HomeMy WebLinkAbout2015-11-16 (Regular) Meeting Agenda Packet.tp. EflQlewood AGENDA
1000 Englewood Pkwy -Council Chambers
Englewood, CO 80110
Regular City Council Meeting
Monday, Nov . 16, 2015 •7:30 p.m.
1. Call to Order.
2. Invocation.
3. Pledge of Allegiance.
4 . Roll Call .
5. Consideration of Minutes of Previous Session .
a . Minutes from the Regular City Council Meeting of Nov. 2, 2015.
b. City Council Recognition and Swearing In.
i. The Mayor will ask the City Clerk to announce the status of the election .
ii. City Council will make a determination of the election and qualifications of its
membership .
iii. Comments and recognition of families and/or guests by the departing members of
City Council.
iv . The newly-elected/re-elected City Council Members will be sworn in by the
Honorable Judge Vincent Atencio .
v. Brief Reception .
vi. Members of City Council are seated (in temporary spaces) and the Mayor Pro Tern
asks the City Clerk to call the roll of City Council Members . The Mayor Pro Tern will
then declare whether a quorum is present.
vii. The Mayor Pro Tern calls for nominations for Mayor.
viii. The Mayor assumes the Chair and calls for nominations for Mayor Pro Tern.
ix. Permanent seating assignments are selected by seniority.
x. Recognition of families and/or guests of the newly-elected/re-elected Members of
City Council.
6. Recognition of Scheduled Public Comment. The deadline to sign up to speak for Scheduled Public
Comment is Wednesday, prior to the meeting , through the City Manager's Office . Only those who meet
Please note : If you have a disability and need auxiliary aids or services, please notify the City of
Englewood (303-762-2405) at least 48 hours in advance of when services are needed .
Englewood City Council Agenda
Nover;nber 16, 2015
Page 2
the deadline can speak in this section . (This is an opportunity for the public to address City Council. There
is an expectation that the presentation will be conducted in a respectful manner. Council may ask
questions for clarification , but there will not be any dialogue . Please limit your presentat ion to five
minutes .)
a . Doug Cohn , Englewood resident, will address Council regarding historic preservation .
7. Recognition of Unscheduled Public Comment. Speakers must sign up for Unscheduled Public
Comment at the beginning of the meeting . (This is an opportunity for the publ ic to address City Council.
There is an expectation that the presentation will be conducted in a respectful manner. Council may ask
questions for clarification , but there will not be any dialogue . Please limit your presentation to three
minutes . Time for unscheduled public comment may be lim ited to 45 minutes , and if limited, shall be
continued to General Discussion .)
Council Response to Public Comment.
8. Communications, Proclamations, and Appointments .
9 . Consent Agenda Items
a . Approval of Ordinances on First Reading .
b . Approval of Ordinances on Second Reading .
i. Council Bill 56 -An Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA) with the Arapahoe County
Department of Human Services (OHS) to provide for a cooperative working relationship
between law enforcement and child protection agencies in Arapahoe County to protect
endangered children. Staff: Deputy Chief Jeff Sanchez
c . Resolutions and Motions.
10. Public Hearing Items .
a . A Public Hearing concerning the appeal of case 2015-09 4635 S. Pearl Street -Urban
Lot Development. Staff: Planner II Brook Bell
11 . Ordinances, Resolutions and Motions .
a . Approval of Ordinances on First Reading .
i. Council Bill 59 -Community Development Department recommends Council approve a
bill for an ordinance approving a six-month extension on the marijuana social club
moratorium. Staff: Interim Community Development Director Michael Flaherty
b . Approval of Ordinances on Second Reading .
i. Council Bill 57 -A new Official Corporate City Seal , by adding the recently approved
logo . Staff: City Clerk Lou Ellis
c. Resolutions and Motions .
Please note : If you have a disability and need auxiliary aids or services , please notify the City of
Englewood (303-762-2405) at least 48 hours in advance of when services are needed .
Englewood City Council Agenda
November 16 , 2015
Page 3
i. City Manager's Office recommends Council approve a resolution approving the
extension of the agreement with the Humane Society of South Platte Valley for
continuation of animal sheltering services . Staff: Deputy City Manager Michael
Flaherty
12 . General Discussion.
a. Mayor's Choice.
b. Council Members ' Choice .
i. A resolution authorizing funding for local non-profits in 2016 .
ii. Council Bill 58 -Amending , on second reading, Title 6, Chapter 1, Section 8, of the
Englewood Municipal Code 2000 adopting smoking prohibitions, state standards , further
defining public buildings and unifying the definition of tobacco throughout the code .
iii. A resolution increasing the City Manager's salary by 3% and a one-time $3 ,000 bonus.
13 . City Manager's Report .
14. City Attorney 's Report .
a. Appointing Martin Semple as Special Counsel under Section 67 of the Home Rule
Charter to advise City Council concerning matters subject to Section 67 .
15 . Adjournment.
Please note : If you have a disability and need auxiliary aids or services, please notify the City of
Englewood (303-762-2405) at least 48 hours in advance of when services are needed.
Arapahoe -Election Results Page 1 of 15
I Statewide Resu lts I Results by County I Choose Language
Arapahoe County Election Results
Matt C r ane. Clerk a nd Recorder
All Registered Voters: 386 ,304 Ballots Cast: 116,279 Voter Turnout: 30.10%
NTY RESULTS
NOVEMBER 3, 2015 COORDINATED ELECTION
USER'S GUIDE
CO LORADO'S ELECTION NIGHT REPORTING SYSTEM AGGREGATES RESUL TS FOR STATEWID E CONTESTS ONLY -IT DOES NO T AGGREGATE RESULTS FOR BALLOT CONTESTS
REFERRED BY OTHER POLITICAL SUBDIVISIONS OR DISTR ICTS. EVEN IF THE CONTEST IN QUESTION APPEARS ON THE BALLOT IN MORE THAN ONE COUNTY. TO DETERM INE
AGGREGATE D RESULTS FOR PARTICIPATING POLITICAL SUBDIVISIONS THAT ARE SHARED BY MORE THAN ONE COUNTY, USERS MUST VIEW THE INDIVIDUAL COUNTY RESULTS
PAGES AND COMBINE TH E RESU LTS FOR TH E SHARED CON TEST. TO V IEW A CO MP LETE LIST OF SHARED BALLOT CO NTESTS IN THE 2015 COO RD INATED ELEC TI ON, CLICK HERE.
