Laramie council rezones 33 acres near Snowy Range Road to allow multifamily housing

The Laramie City Council on Nov. 4 approved Original Ordinance 21-12 on second reading, rezoning an area of about 33 acres between Snowy Range Road, West Garfield Street and the Laramie River from I-2 (industrial) to R-3 (multifamily). The motion, made by Councilor Lockhart and seconded by Councilor O'Doherty, passed 8-0 with Councilor Bowling absent.

Rezoning, staff and proponents said, would not mandate a particular development but would expand the site’s allowable uses to include a wider range of residential housing types. Planner Derek Dixon told the council the site previously served the Union Pacific Railroad, was purchased by 4G Enterprises in 1988 and underwent Phase I and II environmental assessments under the EPA Brownfields program that “confirmed the site is safe for reuse and suitable for development.” Dixon said the request aligns with adopted city plans that identify a shortage of housing and support residential reinvestment.

Brad Enzi, appearing for the landowner/applicant, urged the council to approve the change, saying it “meets both the Thrive plan and the housing needs study” and would help address a shortfall of housing. Doug Foss, CEO of Ivinson Hospital, told the council that employee housing shortages make any additional developable residential land important for retaining workers. Dave Coffey, a local engineer, said his prior work on the parcel indicates “engineering that can be done on this can satisfy the drainage, the utilities, the transportation” for an R-3 project.

Residents of the West Side, however, urged caution. Wendy Chapman, a 27-year resident, said the parcel functions as a flood plain and “is a drain. It’s a sponge,” warning that additional impermeable surface from dense development could worsen existing flooding. John Vasquez, who lives near the former gas station area, described recent heavy-equipment activity on adjacent property and asked the council to consider how industrial activities already bordering the neighborhood would be reconciled with future residential uses. Planners and councilors acknowledged drainage concerns and said engineering and permitting review would be required before any development proceeds.

Council discussion stressed that the action before them was a zoning change, not approval of a specific site plan. Council members and staff noted that any future development would be subject to engineering review, stormwater and drainage requirements, and public notice. The planning commission had recommended approval following a public hearing on Oct. 13; Dixon said notice, application materials and environmental assessments were available at the planning office. The ordinance was adopted on second reading with roll-call confirmation of 8 yes, 0 no, 1 absent.

The vote record shows Councilors Vigil, Lockhart, O'Doherty, Shumway, Newman, Reid, Richardson and Mayor Combi voting yes; Councilor Bowling was absent. The rezoning also included one small adjacent southern parcel to avoid irregular boundaries, a change staff recommended to maintain logical zoning lines.

Next steps: the council’s action changes the property’s allowed uses but does not authorize construction. Any proposed development will need site-specific engineering, stormwater control measures and the typical permitting and public-notice processes required by the city.