Planning Commission Retreat
Arvada Center for the Performing Arts
June 3, 2006
Recorded by Carol Brzeczek

I arrived shortly after 9am and the group was boarding the Omnibus for a field trip of Arvada. This report picks up when they returned.

¨ ¨ ¨

Kent Bagley ran the meeting and asked for comments from everyone about their field trip. Yolanda sited the similar challenges that Arvada faces even though they are a much larger community. Arvada has had the opportunity to “pre plan” to make it possible to live near the rail system. Arvada still has a challenge since the rail system is on the southern end of town and the people have to get there.

By 2030 will more people be willing to use mass transit?

Don wondered if, by 2030, more people will be willing to use mass transit – will mass transit increase in value incrementally?

Someone stated that Park & Ride sites need to be located no closer than 1/8 mile from the station – there is a need for better space for pedestrians to walk through.

Mark was impressed with Arvada being light rail ready. He was also impressed with the wide sidewalks and seating for walkers along Olde Wadsworth.

Brad mentioned their Complan process – Arvada has focused on areas of change as they went through the process. Brad said that you have to listen to the input from the public but then they (Planning Commission) had to get down to the hard work of decision-making.

We have to make sure the public’s and our ideas are not imposed. The question was how do we do that – and they discussed the need to meet with Rotary, Kiwanis, and So. Sub Board to educate them.

Jerry wasn’t impressed. He wanted to know where the heart of the town was. He noted that they were trying to attract residents but from what he saw they were trying to attract the lower and mid income residents. He thought that in 10 to 15 years the housing they saw would be undesirable.

Don said that density is fine but it can be done incorrectly. Whatever is done needs to still be good housing in 15 to 20 years otherwise it will be like Powers.

Someone said (I think Kent or Mark) that density is not the problem – design is the problem. It was recommended that people read “Life and Death of Great American Cities” – just because it is dense does not mean that it is bad.

Mark thought the architecture they saw was abysmal saying that foliage can’t hide bad architecture.

Someone asked how they control the design and the response was through the Design Review Standards.

Jerry said that more units, is more density, is more crimes, and more problems in certain areas – when commercial and density are linked the result is more crime. He understood that Belmar is experiencing more crime.

Kent talked about economic segregation – if you want the police and teachers to have places to live in Littleton then we have to have affordable housing for them.
Yolanda questioned whether it was a matter of density or income – lower income areas won’t have the amenities that a higher income area would have.

The “tools” impressed Kent that Arvada has taken advantage of to accomplish their goals. They are:

• Urban redevelopment planning
• Tax incremental financing
• Eminent domain

It was noticed that both Littleton and Arvada have a river running through it, but the Platte was better than Clear Creek.

Mark said that density doesn’t have to create more crime – there is a book called Defensible Spaces that he recommends. (Apparently it talks about how to design spaces where human eyes can see all the spaces – no dark corners.)

Don asked if we do a good job are we going to have high-income people drive out the low-income group?

Kent said that Elitch’s has done a very good job of mixing the low income with the high-income housing and that Littleton is not likely to replicate it but he thought it was a good example. He has been there 5 or 6 times.

Mark thought it would be a good idea to look at the crime rate for Elitch’s.

Kent then talked a little about the RTD parking, the future charging of customers to use the parking and that Boulder had to pay for their parking structures with tax dollars.

Then the group moved on to the “matrix” for developing ideas about how to use the Norgren property. They have a 4-page list of different categories and statements that are rated by the Planning Commissioners from strongly agree to strongly disagree. Each response is given a number value and they decided to only discuss the items with a +10 score.

Examples of the statements that received +10 are:
Development Objectives – Provides for neighborhood stabilization
Contributes to LPS revenue and enrollment
Master Planned Site Design
Creative or Natural Solutions to Drainage
Distinctive Non-Cookie Cutter Development
Pre-application meeting with staff
Pre-design meeting with neighbors
Conceptual design meeting with Plan Comm.

You get the idea and if you would like to see the other criteria, just ask and I will provide.

Ken said what happens needs to be something that doesn’t degrade the surrounding neighborhood.

Jerry doesn’t want the same – a place where the Highlands Ranch employees live because they can’t afford to live in Highlands Ranch.

Mark and Ken spend a few hours with Stephanie (on CAC) who is a manger of 3 apartment buildings in the Powers area. She explained to them that the Hispanic community that lives in that area primarily work in the restaurants on So. Broadway, Santa Fe Drive and in Highlands Ranch. There are some former Norgren employees that live there too.

Mark observed that a lot of the apartment buildings are well managed and owned and some weren’t. Most of the people living there are hard working people with a stable family life. They do feel discriminated against and segregated from the rest of Littleton. When they do move from the apartments they move west to the duplexes. There is a demarcation line – Littleton Blvd – it is lily white south of Littleton Blvd.