Customize My Search (57 of 57)
Choice Votes Percent
Steph en D. Hog an 37,720 100.00%
Tota l 37 ,720
------· -----·-·-----· ------------------------------
Choice Votes Percent
Debi Hunter Hole n 17,022 25 .11%
Ange la Lawson 19 ,351 28 .55%
Bo b LeGare 19.052 28.1 1%
Maya Wh ee le r 12,353 18.23%
Tota l 67,778
-----···------·---
http://results.enr.clarityelections.com/CO/Arapahoe/56802/157112/WebOl/en/summary.h... 11/16/2015
Arapahoe -Election Results Page 3of15
Choice Votes Percen t
Carrie Penaloza 4 ,130 100.00%
Total 4 ,130
Choice Votes Percent
Ken Lucas 4 ,3 11 70 .96%
Joan Lopez 1,764 29 .04%
Total 6,075
Choice Votes Percent
Stephanie Piko 4,495 100.00%
Total 4,495
Choice Votes Percent
Amy Martinez 2.554 28.43%
Rita Russell 3,066 34 .13 %
Amber Jorgensen 1,375 15.31%
Danielle M. Holley 1.987 22 .12%
Total 8 ,9 82
Choice Votes Percent
Joe Jefferson 954 100 .00%
Total 954
--··--------------·-----·----·-----· -----
http://results.enr.clarityelections.com/CO/Arapahoe/56802/157112/WebOl/en/summary.h... 11116/2015
Arapahoe -Election Results Page 4of15
Choice Votes Percent
Lew is Fowler 544 37.18%
Lauren Barrentine 668 45.66%
John Grazu lis 251 17 .16%
Total 1,4 63
Choice Votes Percent
Ron Rakowsky 3,750 100.00%
Total 3,750
Choice Votes Percent
Lu ke Towle 542 19.84%
Dav e Bullock 707 25 .88%
Henny Lasley 656 24 .0 1%
Freda Miklin 827 30.27%
Total 2,732
Choice Votes Percent
Le slie Schluter 584 53.19%
Darryl Jones 514 46 .81%
Total 1,098
http://results .enr.clarityelections.com/CO/Arapahoe/56802/157112/WebOl/en/summary.h... 11116/2015
Arapahoe -Election Results
Ch o ice
Yes
No
Total
Choice
Yes
No
Total
Choice
Yes
No
Total
Choice
Yes
No
Total
Votes
2,950
2,682
5,632
Votes
3,254
2,193
5,447
Votes
6 ,862
2,478
9,340
V otes
6,396
2,628
9 ,024
Page 11 of 15
Percent
52.38%
47.62%
Percent
59 .74%
40.26%
Percent
73.47%
26.53%
Percent
70.88%
29.12%
http://results.enr.clarityelections.com/CO/ Arapahoe/56802/157112/WebO 1/en/summary.h... 11/16/2015
Agenda Item 5 (b) (i)
City Clerk to announce the status of the Election.
Based on the Official Election Results provided by Arapahoe County,
the newly elected Council Members are:
District 1 Council Member Joe Jefferson
District 3 Council Member Laurett Barrentine
At-Large Council Member Rita Russell
At-Large Council Member Amy Martinez
Finance/City Clerk/Council/el2015 council's first meeting notes
•
•
•
COUNCIL COMMUNICATION
Meeting Date: Agenda Item: Subject:
November 16, 2015 9bi Arapahoe County OHS -
Endangered Children
Cooperative Agreement IGA-
2nd Reading
Initiated By: Staff Source:
Police Department Commander Tim Englert
PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION
N/A
RECOMMENDED ACTION
The Police Department is recommending that City Council adopt, on second reading, a bill for
an ordinance which will authorize the Chief of Police to sign an Intergovernmental Agreement
(IGA) with the Arapahoe County Department of Human Services (OHS) to provide for a
cooperative working relationship between law enforcement and child protection agencies in
Arapahoe County to protect endangered children .
BACKGROUND, ANALYSIS, AND ALTERNATIVES IDENTIFIED
The purpose of this agreement is provide a cooperative working relationship between law
enforcement and child protection agencies in Arapahoe County to protect endangered children .
Colorado Revised Statute requires incidents of known or suspected child abuse or neglect be
reported to Human Services or the local law enforcement agency .
Referrals and cooperation between law enforcement agencies and Human Services are
necessary to ensure prompt action, protection of the child, and actions as required by law.
State law requires Arapahoe County DHS to enter into cooperative agreements with local law
enforcement agencies to coordinate the duties of each agency in connection with the
investigation of all child abuse or neglect cases .
FINANCIAL IMPACT
There are no monetary or funding impacts associated with this IGA.
LIST OF ATTACHMENTS
Arapahoe County OHS -MOU Cooperative Agreement
•
•
•
ORDINANCE NO.
