for this would love to work with the community, work with the team to talk about Tracy Huggins, seeing if this is an area of opportunity to the community. Hear you loud and clear on the infrastructure, the sidewalks, the 40, 47th and York overpass. These are things that in DCC public works. OED we all need to come together and find this. It's going to be interesting on the timing. Is it does the money come first? Then we find the developers and developers come at the same time. Let's let's all work together on that. What you did at Harp was probably once one of the most amazing transformative projects with a really hard neighborhood that's been ripped by gang violence. And to see what's been done, I'm a big believer. How can that happen here? How can we bring this community is stirring community to empower them to see the vision that they desire to see. So I hope that this can happen. Our office wants to be a part of it and our office wants to help push in DCC OED on all of the infrastructure needs to make this a reality. This is a neighborhood that is, you know, going through a lot of change and we need to do whatever we can to make sure that we see sustainability within this neighborhood. And so I'm supportive of that and I want to make sure that it comes to fruition and and make sure that the neighbors feel empowered to lead that effort as well. So I'm supportive of this. I'm excited to see it come to fruition. And I will I hope my colleagues will be supportive of this as well. Thank you.
Speaker 1: Thank you. Councilman Lopez to Councilman Brooks, Councilman Lopez, rep.
Speaker 9: Legendary district three.
Speaker 2: Thank you, Mr. President. I will be very brief. I think, you know, I was able to see this plan from its beginnings to see it develop and see the different stakeholders at the table. And, you know, I just I just wish that there were some other folks who are around anymore to see this happen and to see this implemented. I think, you know, a few come to mind. But here's here's here's the thing. The fact that this plan is actually being implemented and not be not just sitting on a shelf in CPD is a good thing, right? In the fact that we actually have some table I, I trust you, the ULC and what they're doing. I think we've worked together in the past on Morrisson Road, which is you. I have some very similar challenges in terms of connectivity, in terms of infrastructure, in terms of bringing life back into into the neighborhood. Here's the thing. Density helps achieve that. And you know, what we have to consider at this hearing is an issue of zoning. Right. And if it's the right zoning, you can't consider deals and considered deals. You can't consider anything else. Although those are different fruits that I think this will help produce. And those are different trails that we can all go down and explore. And I think the city and looking at, you know, bringing some of these neighborhoods back on the grid and, you know, focusing in some of these neighborhoods that need that attention with the fact that you went on record and talked about the sidewalks and the infrastructure and the needs that go along with it, because the density will bring more foot traffic, more traffic all together. And the desperate need for that, infrastructure upgrades and the you know, what happens to the West doesn't necessarily we shouldn't rely on that one thing. We should rely on our regular general fund money to be able to do stuff like that. Here's what I will say and I think suggest move forward. I mean, I do support this moving forward because I think it does need that. It does that we need that density. I think this is. Zone districts are very appropriate for for the area. They're not a huge increase. I think they're gradual increase and it does get implemented over time. The one thing I would really push for any kind of development happening in the center, when we think of affordability, we think a density it's not just the number of one bedroom units is the number of two and three bedroom units that can be achieved. Those are the families that when you talk about displacement, those are the apartments, those are the units, those are the houses that we are dying to build. And dying to fill in folks who who want to be able to call Swansea and still call Swansea home. Right. Those are the units that we expect to see and I think that's helped. How will you help achieve that balance? Right. So I'd like in the stages of this plan being implemented. Thank you.
Speaker 1: Thank you. Councilman Lopez, Councilwoman Ortega.
Speaker 6: Thank you, Mr. President. I also want to express my support for this project moving forward. You know, we're seeing a lot of families in these three neighborhoods already being displaced. We're seeing landlords raising their rents. And families are struggling, trying to figure out where they're going to go next. It's too bad we couldn't have done this project like two or three years ago so that the units would be up and ready and people would have a place to go. And so that's that's a challenge in terms of timing. But I just I hope that Councilwoman Montero routinely watches these meetings and that she's seen some of the fruits of her labor and know your efforts in having been involved with this as a staff member to Councilwoman Montero and in the continuity of your continued work in and with the neighborhoods to just ensure that all these pieces come together to Urban Land Conservancy. Thank you for your work. I know you guys have played a major role in a number of projects at TOD Sites in making sure that affordability continues to be a big part of many of these projects that, you know, if it if it weren't for that, you know, we would probably be seeing market rate developments at most of these sites and not the affordability mix that, you know, comes with the commitment of ULC seeking the low income tax credit resources that help ensure that people who most rely upon public transportation can actually live next to these stops and that they're not all occupied by people who pay higher rents . So I think that's really important. I think Councilman Brooks covered most of my other comments, but I think this will be good for the neighborhood. The continued involvement with the neighborhood is a vital piece of just making sure that it comes together in the right way with that ongoing community support as part of what will make it work in that interface with the residents that are still in the neighborhood. So thank you very much.
