2024 Text Amendment Bundle Public Review Draft

I am concerned about these proposed zoning changes. As a homeowner bordering a carriage lot, I feel like us neighbors have been kept in the dark regarding these changes. Any development in the lot behind my house would result in loss of privacy, overshadowing of my property, and be a major intrusion on our space. Developing this carriage lot would also be a hazard. The alleyways on our block are already too narrow for trash trucks to drive through so how would emergency vehicles such as firetrucks and ambulances access the lot should there be an emergency? in addition, there is already a lack of parking in the area. Trash/recycle days make this even worse. Where will parking for these structures be? Trash pick up? How will construction vehicles/equipment get back there to build without damaging surrounding properties? How will water and sewer be accessed? What are surrounding neighbors supposed to do while construction occurs? How will we access our garages? Development of these lots will only result in overcrowding, overshadowing, and decreasing the quality of living for those surrounding them.

I am confused and concerned about the city's recent changes in the use of carriage lots. This change seems to have occurred with very little input from surrounding home owners and appears to have taken place through back channels. It's created a very poor perception of the city's decision making as there was no community feedback.

These changes also seem dangerous as the alleyways for carriage lots are insufficient for emergency vehicles and will create considerably more traffic in areas where there is little visibility and limited space.

We had hoped for years that this space would eventually become a community space for our neighbors and our family to come together and enjoy. It could become gathering spaces to bring our communities together. Turning these lots into housing does little to address the real challenges our community is facing, and seems to only benefit a select few who secretly partnered with the city to develop and profit from these lots. We really hope that the city will reconsider these changes.