SERIES OF 2015
BY AUTHORITY
COUNCIL BILL NO. 56
INTRODUCED BY COUNCIL
MEMBER OLSON
AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING A MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING 2015 -2019
BETWEEN ARAPAHOE COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES DIVISION OF
CHILDREN, YOUTH AND FAMILY SERVICES AND ARAPAHOE COUNTY SHERIFF'S
OFFICE, ARAPAHOE COMMUNITY COLLEGE CAMPUS POLICE DEPARTMENT, AURORA
POLICE DEPARTMENT, TOWN OF BOW MAR POLICE DEPARTMENT, CHERRY HILLS
VILLAGE POLICE DEPARTMENT, GLENDALE POLICE DEPARTMENT, COLUMBINE
VALLEY POLICE DEPARTMENT, GREENWOOD VILLAGE POLICE DEPARTMENT,
LITTLETON POLICE DEPARTMENT, SHERIDAN POLICE DEPARTMENT AND THE
ENGLEWOOD POLICE DEPARTMENT TO PROVIDE A COOPERATIVE WORKING
RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN LAW ENFORCEMENT AND CHILD PROTECTION AGENCIES
IN ARAPAHOE COUNTY TO PROTECT ENDANGERED CHILDREN.
WHEREAS, Colorado Revised Statute §19-3-304 and §19-3-307 require that incidents of
known or suspected child abuse or neglect be reported to the Human Services or local law
enforcement agency; and requires incidents of known or suspected child abuse or neglect be
reported to Human Services or the local law enforcement agency; and
WHEREAS, abuse and neglect are community problems requiring cooperation and
complementary responses by law enforcement and child protection agencies to protect
endangered children; and
WHEREAS, referrals and cooperation between law enforcement agencies and Human
Services are necessary to assure prompt action, protection of the child; and
WHEREAS, Colorado Revised Statute§ 19-3-308(5.5) declares that the Colorado legislature
intends that County Department of Human Services enter into cooperative agreements with law
enforcement agencies to coordinate the duties of each agency in connection with the
investigation of all child abuse or neglect cases; and
WHEREAS, the passage of this Ordinance authorizes an Memorandum of Understanding 2015-
2019 between Arapahoe County Department of Human Services Division of Children, Youth and
Family Services and Arapahoe County Sheriffs Office, Aurora Police Department, Town of Bow
Mar Police Department, Cherry Hills Village Police Department, Glendale Police Department,
Columbine Valley Police Department, Greenwood Village Police Department, Littleton Police
Department, Sheridan Police Department and the Englewood Police Department to provide a
cooperative working relationship between law enforcement and child protection agencies in
Arapahoe County to protect endangered children to coordinate the duties of each agency in
connection with the investigation of all child abuse or neglect cases .
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ENGLEWOOD, COLORADO, AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. The City Council of the City of Englewood, Colorado hereby authorizes a
Memorandum of Understanding 2015-2019 between Arapahoe County Department of Human
Services Division of Children, Youth and Family Services and Arapahoe County Sheriff's Office,
Aurora Police Department, Town of Bow Mar Police Department, Cherry Hills Village Police
Department, Glendale Police Department, Columbine Valley Police Department, Greenwood Village
Police Department, Littleton Police Department, Sheridan Police Department and the Englewood
Police Department to provide a cooperative working relationship between law enforcement and child
protection agencies in Arapahoe County to protect endangered children to coordinate the duties of
each agency in connection with the investigation of all child abuse or neglect cases, attached hereto
as Exhibit A.
Section 2. The Chief of Police of the City of Englewood is hereby authorized to sign said
Memorandum of Understanding 2015-2019 for and on behalf of the City of Englewood.
Introduced, read in full , and passed on first reading on the 2nd day of November, 2015 .
Published by Title as a Bill for an Ordinance in the City's official newspaper on the 5th day of
November, 2015.
Published as a Bill for an Ordinance on the City's official website beginning on the 4th day of
November, 2015 for thirty (30) days.
Read by title and passed on final reading on the 16th day of November, 2015.
Published by title in the City 's official newspaper as Ordinance No ._, Series of 2015 , on
the day of 19th, 2015 .
Published by title on the City's official website beginning on the 18th day of
November, 2015 for thirty (30) days.
ATTEST:
Loucrishia A. Ellis , City Clerk
,Mayor
I, Loucrishia A. Ellis, City Clerk of the City of Englewood, Colorado, hereby certify that the
above and foregoing is a true copy of the Ordinance passed on final reading and published by
title as Ordinance No._, Series of 2015 .
Loucrishia A. Ellis
•
•
•
•
•
•
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING
2015-2019
COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT
BETWEEN
ARAPAHOE COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES
DIVISION OF CHILDREN, YOUTH AND FAMILY SERVICES
AND
ARAPAHOE COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE
ARAPAHOE COMMUNITY COLLEGE CAMPUS POLICE DEPARTMENT
AURORA POLICE DEPARTMENT
TOWN OF BOW MAR POLICE DEPARTMENT
CHERRY HILLS VILLAGE POLICE DEPARTMENT
ENGLEWOOD POLICE DEPARTMENT
GLENDALE POLICE DEPARTMENT
COLUMBINE VALLEY POLICE DEPARTMENT
GREENWOOD VILLAGE POLICE DEPARTMENT
LITTLETON POLICE DEPARTMENT
SHERIDAN POLICE DEPARTMENT
THIS AGREEMENT, is entered into this 151 day of July, 2015, by and between the Arapahoe
County Department of Human Services Division of Children, Youth and Family Services,
hereinafter referred to as "Human Services" and Arapahoe County Sherifrs Office, Arapahoe
Community College Campus Police Department, Aurora Police Department, Town of Bow Mar
Police Department, Cherry Hills Police Department, Englewood Police Department, Glendale
Police Department, Columbine Valley Police Department, Greenwood Village police Department,
Littleton Police Department and Sheridan Police Department, hereinafter collectively referred to
as "Law Enforcement Agencies". The Human Services and Law Enforment Agencies constitute
"the Parties" as referenced hereinafter in this agreement.
