The Englewood City Council heard testimony from residents supporting and opposing CodeNext in a public hearing Aug. 21.  

The public hearing began with a presentation from Chris Brewster of Multi Studios, a consulting firm that assisted the city with CodeNext. The presentation demonstrated the top proposed changes to the city's Unified Development Code.  

While there are many proposed changes, residents mostly commented on changes related to accessory dwelling units, the city’s definition of a household, off-street parking requirements for ADUs or lack thereof and owner occupancy requirements.  

Many have expressed opposition for CodeNext as they claim it will increase density, allow absentee ADU ownership and negatively impact homeowners' rights and properties.  

“At 561 pages, CodeNext is a mismatch of incomplete sentences, contradictions, violations of property rights, turns the city ever more over to developers, increases density, and deliberately and apparently with malice aforethought upends single-family zoning to no good purpose,” resident C. Ann Dickerson said.  

However, those in support of CodeNext feel it will benefit the future of Englewood by providing affordable housing, addressing the needs of the diverse family structures within the city and boosting the city’s economy.  

Colleen Nebel, chair of Innovative Housing Concepts, the former Englewood Housing Authority, presented a letter of support for CodeNext on behalf of the organization  to the council. 

“With the increased cost of rent and decreasing number of afforadable housing units the board would like to encourage city council to adopt polices and regulations promoting the development of affordable housing at lower area medium incomes," Nebel said. 

She said Innovative Housing Concepts supports many of the proposed changes in CodeNext specifically regarding ADUs, parking and lot sizes. 

"The adoption of these strategies are critical to the creation of afforadable housing for everyone in the city of Englewood," Nebel said. "The board of commissioners of IHS supports the adoption of the changes to Title 16 and looks forward to working collaboratively with the city of Englewood to address the affordable housing crisis in our community."

If passed, CodeNext would allow ADUs in R1A or large lots and R1B or medium lots for the first time, as they are currently allowed in R1C or small lots and some other zones.  

 The current draft of CodeNext also states no off-street parking would be required for ADUs and up to three ADUs would be allowed in R2B, MUR3A, MUR3B, MUR3C and R2A corner and end-grain lots as long as at least two are attached to the main dwelling structure.  

 Many in opposition to CodeNext feel the lack of a parking requirement and the increase of ADUs on properties will create issues with traffic, increase density and grow short-term housing.  

“Short-term housing will probably explode. The clientele might not be great and it might be in your backyard and if not in your backyard, it might be in your neighbors',” resident Steven Kelly said. “Englewood zoning has been residential, with CodeNext it’s going to be moving toward commercial and this will impact the feel of the community.”  

 However, those in support of ADUs, such as resident Ariel Taylor, feel they will combat the housing crisis currently taking place in the region as they allow for accessible housing, which can contribute to the city’s sales tax.  

“Additionally, I’ve heard some of my neighbors decry ADUs because they see the building of additional housing as a threat to their property rights,” Taylor said. “However, what about the rights of those of us who would like to build ADUs on our properties? Are our rights not to be considered?”  

 CodeNext would require owner occupancy of the property the ADU sits on, and it would sunset after 10 years. This was an amendment added to the draft by the Planning and Zoning Commission in a meeting on July 25.  

Many residents, such as Taylor, feel the owner occupancy requirement should be removed as it would make it difficult for people to acquire funding for ADUs on their properties.  

Additionally, the commission added an amendment that would change the city’s definition of a household from two people to four unrelated adults.  

Residents both in support and opposition of CodeNext critiqued this definition at the public hearing. 

 Resident and minister Tim Nichols shared his support for ADUs because he feels they allow homeowners who want to offer help to their neighbors to do so. He expressed frustration with the current code, which makes it illegal for multiple unrelated people to live in a home together. Nichols feels the proposed definition of a household of four unrelated people would still prevent people from being able to open their homes or adjust their properties to help others.  

 “It’s not the job of city government to get in the way of ordinary people doing ordinary things with their property,” Nichols said. “One of the ways as a government that you lose legitimacy is when good people want to do good things and you are in the way. What will happen is they will ignore you anyway, but you don’t want to be in that position, and you shouldn’t be.”  

 Many in opposition to CodeNext also questioned the urgency of moving this project forward and encouraged the council to postpone its vote until after the recall election of three members on Oct. 3 and the general election on Nov. 7.  

 “I really feel that with the recall going on and the discontent with the residents that we have it would be a real valuble thing to hold of until all of this is over and let the residents have their peace and give justification where it belongs and allow what the residents want to happen to happen,” resident Barb Chumley said.  

 The council is scheduled to vote on CodeNext in a meeting Tuesday, Sept. 5.