Zoning changes sharpen Denver's development goals

By Daniel J. Chacon, Rocky Mountain News (Contact)

Published April 29, 2008 at 9:46 p.m.
Updated April 30, 2008 at 11:49 a.m.

Text size  

• 7 Comments
• Email
• Print

Ken Papaleo / The Rocky

A light-rail train is reflected Tuesday in the window of a former Gates Rubber building. The I-25 and Broadway area is identified by Blueprint Denver as a model growth area.

If you own property in Denver and you've never heard of an "area of stability" or an "area of change," get used to the terms.

The City Council's decision early Tuesday to rezone large swaths of West Highland and Sloan's Lake, limiting development to single-family homes, reflects the council's commitment to Blueprint Denver, the city's land-use and transportation road map.

Blueprint Denver, adopted in March 2002, divides the city into two planning categories: areas of stability and areas of change.

Located along major corridors such as Colfax Avenue and around existing and future light-rail stations, areas of change are where the city wants to channel development and higher-density projects.

An example is the redevelopment of the former Gates Rubber Co. site on South Broadway, a $1 billion transit-oriented project. The thinking is that Gates and similar redevelopments will create pedestrian- friendly neighborhoods with people walking, biking and taking public transportation.

"It's not an anti-car thing," said Peter Park, manager of Community Planning and Development. "It's just that we needed to have a better balance of how we move about because, as we grow, as we 'densify', there is no way that we're going to grow and accommodate the expected growth and population and assume everyone is going to drive.

"Because, if we do that, we don't have the road capacity for all the cars, and it wouldn't be a responsible way of building anyway."

Areas of stability are usually established residential neighborhoods where the city wants to maintain the existing character. So, for example, if a neighborhood is composed of mostly single-family detached homes, the idea is to maintain that make-up.

The 53 acres in Sloan's Lake and 62 acres in West Highland that were downzoned from R-2 to R-1 are both identified as areas of stability.

The zoning changes for the two northwest Denver neighborhoods - which have seen a rash of so-called "scrape-off" redevelopments in recent years that made room for duplexes and other multifamily properties - are aimed at heading off more density.

Proponents argued that multi-unit developments were out of character and out of scale with the neighborhoods, which are overwhelmingly single-family. But opponents said the redevelopment was good for the neighborhoods, and that a rezoning infringed on owners' property rights.

A majority of council members sided with the proponents, saying the rezoning was in line with Blueprint Denver.

"Part of the reason at least 11 of us voted the way we did was that I think we wanted to send a message that we do want to support the Blueprint Denver vision," said Councilwoman Carla Madison. "I think it shows we are serious."

chacond@RockyMountainNews.com or 303-954-5099 Staff writer David Montero contributed to this report.

5 QUESTIONS FOR

Byron Koste

* executive director of the Real Estate Center at the University of Colorado. Koste talked with Rocky reporter David Montero about the zoning change made by Denver City Council early Tuesday.

1. From an outside perspective, what does the decision by the council mean?

What they are doing is reducing the value of those acres for a lot of folks. It will also drive less in property taxes. It will be less efficient because fewer people are living in the same space. What it says is, where 100 to 200 people could be accommodated in these neighborhoods, now they won't be accommodated and we're contributing to sprawl.

2. What about a homeowner who would like to sell property to a developer interested in building multi-family units?

Unless being forced to sell, most people like the status quo better. And the notion of one family per lot is attractive - until the circumstances change. Then the other issues, that were easy to ignore before, come center-stage and you are faced with less value for your property because the only option for the land is to remain as a single-family lot rather than someone who could buy that home and create two homes.

3. Because this ruling doesn't take effect until January, will developers be in a rush to purchase homes and engage in the practice of scraping off?

Yes, but it depends on the definition of a lot. There are still market limits, and in today's tight capital market, there are only so many people who can afford to purchase so many sites. The economics right now don't work for most people.

4. Could there be successful lawsuits over this decision?

It depends on the extent to which they can show harm, and showing harm is always difficult. The law books are full of cases that defy description. My guess is there could be some success because damages are easier to show when you believe you're the victim of downzoning. Downzoning is a high-risk proposition for many governments to engage in. It boils down to a few things like, did this ruin the neighborhood? Has it been in effect or been done to other neighborhoods in the city? If yes, what is so special about these neighborhoods? If it is because the housing is so unique, there are other resolutions short of downzoning.

5. Are property values expected to rise or fall based on the decision?

If Denver had done a poor job of revitalizing itself and didn't do the incredible things it did to make the urban center vital again, the decision wouldn't be an issue. Many people were happy in the suburbs because the alternatives in urban areas weren't that good. But the trend now is to live in urban, downtown settings, and those values are on the rise because of things like multi-family units mixed with retail and locations near mass transit stations. We have invested hundreds of millions of dollars to make the city vibrant and a place people want to be closer to, not farther away from.

• April 30, 2008

  1 a.m.

  Suggest removal

  Jremsoh writes:

  Bravo Denver City Council! Our city neighborhoods are first and formost places to live. Therefore, living conditions and living esthetics are the prioroity. Cities are not in the business of creating favoriable enviroment for developers at the expense of neighborhood upheaval. Nor are they in the business of putting the interests of real estate investors over those of the neighborhood residents. I can not wait until West Washington Park comes up for a vote. If you thought this last one brought a crowd, get ready for bus loads of people who support single family dwellings. By the way, Byron Koste is misinformed. The evidance is overwhelming that when city neighborhoods are down zoned the single family home property values increase. Councilman Nevitt has the data if you care to ask him. The implimentation of Blueprint Denver is long overdue.

