Planning Commission Agenda and Packet 2021 12 09

Home Browse Search

Planning Commission Meeting Minutes November 11, 2021 Page 10 of 12 Hoefner asked if they could see how many votes there were for the amendment and Chair Brauneis asked for additional comments from the Commission. Howe stated that it was not a large proportion of the units that were 55+ and he saw the value in that. The accessibility for senior housing was important. He understood the concern that having it be 55+ limited the options for some homeowners. Brauneis stated that he was stuck on the fact that Council clearly wanted something addressed for 55+. While he appreciated that the Commission may think that it was not necessarily good planning, he did not know if it was a respectful statement since they had given clear direction that that's what they wanted. It was clear to him that the applicant was going to have to address this issue when they came before Council and so he did not know what they were accomplishing by taking out the requirement. Hoefner stated that Commissioner Moline had accepted it as friendly and they could vote on the resolution as amended first. Williams stated that you run the risk of this body not being as helpful to the Council and it may backfire. She found it inappropriate to Council to do this. Brauneis noted that they were selected by and serve Council and he was weighing that Council had been clear that they wanted to see this issue addressed versus what was good planning, and he did not know which outweighed the other. Williams stated that the Commission served at the pleasure of the Council. Hoefner stated that they were a recommending body and this was sent back to them for additional consideration and deliberation. It was one thing to have a difference of opinion on what is or isn't good planning or policy and as a recommending body they ought to make a recommendation that they thought was the correct one. Council could overrule them if they wanted and he did not think it was disrespectful to disagree. Howe stated that in the long-term the needs of the City today may not be the same as the needs tomorrow, and 55+ would limit the flexibility of housing which was very valuable and limit it to a certain age group. The same effect could be achieved through the style of the housing units and did not know if it was their decree to say that a certain age can live in a certain location. Williams stated that the Denver Regional Council of Governments forecasted that cities in the area were not prepared for the forecasts for the silver tsunami. Brauneis asked Commissioner Moline about accepting it as a friendly amendment. Moline stated that he accepted it as friendly and would see where it would go. The motion that had been moved by Commissioner Moline and seconded with a friendly amendment by Commissioner Hoefner was put to a roll call vote and passed 4-2.