WHEREAS, abuse and neglect are community problems requiring cooperation and
complementary responses by law enforcement and child protection agencies to protect endangered
children; and
WHEREAS, C.R.S § 19-3-304and§19-3-307 require that incidents of known or suspected child
abuse or neglect be reported to the Human Services or local Law Enforcement Agency; and
WHEREAS, referrals and cooperation between Law Enforcement Agency and Human Services
are necessary to assure prompt action, protection of the child, and actions as required by Jaw; and
WHEREAS, C.R.S. § 19-3-308(5 .5) declares that the State legislature intends that county
departments of human services enter into cooperative agreements with law enforcement agencies
E x
H
I
B
I
T
to coordinate the duties of each agency in connection with the investigation of all child abuse or
neglect cases.
NOW, THEREFORE , the parties herein agree as follows:
I. RESPONSIBILITIES OF HUMAN SERVICES AND LAW ENFORCEMENT
AGENCIES
A. Human Services will notify the appropriate Law Enforcement Agency of reports of
known or suspected child abuse or neglect, and provide copies of the report to the
respective Law Enforcement Agencies, as required by C.R.S. § 19-3-307(3 ).
B. Law Enforcement Agencies will notify Child Protection Services of the Arapahoe
County Department of Human Services of any report of known or suspected
intrafamilial child abuse or neglect received by such Law Enforcement Agencies. Such
notice will be provided even where the Law Enforcement Agency will be the only entity
conducting an investigation.
C. If the incident involves the death of a child, Law Enforcement Agencies shall notify
Human Services immediately regardless of the cause of death.
D. Once each appropriate Law Enforcement Agency and Child Protection Services of
Human Services have been notified of a particular case of known or suspected child abuse
or neglect, the methods of investigation and the priority of the case shall be mutually
determined on a case-by-case basis.Joint investigations shall be conducted to the extent
possible and deemed appropriate. Human Services shall coordinate the investigations of
all incidents of known or suspected intrafamilial child abuse/neglect and institutional
abuse/neglect.
E. Cases deemed appropriate for joint investigation between Child Protection Services
"CPS" of Human Services and the Law Enforcement Agency shall include, but are not
limited to, the following:
1. Death of a child;
2. Physical abuse or the risk thereof;
3. Familial and quasi-familial sexual abuse (by parents, guradian, stepparent,
boyfriend, girlfriend, and other persons who reside in the child's home);
4. Environmental neglect;
5. Possibility of need for placement or protective custody;
6. Suspected danger to caseworkers/investigators from threatening,
belligerent adults;
7. Nonfamilial sexual abuse when alleged perpetrator has children under 18 or
there are protective issues for suspected victims;
8. When it appears that the suspected perpetrator may flee;
9. When parent refuses access to the children by CPS or refuses medical
examination of the children;
•
•
•
•
•
•
IO. Physical or sexual abuse and/or neglect in such institutional settings such
as a foster home, group home, day care home, residential child care facility or
institution;
11. Conditions suggesting the need for an arrest or the issuance of a summons and
complaint;
12. Drug exposed infants;
13. Any case in which, in the prescence of a child, or on the premise where a child
is found, or where a child resides, a controlled substance, is manufactured or
attempted to be manufactured; or,
14. Any known or suspected child abuse/neglect or a crime has occurred as a
result.
F. Cases deemed appropriate for investigation solely by Child Protection Services of
Human Services shall include, but are not limited to, the following:
1. Mild physical abuse;
2. Fetal Alcohol Syndrome;
3. Medical neglect (failure to provide medically indicated treatment to
disabled children with life threatening conditions);
4. Third party abuse or neglect when alleged perpetrator under age 1 O;
5. Educational neglect;or,
6. Emotional abuse.
G. Cases deemed appropriate for investigations soley by law enforcement shall include,
but are not limited to, the following:
l. Third party abuse or neglect when alleged perpetrator is over the age l 0. Third
party includes, but is not limited to babysitters, nannies, teachers, school personnel,
neighbors, etc.
H. Law Enforcement Agencies shall promptly provide Human Services with all written
reports of third party investigations.
I. The undersigned agencies agree to adopt specific procedures and protocol for the
purpose of implementing the tenns of this cooperative agreement, i.e. coordinate with
school districts if necessary.
J. Human Services shall be responsible for ensuring that all parents and families from
whom children are removed under court order or by Law Enforcement Agency personnel
are provided with a copy of The Notice of Rights and Remedies (attached) at the time of
the child's removal.
K. Human Services and Law Enforcement Agencies understand the need to share
information, records and reports when investigating known or suspected incidents of child
abuse or neglect.
L. This Agreement shall be effective from July 1, 2015 and shall expire on June 30, 2019.
The Parties will renew this Agreement every four years. This Agreement may be modified
or amended only by a duly authorized written instrument executed by the parties hereto.
Human Services will modify or amend the Agreement as needed to ensure compliance with
revisions made to Section 7.601.2A during the current contract tenn. Human Services will
provide the Colorado Department of Human Services with a copy of the signed
cooperative agreement with Law Enforcement Agencies within thirty (30) days of
signature.
II. USE OF CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION
A. The Law Enforcement Agency acknowledges and agrees that the Law Enforcement
Agency shall not at any time, during or after the tenn of this Agreement with the County,
purposely access, use, reveal or disclose Patient Health Information ("PHI") to any persons
outside of the Law Enforcement Agency, or the Law Enforcement Agency 's employees,
except as may be required in the course of providing the services under the terms of this
Agreement, or as required by federal, state or local law.
B. The Law Enforcement Agency shall take reasonable steps to insure that the employees
of the Law Enforcement Agency comply with the provisions of this Section II, and the
various Federal and State laws regulating the disclosure of PHI.