• April 30, 2008

  8:06 a.m.

  Suggest removal

  kingdom writes:

  Blueprint Denver prevails! Denver residents prevail!

  Byron Koste: So this decision will contribute to sprawl? Yet they speak of Bluprint Denver's plan for development in 'areas of change'....hmm. And at that very meeting statistics of property values (homes recently sold) in the area were given, which overwhelmingly showed that R1 homes were 'worth' more.

  The developers and realtors with only a vested interest in scrape offs have been defeated...for the moment. Of course Charlie Brown would be in favor of the developers! He received campaign monies from them! Thank goodness 11 council members had the community's interest in mind. The fighting and bickering will undoubtedly continue...but this sets the precedent that history will be preserved, and change will occur outside of 'areas of stability'. So will Dan Markofsky maybe go back to work and raise funds for his project that has been a dirt patch for years now? (I have an idea: community garden!) Or does the litigation begin?

  Thank you CPD and City Council for preserving the neighborhood I've called home my whole life.

• April 30, 2008

  8:20 a.m.

  Suggest removal

  Bob299 writes:

  R-1 zoning doesn't mean that there will be no more scrape-offs. You can still scrape a single-family home and build a new, larger single-family home.

• April 30, 2008

  8:29 a.m.

  Suggest removal

  pdhudgens writes:

  Do people really believe that the "character" of these neighborhoods will not change? Drive through east Wash Park - there are no duplexes being built there. The old houses are being scraped and replaced with large single family homes. The same is likely to happen in our areas because of our proximity to downtown. And on the issue of parking, check out Cherry Creek north - there are far fewer cars on the streets. The alleys are lined with garages where people can actually park two or even three cars - and that's per duplex side, which is the majority of construction in that neighborhood.

• April 30, 2008

  9:13 a.m.

  Suggest removal

  uncledave writes:

  The RMN poll question doesn't get at the issue. It say "should the city re-zone single family neighborhoods to allow multi-family development?" That is not what happened here. The City Council re-zoned two neighborhoods which had allowed multi-family units for more than 50 years to single family. Whether I agree with Council's decision or not, property owners who bought in those neighborhoods when it was zoned R2 got royally screwed. Coming soon to a neighborhood near you! Better have a copy of Blueprint Denver in your back pocket when you go real estate shopping. Should keep the lawyers busy for a good long while.

• April 30, 2008

  9:28 a.m.

  Suggest removal

  Doughboy writes:

  I don't have a dog in the downzoning fight, but from a neutral point of view, I have to agree that R1 downzoning is not going to solve the problem of scrapeoffs, poor taste, and affordability. Every other house on some streets in University Park are getting scraped and Italinate 4000 sq ft houses are being erected on the lots. That University Park is R1 zoned and stable character has done nothing to slow the development craze. West Wash Park residents are deluding themselves in thinking that they will stop development by down-zoning. The only neighborhoods that can prevent scrape offs and have "design guidelines" are those that are designated Historic. And the city would never grant historic status to West Wash Park; I doubt the residents would want it anyway. I think it's poorly hidden secret that the City planners would support increased density in West Wash Park. It has ample access to the arteries going downtown (I-25, Broadway/Lincoln), and the light rail is walking distance from parts of the neighborhood. I think you'll find more City Council opposition to downzoning there as well (You think Charlie Brown was recalcitrant before, he actually represents parts of Wash Park).

• April 30, 2008

  12:12 p.m.

  Suggest removal

  FL_transplant writes:

  I'd welcome multi family housing with restrictions in any neighborhood in Denver.. Its huge houses that are replacing the small 50's bungalow that is running up the property prices. My neighborhood (DU area) is a perfect example. There are 4 new houses going up on my block right now. the home prices have gone from 200- 300K to 600-800K. Its ridiculous, but the fact is, money talks... and people will eventually end up moving to more affordable areas outside of the city.

  CPD is trying to link transit and high density housing. It makes sense. Why would you want a transit stop that only serves a small collection of single family homes? Why couldn't there be a limit to the number of condos/town homes/ apartments to an area? This would allow a mix of more affordable housing to compliment larger single family houses. If it is Transit Oriented Development, then there is a load taken off the highways and streets and a more walkable community is created (which a majority of folks living in Denver want)

Featured

• 2008 Voter’s Guide

  

  Use our Ballot Builder tool to compare your viewpoints to the candidates.

• A Dozen on Denver

  

  Sandra Dallas wrote 'Lennie's tavern' for our ongoing fiction series. Check it out!

• Rocky Multimedia

  

  The news comes alive in our videos and slide shows. Catch up on today's events.

• Bronco Dean's rant

  

  Listen to Bronco Dean's totally biased pregame rant about the Broncos-Jaguars game.

• Presidential Elections

  

  See how Colorado counties have voted through the years.

• County election profiles

  

  A look at how residents in each Colorado county may vote.

• A dream fulfilled

  

  A Rocky Mountain News and MediaStorm production

• Latest from Dove Valley

  

  Click for more broncos videos.

• Sam Adams' Open Mic

  

  No. 44 means a lot to Floyd Little