Speaker 1: Thank you. Councilwoman Ortega, Councilman, can each.
Speaker 11: Thank you, Mr. President. And I just briefly wanted to say thank you to you c michael Sapp often uses this term Standing in the gap. And in this case, you stepped into a gap. We as a city don't typically own property, maintain it and plan for its future directly. We respond, but we're not a great person or entity to lead that. So thank you for stepping up and stepping into that gap. For that, I want to say thank you to the community residents for your willingness to help envision into the future enough to say you support this zoning moving forward. Tonight, I heard that that hope and that belief and I think that's wonderful to hear. And I think, you know, we are dealing with an envelope tonight. I think the case is very strongly made for the envelope based on the neighborhood plan that just it's a very close match. But we all understand clearly that there's more to fill in inside that envelope. And I hear that from all parties. So thank you for the diligence. I know having looked at some of the things in the communities email, it seems like some of those things might be in conflict with the rules for affordable housing as they come down from the federal government and how it's financed. But many of the things in there seem achievable. So I hope you don't let agreement on some things stop you from doing an MRU just because you can't get everything in the same document. So I encourage you to get those things you agree with documented and signed, even if you either can't, you know, come to agreement on all the other pieces or you're still working on them. But it seems to me like you've got a lot of a lot of ground here that could easily be documented. And then you can either understand more about the pieces you can't do because it doesn't always work with tax credits or the pieces that you just need more time to do. So that's my my hope is that you can get nailed down the things that you agreed to now. So good luck to you all. Let us know how we can continue to support you. You're very good at doing that as community and the developers. They know where to find us as well. But but we have a lot of work left ahead of us. And please know that this will stay on our radar even after we approve the zoning. Thank you.
Speaker 1: Thank you. Councilman, can each. Councilman Brooks.
Speaker 9: You know, I couldn't help but bringing this up because we just had the marijuana conversation. This is zoned iby today. So this is a for use by right for any marijuana business that wanted to come in here. And so I think it's important that when we talk about visioning the future, folks who are maybe against this project need to think about the consequences of the neighborhood across the street as single family residential. And so I just wanted to bring that up because we love that topic of marijuana so much on this dais. Thank you.
Speaker 1: Thank you, Councilman Brooks. Any other comments? 216 CNN Madam Secretary.
Speaker 4: Raquel Brooks. Clark. Espinosa.
Speaker 1: Flynn, I.
Speaker 4: Gilmore. I can eat. Lopez. All right. New. Ortega Susman I black eye. Mr. President.
Speaker 2: Hi.
Speaker 1: Madam Secretary. Please, first of all, announce the results. 12 Ice eyes to 16 has been placed on final consideration and does pass. All right, that's one. Next, public hearing is on to 72. Councilman Lopez, would you please put 272 on the floor? Final passage.
Speaker 2: Thank you, Mr. President. I move that council bill 272 series of 2016 be placed upon the council, placed upon final consideration and do pass.
Speaker 1: All right, public hearing for council bill 272 is now open. May we have the staff report?
Speaker 7: This is a designation for 200 block of South Lincoln. My name is Karen. I am with Landmark Preservation at the CPD. This landmark designation was proactively submitted to us from the community. Three owners of the does three owners within the designated property submitted it to us.
Rezones property at 4800 Race Street from I-B, UO-2 to C-MX-3, C-MX-5, and C-MX-8 in Council District 9. (NEIGHBORHOODS AND PLANNING) Rezones property located at 4800 Race Street from I-B, UO-2 to C-MX-3, C-MX-5, and C-MX-8 in Council District 9. IF ORDERED PUBLISHED, A PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE HELD ON THIS ITEM.  REFER TO THE "PENDING" SECTION OF THE FUTURE COUNCIL MEETING AGENDAS FOR THE DATE. The Committee approved filing this bill at its meeting on 4-6-16.