C. This PHI is subject to protection under state and federal law, including the Health
Insurance and Portability and Accountability Act of 1996, Public Law 104-191
("HIPAA"). The Law Enforcement Agency specifically agrees to safeguard and protect
the confidentiality of PHI consistent with applicable law, including currently effective
provisions of HIPAA and the Regulations. The attached HIPAA Business Associate
Addendum and Attachment A are both incorporated herein and made a part of this
agreement.
III. MISCELLANEOUS
A. Responsibility for Liability: Each party agrees to be responsible for all liability, losses,
damages, claims, or causes of action, and related expenses, (including determinations
related to utilization review), which result from its acts or omissions, and those of its
directors, employees or agents or representatives arising from their duties and obligations
under this contract.
B. Governmental Immunitv. All activities performed under this Agreement are hereby
declared to be governmental functions. The parties to this Agreement, and their personnel
complying with or reasonably attempting to comply with this Agreement or any ordinance,
order, rule, or regulation enacted or promulgated pursuant to the provisions of this
Agreement shall be deemed to be operating within the scope of their duties and
responsibilities and in furtherance of said governmental functions.
C. No Waiver Under CGIA. Nothing in this Agreement shall be construed as a waiver by
either party of the protections afforded them pursuant to the Colorado Governmental
Immunity Act, Sections 24-10-101, et seq., C.R.S. ("CGIA") as same may be amended
•
•
•
•
•
•
from time to time. Specifically, neither party waives the monetary limitations or any other
rights, immunities or protections afforded by the COIA or otherwise available at law. If
any waiver by the Law Enforcement Agency results in a waiver of protections afforded to
the County, the Law Enforcement Agency, to the extent allowed by law, shall indemnify
and hold hannless the County for such actions. If any waiver by the County results in a
waiver of the protections afforded to the Law Enforcement Agency, the County shall, to
the extent allowed by law, indemnify and hold harmless the Law Enforcement Agency for
such actions.
D. Background Checks. The Law Enforcement Agency [8J shall D shall not conduct, or
cause to be conducted, criminal background checks of at least a seven year period on all of
its employees, agents or subcontractors who may, while performing work under this
Agreement, come into contact with persons receiving services by or from the County. If
the Law Enforcement Agency is required to conduct, or cause to be conducted, background
checks pursuant to this paragraph, any of the Law Enforcement Agency's employees,
agents or subcontractors with a record indicating felony violations, questionable character
or possible security risk shall not be placed in any work activity under this Agreement that
may result in contact with persons receiving services by or from the County.
E. Severability. In the event that any of the provisions of this Agreement shall be held to
be invalid or unenforceable, the remaining provisions shall nevertheless continue to be
valid and enforceable as though the invalid or unenforceable parts had not been included
therein .
F. Entire Agreement. This Agreement constitutes the entire agreement and understanding
between the parties and supersedes any prior agreement or understanding relating to the
subject matter of this Agreement.
G. Survival. The rights and obligations of the parties shall survive the term of this
Agreement to the extent that any performance is required under this Agreement after the
expiration or termination of this Agreement.
H. Notices. Any notice to be given hereunder by any party to another party may be
effected in writing by personal delivery, or by mail, certified with postage prepaid, or by
overnight delivery service. Notices sent by mail or by an overnight delivery service shall
be addressed to the parties at the addresses appearing following their signatures below, but
either party may change its address by written notice in accordance with this paragraph.
I. Governing Law. This Agreement shall be governed by and interpreted in accordance
with the laws of the State of Colorado without regard to the conflict oflaws of such State.
J. Good Faith. The parties agree to work together in good faith in performing their
obligations hereunder.
Q. Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in counterparts .
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused this Cooperative Agreement Memorandum
of Understanding to be executed by its duly authorized representative as of July 1, 2015 .
SIGNED BY:
Director Cheryl Ternes
Arapahoe County Department of Human Services
14980 E. Alameda Drive
Aurora, CO 80012
Sheriff David C. Walcher
Arapahoe County Sheriffs Office
13101 Broncos Parkway
Centennial, CO 80112
Chief Joseph Morris
Arapahoe Community College Campus Police Department
5900 S. Santa Fe Drive M2600
Littleton, CO 80120
Chief Nick Metz
Aurora Police Department
15001 E. Alameda Pkwy
Aurora, CO 80012
Chief Bret Cottrell
Town of Bow Mar Police Department
2 South Middlefield Road
Columbine Valley, CO 80123
Chief Michelle Tovrea
Cherry Hills Village Police Department
2450 E. Quincy A venue
Cherry Hills Village, CO 80113
Date
Date
Date
Date
Date
Date
•
•
•
•
Chief Brett Cottrell
Columbine Valley Police Department
2 South Middlefield Road
Columbine Valley, CO 80123
Chief John Collins
Englewood Police Department
3615 South Elati Street
Englewood, CO 80110
Chief W.J. Haskins
Glendale Police Department
950 South Birch Street
• Glendale, CO 80246
•
Chief John Jackson
Greenwood Village Police Department
6060 South Quebec Street
Greenwood Village, CO 80111
Chief Doug Stephens
Littleton Police Department
2255 West Berry Avenue
Littleton, CO 80120
Chief Mark Campbell
Sheridan Police Department
4101 South Federal Blvd.
Sheridan, CO 80110
Date
Date
... '.
Date
Date
Date
Date
IDPAA BUSINESS ASSOCIATE ADDENDUM
The parties to this Business Associate Addendum are the County (hereinafter referred to
as the "County", "Covered Entity" or "CE") and the Contractor (hereinafter referred to as the
"Contractor" or "Associate"). This Addendum takes effect along with the Agreement or at the
time of the compliance date of the Privacy Rule as defined below, whichever first occurs (the
"Addendum Effective Date").
RECITALS
A. Associate entered into the Agreement with CE and, as a contractor for CE, has access to
certain information, some of which may constitute Protected Health Information ("PHI")
as defined below.
