Glenwood Springs City Council voted to table their discussion about proposed amendments to lot area standards for the second time during their May 16 regular meeting.
The two-part proposal, which originally included consideration of a change in zoning to allow duplexes as a use-by-right where they are currently only allowed by Special Use Permit in RL (Residential Low-Density) and RM1 (Residential Medium Density) zone districts, was amended during an earlier May 16 work session to only consider changes to minimum lot standards.
“We had a work session earlier, and there just did not seem to be any support for having the conversation about allowed uses, which would be the duplex conversation,” Councilor Jonathan Godes said.
“We are listening to the community,” Mayor Ingrid Wussow said. “And our feedback from the community is that, while this went through an extensive process … it came to us. We digested it, we looked into it, and we feel as though the climate in the community right now is not interested in discussing duplexes and changing the current zoning to allow those.”
The proposed changes to lot standards would have impacted whether subdivisions are possible in specific zones and how much multifamily housing is allowed by lowering the required minimum lot area for attached dwelling units and single-family detached units in certain zones. The proposal also included reducing minimum lot area requirements for Rural Residential zone districts from 40,000 square feet to 20,000 square feet.
For example, if 2,200 square feet was the minimum lot size per housing unit, a lot measuring around 5,000 square feet could build two housing units.
“What we’re trying to do here is allow smaller units, smaller homes, which tend to be more affordable,” Senior Planner Watkins Fulk-Gray said.
The zoning changes would have had no impact on parking and landscaping requirements, design standards, or anything else.
The May 16 proposal was an amended continuation of a Nov. 16 proposal, which city council voted to table for future consideration. Between the November and May proposals, the city’s community development department conducted two public work sessions with council to revise the proposal.
In addition to the work sessions, the community development department hosted an informational webinar in April to explain the proposed changes to residents and give them a chance to ask questions in real-time. The webinar was hosted on Zoom and livestreamed on Facebook.
Still, residents who showed up to the meeting to give public comments stated they weren’t well-informed about the changes prior to the meeting and needed more time to understand them.
“I would agree that … we might want to have some further discussion and input so that everybody’s a little clearer on what exactly all these things mean,” Resident Jim Mason said.
Some were there to oppose the changes to more easily allow duplexes, and had to adjust their comments once city council members announced those would be removed from consideration.
“I think most of the emails that you received addressed the ‘headline item,’ which was duplexes in single-family neighborhoods. And I’ll be real honest, after we saw that, we didn’t go into the details of the lot sizes in various neighborhoods,” resident Gary Vick said. “What I would recommend is that you table this, not indefinitely, but for a while so we can wrap our heads around it.”
Others expressed concerns that, although duplexes had been removed from the conversation, that the changes in minimum lot size standards would function as a “back door” to allowing for the development of more duplexes.
“I just wonder if we’re kind of getting a back doorway to move toward those things that we aren’t talking about tonight,” resident Scott Provorse said.
In responding to the public commenters, city staff stepped forward to answer questions and clarify points made about the impacts of the proposed changes.
“A lot of property owners themselves come in with unique lots that are close to being able to have a single-family home or being divided to allow another single-family home on a lot that aren’t able to do it,” Community Development Director Hannah Klausman said in response to some of the comments.
“The one other goal … is there’s a strong desire for more ownership opportunity,” Klausman continued. “If you look at Glenwood Springs building statistics, we have not had ownership development. There’s been one project in the last 10 years … This gets to the goal of creating more ownership opportunities.”
Godes made a motion to adopt the minimum lot size standard changes, which died for lack of a second.
Mayor Pro Tem Marco Dehm moved to instead continue the discussion after the city has had more engagement with the community and provided residents with additional education on the proposed changes. The motion received a second and passed 4-2, with Councilor Sumner Schachter absent and Wussow and Godes voting no.
“This has been before the community, in public meetings, for over a year,” Godes said. “… I don’t know that more education is going to help anybody in this room.”
“This is a valuable tool in our toolbox. It’s not a magic bullet, it’s not going to fix all of our problems, but it’s a very sensible next step to addressing some community needs,” Councilor Erin Zalinski said.
Some of those community needs, as expressed by Councilor Shelley Kaup, are providing pathways to ownership and ensuring the city has enough housing for its workforce.
“We’re trying to get it so that every year, the school district doesn’t lose 10s or 20s of teachers because they can’t find a place to live,” Wussow said. “… I would ask you to all be at the table, encourage your neighbors to be at the table. Come with solutions, come with an open mind.”
