Denver Zoning Code Changes

Questions about the zoning code changes

Is an article about a seemingly mundane topic such as “a zoning code” ever going to be sexy enough to merit the time to read? Probably not, unless you are concerned about the future value of your home, or real estate investment opportunities that may arise because of changes in the code, or the destruction or preservation of the character of the neighborhood in which you live. Then its attractiveness may become magnetic.

Denver is undergoing a zoning code change. What does that mean?

A city’s zoning code is intended to regulate the use of the land so that all property owners have equally protected rights. Denver’s first zoning code was adopted in 1923. It was 25 pages long and contained 13 zone district classifications. The current format of the Denver Zoning Code was adopted in 1956, which was the last time the entire code was revised.  At the time of its adoption, the code was 172 pages long and contained 16 separate zone district classifications.  The current Denver Code is 639 pages long and contains 44 basic zone district classifications and 14 sub-districts, totaling 58. (Source: Denver Community Planning Department).

Do you want to read that document?

Obviously, there is a need to simplify the code. If you have attempted to build a new home or significantly modify an existing structure you understand the Kafkaesque nature of the code and the need to revise and simplify it.

The Zoning Code Update underway in the Community Planning Department (CPD) seeks to bridge the gap that exists between current zoning and Blueprint Denver.

Denver citizens called for reform of the City’s Zoning Code in the 1989 Comprehensive Plan. This message was repeated in the Denver Comprehensive Plan 2000.  Blueprint Denver (2002) provided the vision and initial strategy to begin this effort.

Denver has chosen to adopt a “form-based” code that “addresses the relationship between building facades and the public realm, the form and mass of buildings in relation to one another, and the scale and types of streets and blocks. It is a method of regulating development to achieve a specific urban form.” The Form-Based Code Institute describes the approach:

The regulations and standards in form-based codes, presented in both diagrams and words, are keyed to a regulating plan that designates the appropriate form and scale (and therefore, character) of development rather than only distinctions in land-use types. This is in contrast to conventional zoning’s focus on the segregation of land-use types, permissible property uses, and the control of development intensity through simple numerical parameters (e.g., FAR, dwellings per acre, height limits, setbacks, parking ratios).

Blueprint Denver requires areas of stability and areas of change. The large majority of Denver has been designated as areas of stability. The goal for the areas of stability is to identify and maintain the character of an area while accommodating some new development and redevelopment. (Source: Blueprint Denver). One of the “Starting Policies” states that areas of stability will “respect context.”

Denver’s CPD and its consultants have determined that Denver’s zoning code will regulate land use with base zone districts, typologies and form-based standards.

Of primary area of concern to many who have attended the CPD’s public meetings and who have read the presentations is the operational definitions to be used to determine what is a neighborhood “context.” Throughout all public presentations and in their internal documents the CPD and the consultants refer to “context” as the determining factor for what will be allowed in areas of stability.

In their “Overall Preferred Approach” they state that the “major substantive changes” will include “Context-based standards (that) respect existing and desired (emphasis added) neighborhood character (emphasis added).” This immediately raises many questions:

• Who will determine desired character?
• What operational definitions will they use?
• What type of flexibility will be allowed?
• How will Registered Neighborhood Organizations’ (RNO) input be considered?
• Who, in the final analysis, will be the ultimate decision-maker?

In the section entitled “Zone District” they say that zone map changes will come from the “neighborhood or developer proposal” or a “city proposal.”

• Which one rules?
• What will be the process for determining how zone map changes are decided?

Under “Neighborhood Typology” they refer to the “context” and “framework character.” They then list the A1 to A5 “Urban Resident Typologies.”

• How will the classification occur; against what rules?
• Who will participate in the decision

Washington Park has 58% original architecture, 22% scrapes with 10% of all new sales over the last year being infill. There are 5% duplexes, and 20% of the homes have been either popped or added to out the back. These data show an eclectic mix of homes, architectural styles and values.

• What is the typology?
• What is the “context?’

Under “Building Form” they cite “envelope (height, width, depth)” and “character elements (massing shape, roof form)” as being critical in determining context.

• If a neighborhood RNO presents a plan in which it would like to see a change to the envelope and character elements of a neighborhood block, will that be allowed?
• If so, what are the rules of engagement?

Finally, they say “the typology and building form standards do facilitate change that is compatible with existing building forms (emphasis added) in a neighborhood.”

• What if the neighborhood, or a homeowner, or a builder wants to deviate from the “existing building forms?”
• Will that be allowed?
• What will be the rules?

If a surrounding neighborhood has successful infill development and the result is rapidly appreciating real estate values in that neighborhood and an adjacent neighborhood has different typology, context, and building form, will it be able to change its standards to take advantage of the economic opportunity?

Perhaps most disturbing in the entire process is what has not been done or included. The CPD has not performed an economic analysis of the impact of these proposed changes on real estate values.

This is one of those government declarations: “trust us; we know best.

Do you think they know best? Do you trust them with the value of your home?

Finally, the Denver Board of Realtors expressed its concern in a recent letter to the Zoning Code Task Force:

At this point, it is unclear whether the overall direction of the ZCTF towards form-based zoning will simplify the code, or make it more complicated.  While the ideas of form-based zoning sound simple, patterns and rules could vary greatly from neighborhood to neighborhood, or even block to block.  Without an effective implementation process with certainty and clarity, this approach may make it difficult for citizens, homeowners, real estate professionals, developers, and even city employees to have a solid grasp of zoning code as it varies within the city.

Now is the time to get involved. Contact your neighborhood association. Read the CPD presentation at www.Denvergov.org. Decide for yourself. Make this issue sexy.

Advertisement