B. CE wishes to disclose certain information to Associate pursuant to the terms of the
Agreement, some of which may constitute PHI.
C. As a contractor with access to PHI, Associate is subject to obligations with respect to PHI
under HIP AA in the same manner as CE.
a. CE and Associate intend to protect the privacy and provide for the security of PHI
disclosed to Associate pursuant to the Agreement in compliance with the Health
Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996, 42 U .S .C. § l 320d -3 l 20d-8
("HIPAA") and its implementing regulations thereunder by the U.S . Department of
Health and Human Services (the "Privacy Rule") and other applicable laws, as amended.
C. As part of the HIP AA regulations, the Privacy Rule requires CE to enter into a contract
containing specific requirements with Associate prior to the disclosure of PHI, as set
forth in, but not limited to, Title 45, Sections 160.103, 164.502(e) and 164.504(e) of the
Code of Federal Regulations C'C.F.R.") and contained in this Addendum.
The parties agree as follows:
l . Definitions.
a. Except as otherwise defined herein, capitalized terms in this Addendum shall have
the definitions set forth in the HIPAA Privacy Rule at 45 C.F.R. Parts 160 and 164, as amended.
In the event of any conflict between the mandatory provisions of the Privacy Rule and the
provisions of this Addendum, the Privacy Rule shall control. Where the provisions of this
Addendum differ from those mandated by the Privacy Rule, but are nonetheless permitted by the
Privacy Rule, the provisions of this Addendum shall control.
b. "Protected Health Information" or "PHf' means any information, whether oral or
recorded in any form or medium: (i) that relates to the past, present or future physical or mental
condition of an individual; the provision of health care to an individual; or the past, present or
future payment for the provision of health care to an individual; and (ii) that identifies the
•
•
•
•
•
•
individual or with respect to which there is a reasonable basis to believe the information can be
used to identify the individual, and shall have the meaning given to such term under the Privacy
Rule, including, but not limited to, 45 C.F.R. Section 164.501.
c. "Protected Information" shall mean PHI provided by CE to Associate or created
or received by Associate on CE's behalf. To the extent Associate is a covered entity under
HIPAA and creates or obtains its own PHI for treatment, payment and health care operations,
Protected Information under this Addendum does not include any PHI created or obtained by
Associate as a covered entity and Associate shall follow its own policies and procedures for
accounting, access and amendment of Associate's PHI.
2. Obligations of Associate.
a. Permitted Uses. Associate shall not use Protected Information except for the
purpose of performing Associate's obligations under and as permitted by the terms of this
Addendum. Further, Associate shall not use Protected Information in any manner that would
constitute a violation of the Privacy Rule if so used by CE, except that Associate may use
Protected Information: (i) for the proper management and administration of Associate; (ii) to
carry out the legal responsibilities of Associate; or (iii) for Data Aggregation purposes for the
Health Care Operations of CE. Additional provisions, if any, governing permitted uses of
Protected Information are set forth in Attachment A.
b. Permitted Disclosures. Associate shall not disclose Protected Information in any
manner that would constitute a violation of the Privacy Rule if disclosed by CE, except that
Associate may disclose Protected Information: (i) in a manner permitted pursuant to this
Adendum; (ii) for the proper management and administration of Associate; (iii) as required by
law; (iv) for Data Aggregation purposes for the Health Care Operations of CE; or (v) to report
violations of law to appropriate federal or state authorities, consistent with 45 C.F.R. Section
164.5020)(1). To the extent that Associate discloses Protected Information to a third party,
Associate must obtain, prior to making any such disclosure:(i) reasonable assurances from such
third party that such Protected Information will be held confidential as provided pursuant to this
Addendumand only disclosed as required by law or for the purposes for which it was disclosed to
such third party; and (ii) an agreement from such third party to notify Associate within two
business days of any breaches of confidentiality of the Protected Information, to the extent it has
obtained knowfedge of such breach. Additional provisions, if any, governing permitted
disclosures of Protected Information are set forth in Attachment A.
c. Appropriate Safeguards. Associate shall implement appropriate safeguards to
prevent the use or disclosure of Protected Information otherwise than as permitted by this
Addendum. Associate shall maintain a comprehensive written information privacy and security
program that includes administrative, technical and physical safeguards appropriate to the size
and complexity of the Associate' s operations and the nature and scope of its activities.
d. Reporting of Improper Use or Disclosure. Associate shall report to CE in writing
any use or disclosure of Protected Infonnation other than as provided for by this Addendum
within five (5) business days of becoming aware of such use or disclosure .
e. Associate's Agents. If Associate uses one or more subcontractors or agents to
provide services under this Addendum, and such subcontractors or agents receive or have access
to Protected Information, each subcontractor or agent shall sign an agreement with Associate
containing substantially the same provisions as this Addendum and further identifying CE as a
third party beneficiary with rights of enforcement and indemnification from such subcontractors
or agents in the event of any violation of such subcontractor or agent agreement. Associate shall
implement and maintain appropriate sanctions against agents and subcontractors that violate such
restrictions and conditions and shall mitigate the effects of any such violation.
f. Access to Protected Information. Associate shall make Protected Information
maintained by Associate or its agents or subcontractors in Designated Record Sets available to
CE for inspection and copying within ten ( 10) business days of a request by CE to enable CE to
fulfill its obligations to permit individual access to PHI under the Privacy Rule, including, but
not limited to, 45 C.F.R. Section 164.524.
