Arvada planning staff update council on West 60 Fourth Avenue subarea plan; residents oppose more apartments

Arvada planning staff on Tuesday briefed council members on progress for the West 60 Fourth Avenue subarea plan, describing community input, draft guiding principles and a timeline that staff said aims to finish a draft plan by late fall or early winter and complete the project by the end of the year or early next year. Patty, a planning staff member who led the presentation, said the effort covers two study areas along West 60 Fourth Avenue between Sims Street and Yank Way and includes properties north of the corridor that are currently in unincorporated Jefferson County.

The update matters because the subarea plan will translate citywide policies — the Arvada comprehensive plan and the land development code — into recommendations for a roughly targeted portion of the city where staff expect infill or redevelopment over the next five to 10 years. Patty told council members the plan’s draft purpose is “to create a long term vision and implementation plan to encourage, promote, and support resilient and sustainable community development along West 60 Fourth Avenue.”

Residents and several council members pushed back on draft guiding principles that call for “balanced housing diversity” and possible increased density. “Not all of the principles that are in these founding documents belong everywhere,” one council member said during the discussion, urging the plan to allow for local variation. Multiple community members, workshops and surveys expressed opposition to additional apartments and high-density residential in the study area, saying existing single-family areas and commercial amenities should be preserved.

Businesses and business advocates raised related concerns about displacement. A council member who said she regularly visits nearby merchants reported that a cobbler and a local bakery worry they would be “pushed out” by redevelopment; Patty reassured the council that “this is so highly conceptual that…there is nothing in this plan that’s gonna push a business out,” adding that the subarea plan produces recommendations rather than authorizing immediate projects.

Pedestrian and bicycle safety emerged as a persistent theme. Workshop attendees described the intersection of West 60 Fourth Avenue and Ward Road as difficult and dangerous to cross; one resident said, “the light turns red, three cars go through it either way,” arguing for stronger enforcement and physical improvements. Staff noted the corridor includes segments of the state highway system and that Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) has jurisdiction over some elements. The transportation system plan has identified several of the same trouble spots, staff said.

Staff summarized engagement to date: two open community meetings (one in August and another on Dec. 4), a Speak Up Arvada survey and technical and steering-committee meetings with property owners, organizations and school and church representatives. Patty said those events drew well-attended sessions — “approximately 100 people plus” at the kickoff and another meeting with roughly 90 attendees — and that the project team expects roughly half of attendees to have been repeat participants between meetings.

Technical findings highlighted opportunities and constraints. Based on the city’s parking regulations, staff found several commercial sites are overparked, creating possible opportunities for placemaking or incremental redevelopment; the largest excess parking was noted at the 24 Hour Fitness and FirstBank site at Ward and 60th. The city’s urban-park requirement for major redevelopment was flagged as another factor: projects that redevelop large commercial parcels may need to include park space as part of city standards.

Zoning and annexation issues were also discussed. The portion of Study Area 1 inside Arvada is zoned MXS (mixed-use), which permits commercial retail and office uses and allows residential in many configurations; staff clarified residential would require public hearings and conditional-use processes in some circumstances. Study Area 2 sits in unincorporated Jefferson County, where county zoning (primarily agricultural) presently applies; staff said they have had pre-application inquiries from a potential buyer who indicated a possible annexation into Arvada if city services such as water or sewer were needed.

Council members raised a recurring theme: protecting existing commercial square footage and sales tax base while allowing appropriate, community-led change. One council member urged the subarea plan to avoid producing “mixed use in name only,” where redevelopment would replace a large amount of commercial floor area with mostly residential units and only token retail at the street. Staff said the subarea plan provides an opportunity to present zoning and design options — for example, retaining commercial square footage at key corners while adding housing in ways that support nearby businesses.

Next steps and timing: staff said technical and steering-committee work will continue and the team plans another public forum at the end of summer to present draft framework ideas. Patty said the draft plan is expected in late fall or early winter, followed by additional planning-commission and council workshops and a target completion by the end of this year or early next year. Council members and staff also flagged immediate implementation actions unrelated to the plan, including stepped-up code-enforcement and site-maintenance efforts to keep commercial centers attractive to potential tenants and anchor retailers.

Council and staff discussion noted limits of local authority on some items: transportation improvements on the state-controlled portion of the corridor require coordination with CDOT, and land in Study Area 2 remains private property until annexation or other transactions occur. Staff asked council for suggestions for additional stakeholder participants on the steering committee and for direction on balance between preserving commercial character and permitting additional rooftops to support retail.

Patty and other staff members indicated they will return with refined guiding principles and choices for council consideration, shaped by the community workshop feedback and the retail/parking, connectivity and zoning analysis compiled so far.