Hello, I am the owner of a home that surrounds a carriage lot. When we purchased our home almost 5 years ago, the carriage lot was a significant part of our due diligence process, and we were told by the Seller’s real estate agent, and we independently confirmed by reviewing the zoning code, that very limited structures could be built on carriage lots only by an adjacent lot owner. These limitations made us feel conformable following through with the largest purchase and investment decision of our lives. The proposed change to the zoning code to allow individuals that do not own adjacent property to develop these parcels is of great concern to my household, as well as all of my neighbors. My concerns are outlined in more detail below:
1. Access to Garages/Setbacks: The alleyways are very narrow and I have to drive up onto a portion of the carriage lot in order to get in and out of my garage. If a structure or a fence is built on the carriage lot it will make it very challenging if not impossible for us to get in and out of our garage.
2. Construction Issues: There is very limited space on the carriage lot and surrounding alleyways. If a home is built on this parcel, there is very little space for construction vehicles, cement trucks, supplies, etc., and there is a very real risk that construction of a home that takes up the majority of the space on the carriage lot will create access issues to our homes.
3. Service Issues: Utility servicers currently use the space on the carriage lot to park when they are working on powerlines etc. in our neighborhood, and they will no longer have any space to perform these services.
4. Congestion: Building a home on the carriage lot will add significant congestion and take away all of the very little green space on the block.
5. Increased Traffic: In addition to the very significant traffic and interference created by the construction, a new home will add increased traffic through the alleyways due to an entirely new household of residents, guests and visitors.
6. Parking Issues: If the new structure being built does not have a garage, the residents will take spots on the already very crowded streets, in addition to spots being taken by guests, visitors, etc.
7. Height Issues: Allowing tall, detached homes that are 24 feet high will add significantly to the congestion issue and would allow the home to be taller than many surrounding structures, impacting the appearance of the neighborhood and likely impacting property values.
8. Fire Hazard: The increased congested development will limit access for emergency vehicles, and could delay response times and increase risk of damage by fire for every surrounding home.
9. Snow Removal: Currently the carriage lot holds a lot of excess snow that is removed from the alleys, and there will be nowhere for that excess snow to be stored.
10. *Short-Term Rental Risks: Current laws limit short-term rentals to primary residences, which would not apply to accessory dwelling units that are built by adjacent property owners. This change to the zoning code would allow individuals to buy carriage lots and build short-term rentals on them, which would indisputably significantly impact the quality of life of all of the surrounding neighbors and undeniably decrease the value of all of the surrounding homes. There is a very high risk that individuals will see this as an investment opportunity to buy land at a discounted rate and then turn the home into a short-term rental, because many people will not want to build their primary home that they plan to reside in on a carriage lot surrounded by alleys and garages. This factor is one of the most significant issues and risks because it would not be permitted without this zoning change, and it is by far the biggest risk to the surrounding homeowners’ quality of life and property values.
11. Safety Issues: Having residents and visitors out where we all enter our garages at night creates a safety issue. This issue increases exponentially if it is a short-term rental and there are many different unknown people, who have no connection to this neighborhood and whose primary goal is to vacation and party, constantly coming and going in the back of our homes where we enter and exit with our children.
12. Lack of Knowledge/Transparency: The communication about this issue has been very frustrating and even intentionally misleading in many ways. We were told in February that the question of building on carriage lots was not an issue, and that Councilwoman Sandoval was not in support of this change. However, this change has clearly already been in process for quite some time and is very supported by at least some council members, and yet we only received notice of this change mere weeks ago, and we know that the vast majority of affected homeowners have no idea that this is even a possibility.
In sum, allowing these carriage lots to be developed by individuals that do not own adjacent property fundamentally alters a basic assumption that we all had when we bought our homes. We prudently investigated the code and analyzed the risk that the limited building parameters could negatively impact us, and we decided we were okay with that risk. This change to the code changes what the risk is and the likelihood that living adjacent to a carriage lot could negatively impact our quality of life or the value of our homes. If the code change had been in effect when we were looking to buy this home, we very likely would not have purchased this home. The risk of this change going forward has caused significant stress to our household, and has made us consider whether we need to try to sell our home as soon as we can to avoid the potential problems this could cause if it goes through, and I know many others share this same fear.
It is certain that this zoning code change will negatively impact hundreds of homeowners that currently surround carriage lots. Creating a couple dozen new homes cannot justify the impact on hundreds of other homeowners who reasonably relied on the zoning code when purchasing our homes. The existing code serves an essential purpose of protecting homeowners’ interests and was a critical factor in the decision to live in these particular areas. Section 12.10.4.1 of the Zoning Code states, “this Section 12.10.4 is intended to address a unique configuration of land in Denver defined by this Code as a "Carriage Lot," and to allow only a strictly limited range of permitted structures, uses, and activity to control for potential adverse impacts on surrounding uses.” We have been told that if the structure is the same size as it would otherwise need to be per the existing code, that there is no difference in the impact to the surrounding owners, however the most significant points that I make above demonstrate that this is not true. Sections 12.10.4.2 and 12.10.4.3 of the zoning code are extremely important and create the fundamental understanding of homeowners that surround these carriage lots, and changing these Sections in such a substantial manner will have a serious and negative impact on all of the hundreds of homes surrounding carriage lots, and will at the very least cause their value to decrease substantially because of the new risks associated with buying one of these properties. For those of us who were unlucky enough to have already purchased one of these homes in reasonable reliance on the long-standing existing zoning code, we will be irreparably damaged by this change, and are adamantly opposed to it. Thank you for your consideration.

I am extremely concerned about the impact this proposal will have on carriage lots and the surrounding neighbors. I would implore the city to reconsider due to the following concerns:

**Lack of Community Feedback:**
- The zoning changes may advance without sufficient input from local residents, potentially ignoring their concerns and priorities.

**Unaddressed Local Concerns:**
- Without community engagement, issues like increased traffic or privacy impacts may be overlooked, leading to unforeseen consequences.

**Limited Transparency:**

**Opaque Decision-Making:**
- Lack of community input can make the zoning process seem opaque, undermining public trust and perceived fairness.

**Inadequate Mitigation of Potential Issues:**

**Missed Opportunities for Solutions:**
- Engaging with residents can reveal potential problems and solutions early, avoiding issues like increased density impacts or neighborhood changes.

**Setback Issues:**

**Inconsistent Setbacks:**
- New developments may disrupt existing setback patterns, affecting neighborhood uniformity and aesthetics.

**Reduced Privacy:**
- New structures close to existing homes can decrease privacy, impacting residents' quality of life.