Ken said there are more than apartment buildings in that area. Arapahoe House and several churches. The Hispanic community is kind of excluded – for instance, there is no Hispanic soccer team. They are experiencing some gang activity. There are opportunities for community development in that area and they need more inclusion. There is another community, the eastern European that live west of Windermere and north of Littleton Blvd.

Mark said the physical quality of the apartment complexes is dull but not run down yet. Help is needed in that area and now – before it is too late.

Some wanted to know what “provides a creative/productive use” (from the matrix) means? Is that an assumption that what is there now doesn’t? Someone said that the land is zoned industrial and is functionally obsolete and that Norgren has stopped maintaining the site. Norgren neighbors don’t like the way it looks and that Norgren has never been interested in community involvement with the neighborhood.

Mary Roberts, on a few occasions, explained to the commissioners that the Norgren site could be developed without having to go thru any process if the development was within the zoning definition. In fact, the Norgren property is in 3 parcels and each one could be sold and developed separately. Ken said that needed to be changed in the code.

Ken said that the value of the property will drive high density – a mixture of condos, apartments, and town homes. Probably not patio or single-family homes.

Brad Bailey, a city attorney, gave a presentation on the Complan and rezoning. He made some very interesting statements.

Zoning should be consistent with the Complan.
The Complan should be updated every 3-5 years.
If we updated the Complan more often there would be less rezoning
There are only two reasons to rezone: 1)changing conditions in the area or the city in general and 2) manifest error.
Zoning can be redefined if the Plan Comm likes the plan.
The language of the Complan is vague and fuzzy

He then went on about all the baby boomers that no longer wanted yards to maintain and that is why patio homes are so popular and that that market will impact Littleton real soon.

Don said that a couple in their 70s just bought a large home in his neighborhood – the Preserve at Southbridge.

Mary then said that the market is getting more and more segmented and that there are trends.

Someone asked why update the Complan is all you do is rezone? Dennis said that the Complan sets the tone. Jerry asked if they shouldn’t be looking at all the rezones in the Complan process.

There was a discussion about the difference between the plating of property and planned developments. In general, everything south of Ridge Road is a planned development and north the land is zone by plat. The best example to show the difference between the two is a situation currently ongoing out at Trailmark. Trailmark is a planned development and the planned development is a contract between the City and those living in Trailmark. The current “contract” states that decks can only go so far to the setback requirements and several homeowners have built huge decks that extend into the setback against the “contract”. In order for the contract to be changed, each party has to agree – that means all the homeowners in Trailmark and the City have to agree to change the language. One party can kill the deal. As it stands now, the homeowners in Trailmark are going to have to take a chain saw to their overly large decks. If it weren’t a planned development, the contract is between the homeowner and the city – only two parties. (Trailmark cannot go to the Appeals Board because theirs is a “self imposed hardship.” Bottom line – zoning can be changed but, rarely, will PDs be changed.

There was a brief discussion about the public’s lack of understanding about what the Planning Commission can and cannot consider in their decision-making. There are certain criteria and Wal-Mart’s hiring practices and the look of their buildings are not within the realm of consideration. (There was a brief discussion about the Wal-Mart protestors that were in attendance at the CAC meeting at St. Mary’s.)

Kevin, senior planner, then spent some time updating the PC on the current projects in Littleton.

At the end Jack and I were asked about our observations.

I told them that I had attended a CAC meeting, a community meeting and because I was disappointed in the community meeting I decided to attend a Plan Comm. meeting to learn more. Ken asked my why I was disappointed and I told him that I thought it was a meeting for the public input but I felt pushed by what I heard and that when I was pushed my natural reaction was to resist. He wanted to know what made me feel pushed and I told him the Marilee Utter presentation. Here I had gone to a meeting to offer input and what I got was indoctrination and that I thought the results of their meetings might be different if they had not had her presentation. The Don asked my what I thought about the “matrix” and I told him that that was one of the questions that I had (it was not clear to me what the matrix actually was). He mentioned the Norgren property then it clicked with me what the matrix was and I told him that I thought the input from 5 people was a very small group of people. Ken said something that I can’t remember in response to what I said trying to undercut what I said and I told him that Don asked for my impression and that was what I gave him. I then asked if they had used the matrix for the Marathon property and I was told yes – the second go around and I said something about the first go around being a disaster. I told them I had learned a lot and I had questions and I was hoping to get someone’s email address that I could ask my questions. Mark did give me his.

Jack told them that he thought they were working well together and complimented them in general.

After the meeting I asked Ken if anyone had done an analysis of the need for those baby boomers to have patio homes – perhaps the national trend wasn’t valid in Littleton. For instance, in my neighborhood I live next door to my mom and my neighbors are the same ones that were here when I was a kid. Most often, when a home goes on the market here it is because someone dies! He told me that would be a very difficult study to do.