A struggle is underway over rezoning in far east Denver

The owners of the Windsor lot think the site could be a gas station or maybe a fast food joint. Neighbors disagree.

An old drive-up ATM spot in Aurora that's poised to be redeveloped. Oct. 29, 2019. (Kevin J. Beaty/Denverite)

An old drive-up ATM spot in Aurora that's poised to be redeveloped. Oct. 29, 2019. (Kevin J. Beaty/Denverite)

191002-LINDSAY-FENDT-STAFF-PHOTO-KEVINJBEATY-03-sq-2

The future of a parking lot full of vacant drive-up ATMs in Windsor has caused concern from neighbors.

The property owner, Bellco Credit Union, submitted an application to rezone the property from a category allowing a one-level commercial building to one that would allow for a three-level mixed-use building. The application lists a drive-thru restaurant or a gas station as possible uses for the site.

This is the second time the landowners have sought to rezone the property, which is on Mississippi Avenue near the intersection with Havana Street. The Denver Planning Board recommended that City Council deny a similar proposal last year after finding that the development didn’t fit with the residential feel of the area. The planning board received two letters opposing the rezoning, one from the Rangeview Neighborhood Association and one from a homeowner nearby that requested the developer build a wall on the property if a gas station is built.

In May, the Rangeview Neighborhood Association voted to oppose rezoning the property, but the vote took place before this particular application was filed with the city.

On Oct. 16, the planning board voted on the new application but was unable to issue a recommendation due to a tie vote.

Tuesday, the development committee voted to put the proposal to the full city council.

The property owner has a right to move the rezoning application to a full hearing in front of City Council even if the committee fails to move it forward. Ultimately, the full council will decide whether or not the rezoning goes forward.

This article was updated for the following reasons: It incorrectly stated that the planning board has seven members; it’s an 11-person body with one vacancy. Only one member of the committee dissented, not several. 

Hi! You’re like us!

Looks like you’re the type of person who reads to the ends of articles! Well, true believer, you might really like our morning newsletter. It’s quick, free and gets you up to speed on the important and delightful things happening right here in Denver.

Thanks for reading another Denverite story

Looks like you’re the type of person who reads to the ends of articles! Well, true believer, you might really like our morning newsletter. It’s quick, free and gets you up to speed on the important and delightful things happening right here in Denver.Does Denverite help you feel more connected to what’s up in your area? Do you want to be a part of it?

Member donations are critical to our continued existence and growth.

Thanks for reading another Denverite story

Does Denverite help you feel more connected to what’s up in your area? Do you want to be a part of it?

Member donations are critical to our continued existence and growth.

You’re our superpower

Denverite supporters have made the decision to financially support local journalism that matters to you. Ready to tell your networks why? Sharing our “About” page with your own personal comments could really help us out.

You’re our superpower

Denverite members have made the decision to financially support local journalism that matters to you. Ready to tell your networks why? Sharing our “About” page with your own personal comments could really help us out.