**Height Issues:**

**Overshadowing:**
- Taller buildings might block sunlight and cast shadows on adjacent homes and yards.

**Visual Intrusion:**
- Height discrepancies can cause visual discord and potentially lower property values.

**Destruction of Community Spaces:**

**Loss of Shared Areas:**
- Developing carriage lots reduces informal community spaces, limiting opportunities for social interaction and recreation.

**Fragmentation of Social Cohesion:**
- Removing these spaces can weaken neighborhood bonds and the sense of community.

**Loss of Green Space:**

**Reduced Urban Greenery:**
- Development may eliminate valuable green spaces, impacting local ecosystems and neighborhood aesthetics.

**Decreased Environmental Benefits:**
- Green spaces offer air purification and temperature regulation, benefits lost with development.

**Fire Hazards:**

**Increased Fire Risk:**
- Higher building density can raise the risk of fire spreading between structures.

**Insufficient Fire Access:**
- Dense development may restrict emergency vehicle access, potentially delaying response times and increasing fire risks.

**Safety Issues:**

**Increased Traffic:**
- New development can lead to more traffic congestion, posing risks to pedestrians, particularly children and the elderly.

**Reduced Visibility:**
- New buildings might obstruct sightlines, increasing the risk of accidents at intersections and driveways.

I am very concerned with the lack of community feedback and involvement in the decision surrounding carriage lots. There has not been the proper feedback and engagement with homeowners surrounding these lots to consider how these spaces can and should be used. What are the considerations for increased traffic, how will emergency services get back to these areas with the alleyways being so small, loss of urban greenery, increased fire risk with no true plans of how to mitigate that risk. Not to mention how utilities will get back to that space and the negative impact this will have on current homeowners and property values of the surrounding homes. There seems to be a lot of unintended consequences that will come from this that council and zoning are overlooking to create a few more homes in an already densely populated area. My garage is across the alley from one of these lots, has anyone in favor of this change actually visited a carriage lot and understand the consequences this would have on the neighboring homes? This will negatively impact the quality of life for every home and family surrounding a carriage lot.

10' seems very short. Suggest increasing to at least 15'. There is already a precedence in the code for a 15' assumed distance between a garage and primary structure. 15' is a usable space that might allow decent natura light in. 10' is very short and will create nooks that will be poorly lit and hard to drain.

I’m extremely concerned with the zoning changes as they pertain to carriage lots. This change in zoning laws will
Impact over 1800+ current home owners/residents without awareness or consideration. Here are a few reasons why this change brings our block + other homeowners concern:

- increased risk to fire hazard - our alleys are extremely narrow and no fire truck could fit in the alley. The increased fire hazard puts all of us at risk for home damage, or potentially life threatening depending on fire severity.
- our resources are already strained. Every summer our entire block will lose
Power during our hottest days because XCEL tells us that too many people on the grid are running their AC. If we add even more homes to such a tiny condensed area, we run the risk of having more outages. This puts our elderly even more at risk for heat related illnesses or death.
- Home equity devaluation. The new buildings in the carriage lots will make our homes less desirable for many reasons. The erosion of our equity is not worth a small building crammed into a small area that doesn’t even come close to addressing our actual housing crisis.

I’d like to see REAL solutions to our housing crisis and not to the detriment of current homeowners and residents.

Lastly, it’s odd to me our representative, Sandoval, has changed position in such a short period of time. I can’t imagine further lining the pockets of developers instead
Of investing in our communities is the reputation our city council wants.

Language is unclear. What does 'not permitted' mean in this context? Is the stipulation stating that the GFA of the connector will not count towards the GFA of the primary structure?

Most?

Section 1.4.5.6 refers to the "following standards," but the section is empty and the contents are in 1.4.5.7.B. Section suggested for deletion.

On a large suburban lot, not possible that a longer connector might be appropriate? Particularly in a case where it might be a mobility/ADA issue?

Not sure why you would restrict this to a single connector per zone lot. On a very large zone lot with multiple buildings, multiple connectors may be appropriate. For example, on an education campus.