g. Amendment of PHI. Within ten (10) business days of receipt of a request from
CE for an amendment of Protected Infonnation or a record about an individual contained in a
Designated Record Set, Associate or its agents or subcontractors shall make such Protected
Information available to CE for amendment and incorporate any such amendment to enable CE
to fulfill its obligations with respect to requests by individuals to amend their PHI under the
Privacy Rule, including, but not limited to, 45 C.F.R. Section 164.526. If any individual requests
an amendment of Protected Information directly from Associate or its agents or subcontractors,
Associate must notify CE in writing within five (5) business days of the receipt of the request.
h. Accounting Rights. Within ten ( 10) business days of notice by CE of a request
for an accounting of disclosures of Protected Information, Associate and its agents or
subcontractors shall make available to CE the information required to provide an accounting of
disclosures to enable CE to fulfill its obligations under the Privacy Rule, including, but not
limited to, 45 C.F.R. Section 164.528. As set forth in, and as limited by, 45 C.F.R. Section
164.528, Associate shall not provide an accounting to CE of disclosures: (i) to carry out
treatment, payment or health care operations, as set forth in 45 C.F.R. Section 164.506; (ii) to
individuals of Protected Infonnation about them as set forth in 45 C.F.R. Section 164.502; (iii)
pursuant to an authorization as provided in 45 C.F.R. Section 164.508; (iv) to persons involved
in the individual's care or other notification purposes as set forth in 45 C.F.R. Section 164.510;
(v) for national security or intelligence purposes as set forth in 45 C.F.R. Section 164.512(k)(2);
(vi) to correctional institutions or law enforcement officials as set forth in 45 C.F.R. Section
164.512(k)(5); (vii) incident to a use or disclosure otherwise permitted by the Privacy Rule; (viii)
as part of a limited data set under 45 C.F.R. Section 164.514(e); or (ix) disclosures prior to April
14, 2003. Associate agrees to implement a process that allows for an accounting to be collected
and maintained by Associate and its agents or subcontractors for at least six (6) years prior to the
request, but not before the compliance date of the Privacy Rule. At a minimum, such information
shall include: (i) the date of disclosure; (ii) the name of the entity or person who received
Protected Information and, if known, the address of the entity or person; (iii) a brief description
of Protected Information disclosed; and (iv) a brief statement of purpose of the disclosure that
reasonably informs the individual of the basis for the disclosure, or a copy of the individual's
•
•
•
•
•
•
authorization, or a copy of the written request for disclosure. In the event that the request for an
accounting is delivered directly to Associate or its agents or subcontractors, Associate shall
within five (5) business days of the receipt of the request forward it to CE in writing. It shall be
CE's responsibility to prepare and deliver any such accounting requested Associate shall not
disclose any Protected Information except as set forth in Section 2(b) of this Addendum.
i. Governmental Access to Records. Associate shall make its internal practices,
books and records relating to the use and disclosure of Protected Information available to the
Secretary of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (the "Secretary"), in a time and
manner designated by the Secretary, for purposes of determining CE's compliance with the
Privacy Rule. Associate shall also provide concurrently to CE a copy of any Protected
Information that Associate provides to the Secretary.
j. Minimum Necessary. Associate (and its agents or subcontractors) shall only
request, use and disclose the minimum amount of Protected Information necessary to accomplish
the purpose of the request, use or disclosure, in accordance with the Minimum Necessary
requirements of the Privacy Rule including, but not limited to, 45 C.F.R. Sections 164.502(b)
and 164.514(d).
k. Data Ownership. Associate acknowledges that Associate has no ownership rights
with respect to the Protected Information.
l. Retention of Protected Information. Except as provided in Section 4( e) of this
Addendum, Associate and its subcontractors or agents shall retain all Protected Information
throughout the term of this Addendum and shall continue to maintain the information required
under Section 2(h) of this Addendum for a period of six (6) years after termination of the
Contract.
m. Notification of Breach. During the term of this Addendum, Associate shall notify
CE within two business days of any suspected or actual breach of security, intrusion or
unauthorized use or disclosure of PHI and/or any actual or suspected use or disclosure of data in
violation of any applicable federal or state laws or regulations. Associate shall take (i) prompt
corrective action to cure any such deficiencies and (ii) any action pertaining to such unauthorized
disclosure required by applicable federal and state laws and regulations.
n. Audits. Inspection and Enforcement. Within ten business (10) days of a written
request by CE, Associate and its agents or subcontractors shall allow CE to conduct a reasonable
inspection of the facilities, systems, books, records, agreements, policies and procedures relating
to the use or disclosure of Protected Information pursuant to this Addendum for the purpose of
determining whether Associate has complied with this Addendum; provided, however, that: (i)
Associate and CE shall mutually agree in advance upon the scope, timing and location of such an
inspection; (ii) CE shall protect the confidentiality of all confidential and proprietary information
of Associate to which CE has access during the course of such inspection; and (iii) CE shall
execute a nondisclosure agreement, upon terms mutually agreed upon by the parties, if requested
by Associate. The fact that CE inspects, or fails to inspect, or has the right to inspect, Associate's
facilities, systems, books, records, agreements, policies and procedures does not relieve
Associate of its responsibility to comply with this Addendum, nor does CE's (i) failure to detect
or (ii) detection, but failure to notify Associate or require Associate's remediation of any
unsatisfactory practices, constitute acceptance of such practice or a waiver of CE' s enforcement
rights under this Addendum.
o. Safeguards During Transmission. Associate shall be responsible for using
appropriate safeguards to maintain and ensure the confidentiality, privacy and security of
Protected Information transmitted to CE pursuant to this Addendum, in accordance with the
standards and requirements of the Privacy Rule, until such Protected Information is received by
CE, and in accordance with any specifications set forth in Attachment A.
p. Restrictions and Confidential Communications. Within ten (10) business days of
notice by CE of a restriction upon uses or disclosures or request for confidential communications
pursuant to 45 C.F.R. 164.522, Associate will restrict the use or disclosure of an individual's
Protected Infonnation, provided Associate has agreed to such a restriction. Associate will not
respond directly to an individual's requests to restrict the use or disclosure of Protected
Infonnation or to send all communication of Protected Information to an alternate address.
