GPHC

The proposed allowable size of a home (center) under the new Code, compared with the allowable bulk plane of a home (left) under the existing Code.

What Does This Mean for Park Hill?

By the GPHC Zoning and Community Planning Committees

Denver’s Community Planning and Development Department (CPD) is nearing the end of a multi-year effort to redraft the entire Zoning Code, which will bring significant change to all of Denver, including Park Hill. Although the new Code is intended to protect stable, existing residential neighborhoods, the newly-released Draft #3 does not address the recent development trend in Park Hill of scraping and replacing existing homes with overly-large houses. The new Code in fact allows even larger houses and expands the potential for business uses to disrupt residential life on adjacent blocks.

Rush to Judgment

Review and approval of the final Code is on a fast track. Greater Park Hill Community, Inc. (GPHC) volunteers have spent long hours over six-plus months trying to participate in a meaningful fashion in CPD’s redrafting process, with the goal to protect the predominant single family nature and established character of Park Hill. Volunteers reviewed two drafts of the 700-plus page Code and zoning map, attended numerous meetings with CPD, conducted separate meetings and outreach efforts with residents, and are beginning a review of Draft #3 of the Code and map.

GPHC’s Zoning and Community Planning Committees do not believe the draft Code is ready for Planning Board or City Council review and approval in January 2010, as scheduled. The truncated review period for Draft #3, resulting from the rush to issue a final document, places unnecessary hardships on registered neighborhood organizations, which rely on volunteers to review Code changes and draft comments. CPD did not release a substantially complete draft of this lengthy and complex document until November 3, and has yet to review the draft’s specifics with the public, most of whom are not zoning experts.

Furthermore, CPD divided Park Hill into three parts (South, North and Northeast Park Hill), subdividing it further by Council district (Hancock,11; Johnson, 5; and Madison, 8), thereby requiring the analysis of Park Hill in seven areas. To our knowledge, there has been no attempt by CPD to view the neighborhood as a whole, despite its long and purposeful history as one neighborhood and City Council’s approval and adoption of the Park Hill Neighborhood Plan that encompasses all of Park Hill.

CPD has given GPHC’s comments and concerns limited consideration throughout the process, and did not review GPHC’s written comments on Draft #2 prior to issuing Draft #3. Draft #3 includes substantial and significant changes and additions, and requires close review. Nevertheless, by the time you read this article, your opportunity to ask questions and provide comment at public meetings with CPD and City Council, as announced during the week of November 3, will, in all likelihood, have passed. Thus, we fear the revised Code will be rushed to approval with inadequate notice or opportunity for meaningful public review and comment.

At Q&A sessions during the week of November 9, CPD told GPHC to bring specific concerns to our Council members. We intend to invite the five Council members who represent Park Hill (the three District representatives and the two at-large representatives) to meet with us to discuss our continuing concerns about the impact on this neighborhood of what is likely to be the final draft of the Code. We encourage you to contact City Council, as well.

Background

GPHC has consistently expressed its desire to retain Park Hill’s single family residential character and minimize excessive development with respect to both size and density. Almost 50 years ago, GPHC’s predecessor neighborhood organization fought for, and largely obtained, R-0 (single family) zoning for substantial portions of the residential area.

GPHC worked to ensure that Blueprint Denver (2002), which provides the general framework for the Code’s revisions, designated all of Park Hill as single family residential and an “area of stability” (defined as primarily fairly stable residential neighborhoods where no significant changes in land use were expected over the next 20 years). Similarly, GPHC helped develop the Park Hill Neighborhood Plan (2000), which emphasized the neighborhood’s desire to protect its single family residential character; City Council and the Denver Planning Board approved this Plan.

In 2003, GPHC supported the “Quick-Wins II” zoning compromise that was intended as a stop-gap measure to limit the size of over-sized “long houses” that were fundamentally changing the nature of neighborhoods such as Washington Park and Cory-Merrill, even as CPD worked to revise the entire Code. At that time, the wave of development impacting other established neighborhoods had just begun in Park Hill.

Implementation of “Quick-Wins II” zoning, nevertheless, brought scrape-off development and overly-large houses to Park Hill, to the consternation of residents, some of whom approached GPHC in 2006 and organized a “Smart Growth” committee. In 2008, GPHC adopted a Smart Growth Statement, which it provided to CPD and City Council. Among other things, this statement makes clear that the context and character of Park Hill includes larger lots and more open space on individual lots than found in many other Denver neighborhoods and that the open space requirements in Quick-Wins II are not sufficiently protective. Thereafter, in July 2008, Council members Johnson and Madison arranged a meeting with CPD and “Smart Growth” committee members, during which the CPD representative stated that nothing could be done to address GPHC’s Smart Growth Statement or protect the neighborhood until the redraft of the Zoning Code was undertaken.

The New Code and Substantive Issues

It is impossible to detail here all of GPHC’s substantive concerns with the draft Code. In some instances, our concerns vary from block to block. A very brief summary of several concerns follows. By way of introduction, the new Code divides Park Hill into two basic zoning categories, Urban and Urban-Edge. Very generally, Urban homes are older with garages that face alleys, while Urban-Edge homes have driveways off the street and larger minimum lot sizes; each category is divided further into housing type (e.g., single unit; two unit) and minimum lot size. CPD has mapped the entire city by these zoning catagories. To see where your home is located, check CPD’s website. We have asked CPD for a large zoning map of Park Hill to post in the front window of the GPHC offices.

