Brandon Leuallen, The Business Times 

Two proposed zoning and development code changes are headed to the Grand Junction City Council for their first reading after the Planning Commission recommended their approval. The amendments are intended to reduce development costs and address implementation challenges identified following the city’s comprehensive zoning-code rewrite during the planning commission’s June 23 meeting.

The proposals, both recommended by the Housing Affordability Code Task Force, would reduce bicycle-parking requirements for many developments and delay implementation of a certified irrigation-designer requirement until 2029. 

Bicycle-parking requirements

The most extensive discussion during the meeting centered on proposed changes to bicycle-parking requirements adopted as part of the city’s 2023 zoning and development code.

Tim Lehrbach, the city’s zoning supervisor, explained that Grand Junction’s previous code required relatively little bicycle parking. The updated code, which became effective in 2024, significantly expanded those requirements by creating separate short-term and long-term bicycle-parking standards while adding detailed location and design requirements.  

The Housing Affordability Code Task Force argued those newer requirements increased development costs, reduced site-design flexibility and required bicycle-parking infrastructure that was often underutilized, such as at a car wash.

Task force members also argued the regulations had become too much of a one-size-fits-all approach by requiring bicycle parking for developments where demand was expected to be minimal. They contended developers should determine how much bicycle parking to provide based on market demand rather than uniform code requirements.

The proposed amendment would reduce required bicycle parking: eliminate minimum requirements for many land uses; combine short-term and long-term parking into a single standard; and simplify location and design requirements while retaining minimum bicycle-parking requirements for several commercial and residential uses.  

Lehrbach said staff believed the proposal struck an appropriate balance.

“The proposed amendment strikes a balance to pursue housing-production imperatives without precluding continual advancement of multimodal goals,” he said.

Commissioners then spent nearly an hour debating whether that balance had been achieved.

Commissioner Robert Quintero asked whether developers will still be allowed to install more bicycle parking than required under the code.

Lehrbach said the proposal establishes minimum requirements, not maximums.

Mark Austin, a member of the Housing Affordability Code Task Force and owner of Austin Civil Group, argued that one of the biggest concerns involved long-term bicycle-storage requirements.

“The bike lockers at the rec center, each one of those installed is $4,500,” Austin said.

Not all commissioners agreed.

Commissioner Ian Thomas argued that bicycles remain an important transportation option for many residents, especially for low-income citizens.

“It’s very expensive being poor,” Thomas said while discussing transportation costs.

Later in the discussion, he added, “Affordable housing is not affordable if it’s only accessible by car.”

Other commissioners viewed the issue differently.

Commissioner Robert Quintero said the amendment represented one of many incremental changes intended to reduce development costs.

“It’s not going to cure the housing-affordability crisis,” Quintero said. “But it’s a chain of events that do help with easing the burden. You drop three grand here, $500 there, $1,000, $10,000. It all adds up. So, the death by a thousand cuts can be stopped by a thousand Band-Aids.”

He also emphasized that developers would remain free to exceed the minimum requirements.

“It gives them flexibility,” Quintero said. “At the end of the day, I think that provides the public with better options, and it allows better usage of funds.”

Austin argued the proposal would not eliminate short-term bicycle-parking requirements for all uses. He said most public-facing uses, including restaurants, offices, personal services, recreation and entertainment, retail businesses and multi-unit housing, would still be required to provide bicycle parking, though at reduced levels.

Commissioner Keith Ehlers said he believed the discussion had become unnecessarily polarized.

“I tend to reject just the binary decision of you’re either for bikes or you’re against bikes,” Ehlers said.

Instead, he described the amendment as an effort to rebalance regulations.

“This proposal does lean back into a balance,” he said.

Commissioner Orin Zyvan disagreed, saying he believed the proposal overlooked residents who rely on bicycles, because they have few other transportation options.

“It comes down to perspective,” Zyvan said. “If you look at it from the perspective of people who don’t have that luxury, then having it as an integrated part of our community makes a huge difference.”

He concluded, “I can’t feel comfortable moving forward with this as it stands.”

Commissioners briefly considered an amendment proposed by Thomas that would have required at least two bicycle parking spaces for additional nonresidential uses not covered by the proposal. Thomas said he was concerned the city could be missing opportunities by eliminating minimum requirements altogether, noting some businesses, such as car washes or storage facilities, might unexpectedly see bicycle traffic if racks were available. 

The amendment failed.

The Planning Commission then voted 4-3 to recommend approval of the proposal as originally written before forwarding it to City Council.

Irrigation certification

Commissioners spent considerably less time discussing the second amendment, which would postpone a requirement that irrigation plans be prepared by Certified Irrigation Designers or professionals holding similar EPA WaterSense certifications.

The certification requirement was adopted as part of earlier water-conservation measures, but it was intentionally delayed because relatively few certified professionals were available locally.

Lehrbach told commissioners the situation has changed little.

Staff and the Housing Affordability Code Task Force expressed concern that allowing the requirement to take effect now could delay development projects simply because applicants would struggle to find qualified professionals to prepare the required irrigation plans.

The amendment would extend the deadline until Jan. 1, 2029, providing additional time for more professionals to obtain the required certifications.  

Commissioners recommended approval.