Open Space and Overly-Large Houses

“One picture is worth a thousand words.” We are particularly frustrated that CPD has neither completed nor made public promised modeling of potential maximum structure sizes under the new Code. Absent definitive modeling, the public is left to speculate about the potential impacts on residential areas. Pictorial representations of maximum allowable development on the range of lot sizes in the new zone districts would be invaluable to the public’s understanding of the new Code’s potential impacts.

CPD has replaced “open space” requirements with “maximum building coverage” requirements, first revealed in Draft #3. The limit for most Urban and all Urban Edge single family districts in Park Hill is 37.5% maximum building coverage. Multi-unit zones are either 50% or 37.5%. CPD asserts that 37.5% maximum building coverage is intended to mirror Quick Wins II’s 62.5% open space requirement. While 62.5% of a lot reserved for open space may sound spacious, Quick Wins II as applied in Park Hill, has resulted in overly-large homes and limited yard space; 50% open space development extends almost from lot line to lot line. Moreover, Draft #3 also appears to have eliminated the bulk plane, so new construction could have greater volume at the roof line and allow even larger houses.

Thus, the draft Code does not address one of GPHC’s most important issues, construction of overly-large houses (and associated scraping of homes), with the likely consequence that even larger houses will be built and continue to alter the character of the neighborhood. We suspect CPD looked at the impact of Quick Wins II in other neighborhoods where lots are traditionally smaller and homes bigger than in Park Hill. We have told CPD that our residents want the ability to remodel and construct additions, or even scrape and rebuild homes, but that additional open space requirements can recognize these interests while protecting the neighborhood.

The drawings accompanying this article, by GPHC Board member and architect, Bernadette Kelly, show two examples of 37.5% coverage (and 62.5% open space) that could be built on her 5,500 sq. ft. lot:

1. a two-story home larger than 2,700 sq. ft., plus a 576 sq. ft. garage and 100 sq. ft. utility shed; and (see page 15)   

2. a two-story home and attached garage larger than 3,800 sq. ft. (see right)

The front elevation drawing on page one represents both site plans. It shows the outline of the existing bulkplane requirements of the current Code and compares that size home with the maximum allowable size of a home, in the center, under the new Code. The homes shown on either side of the new development in the center are existing established homes, the one on the left built in 1927 and the one on the right in 1954. Most homes on her block are one story and average 1,100 sq. ft. On 6,200 sq. ft. lots and 9,300 sq. ft. lots, which are common in Park Hill, allowable construction will be proportionately larger.

Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs), Tandem Houses, Multi-housing Zones and Carriage Lots

GPHC opposes ADUs and Tandem Houses (two houses on a lot, one behind the other) anywhere in Park Hill, regardless of zone district, because they are inconsistent with single family housing and may negatively impact the value and enjoyment of neighboring properties.

The single family districts proposed for Park Hill do not allow ADUs or Tandems, except for 160 acres in the historic Hartman’s Addition, bordered by Colorado Boulevard, Colfax Avenue, Dahlia Street and Montview Boulevard, where numerous historic carriage lots remain. CPD promised GPHC that language allowing ADUs in carriage lots would be removed from Draft #3, but the language remains.

ADUs and Tandems will be allowed in any MU (Multiple Unit) or TU (Two Unit) district, several of which are designated throughout Park Hill. Existing duplexes will not be able to add these new forms without scraping the existing structure, but single family homes in these areas can add one ADU or possibly one Tandem without scraping the existing house.

Build-out (32.5%) permitted under the new Code with 62.5% open space for a home with an attached garage.

Industrial Zoning

GPHC proposed that CPD review the Industrial zoning on Park Hill’s northern border and consider mixed-use zones to allow a broader range of future uses, while grandfathering in existing uses. This approach, which might address environmental justice concerns posed by industrial zoning immediately adjacent to residential areas, is consistent with the Park Hill Neighborhood Plan, and could incorporate the Holly Street Police Station into the neighborhood and complement efforts to redevelop the burned-out Holly Center.

Main Street Zoning, Non-conforming Business Uses, and Adjacent Homes

Park Hill is one of several older Denver neighborhoods where business uses adjacent to residences present an array of difficult issues. Draft #3 renders virtually meaningless any ability to address parking and noise problems presented by businesses adjacent to residences or to limit outdoor patios associated with eating and drinking places. This may allow the Cherry Tomato, a popular restaurant for many and frequent source of disruption for nearby residents, to construct a large outdoor patio on a residential street near homes, in violation of an express agreement between the restaurant and GPHC that allowed the restaurant to locate in a non-conforming building and kept a fragile peace between residents and the business for over a decade. GPHC believes that if the new Code allows patios under these circumstances, it should require the Board of Adjustment to determine whether and under what conditions to permit the outdoor patios. Draft #3’s provisions could have significant future impact any place where residences are within the general vicinity of business uses.

Minimum Lot Sizes

The new code will decrease minimum lot sizes for U-SU-C, B and A zone districts, which may encourage combining lots, scraping homes and building more houses in the same space.

For further information, see www.newcodedenver.org . If you contact GPHC, a committee member will get back to you. You can contact GPHC by calling 303-388-0918 or by sending an e-mail to This e-mail address is being protected from spambots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it

The remainder of the New Zoning Code process is:

Mid-November through mid-December 2009: Zoning Code staff will make final revisions in the New Code following the Listening Sessions with City Council during the week of November 16.

December 22, 2009 CPD submits the final draft of the Code to the Blueprint Denver Committee of City Council.

January 6, 2010: Denver Planning Board Public Hearing on Proposed New Code

January 21, 2010: CPD files for an ordinance to enact the New Code.

January 25, 2010:  First Reading of New Code before full City Council

February 22, 2010: Second reading of New Code before full City Council, plus a public hearing and possible Council vote.