Associate will refer such requests to the CE so that the CE can coordinate and prepare a timely
response to the requesting individual and provide direction to Associate.
3. Obligations of CE.
a. Safeguards During Transmission. CE shall be responsible for using appropriate
safeguards to maintain and ensure the confidentiality, privacy and security of PHI transmitted to
Associate pursuant to this Addendum, in accordance with the standards and requirements of the
Privacy Rule, until such PHI is received by Associate, and in accordance with any specifications
set forth in Attachment A.
b. Notice of Changes. CE shall provide Associate with a copy of any notices of
changes that it receives from the State pursuant to the State Addendum, including the following:
1) notice of privacy practices produced in accordance with 45 CFR Section 164.520, as well as
any subsequent changes or limitation(s) to such notice, to the extent such changes or limitations
may effect Associate's use or disclosure of Protected Infonnation; 2) Any changes in, or
revocation of, pennission to use or disclose Protected Information, to the extent it may affect
Associate's permitted or required uses or disclosures; and 3) To the extent that it may affect
Associate's permitted use or disclosure of PHI, any restriction on the use or disclosure of
Protected Information that CE has agreed to in accordance with 45 CFR Section 164.522. CE
may effectuate any and all such notices of non-private information via posting on CE's web site.
First Transit shall monitor CE's designated web site for notice of changes to CE's HIPAA
privacy policies and practices.
4. Termination.
a. Without Cause. Either of the parties shall have the right to terminate this
Addendum by giving the other party 30 days notice. If notice is given, the Addendum will
tenninate at the end of 30 days, and the liabilities of the parties hereunder for further
•
•
•
• performance of the terms of the Addendum shall thereupon cease, but the parties shall not be
released from duty to perform up to the date of termination.
•
•
b. Material Breach. In addition to any other provisions in the Agreement regarding
breach, a breach by Associate of any provision of this Addendum, as determined by CE, shall
constitute a material breach of the Agreement and this Addendum and shall provide grounds for
immediate termination of the Agreement and this Addendum by CE pursuant to the provisions of
the this Addendum and the Agreement covering termination for cause, if any. If the Agreement
contains no express provisions regarding termination for cause, the following terms and
conditions shall apply: 1) Default. If Associate refuses or fails to timely perform any of the
provisions of this Addendum or the Agreement, CE may notify Assocaite in writing of the non-
performance, and if not promptly corrected within the time specified, CE may terminate this
Addendum and the Agreement. Associate shall continue performance of this Addendum and the
Agreement to the extent it is not terminated and shall be liable for excess costs incurred in
procuring similar goods or services elsewhere, (2) Erroneous Termination for Default. If after
such termination it is determined, for any reason, that Associate was not in default, or that
Assocaite's action/inaction was excusable, such termination shall be treated as a termination for
convenience, and the rights and obligations of the parties shall be the same as if this Addendum
and the Agreement had been terminated for convenience.
c. Reasonable Steps to Cure Breach. If CE knows of a pattern of activity or practice
of Associate that constitutes a material breach or violation of the Associate's obligations under
the provisions of this Addendum or another arrangement and does not terminate this Addendum
pursuant to Section 4(a), then CE shall take reasonable steps to cure such breach or end such
violation, as applicable. If CE's efforts to cure such breach or end such violation are
unsuccessful, CE shall either (i) terminate this Addendum, if feasible or (ii) if termination of this
Addendum is not feasible, CE shall report Associate's breach or violation to the Secretary of the
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
d. Judicial or Administrative Proceedings. Either party may terminate this
Addendum, effective immediately, if (i) the other party is named as a defendant in a criminal
proceeding for a violation of HIP AA, the HIP AA Regulations or other security or privacy laws
or (ii) a finding or stipulation that the other party has violated any standard or requirement of
HIPAA, the HIPAA Regulations or other security or privacy laws is made in any administrative
or civil proceeding in which the party has been joined.
e. Effect of Termination.
( 1) Except as provided in paragraph (2) of this subsection, upon termination
of this Addendum, for any reason, Associate shall return or destroy all Protected Information that
Associate or its agents or subcontractors still maintain in any form, and shall retain no copies of
such Protected Information. If Associate elects to destroy the PHI, Associate shall certify in
writing to CE that such PHI has been destroyed.
(2) If Associate believes that returning or destroying the Protected
Information is not feasible, Associate shall promptly provide CE notice of the conditions making
return or destruction infeasible. Upon mutual agreement of CE and Associate that return or
destruction of Protected Infonnation is infeasible, Associate shall continue to extend the
protections of Sections 2(a), 2(b), 2(c), 2(d) and 2(e) of this Addendum to such information, and
shall limit further use of such PHI to those purposes that make the return or destruction of such
PHI infeasible.
5. Injunctive Relief. CE shall have the right to injunctive and other equitable and legal
relief against Associate in the event of any use or disclosure of Protected Information in violation
of this Agreement or applicable law. Associate acknowledges and agrees that in the event of such
impermissible use or disclosure of Protected Information, CE may seek injunctive relief if: ( 1)
CE will suffer real, immediate, and irreparable injury which will be prevented by injunctive
relief; (2) that CE has no plain, speedy, and adequate remedy at law; (3) that the granting of a
preliminary injunction will promote the public interest in privacy rather than disserve the public
interest; (4) that the balance of equities always favors the injunction in such cases; (5) that the
injunction will preserve the status quo pending a trial on the merits; and (6) that CE shall not be
required to demonstrate a reasonable probability of success on the merits in order to obtain
injunctive relief.
6. No Waiver of Immunity. No term or condition of this Addendum shall be construed or
interpreted as a waiver, express or implied, of any of the immunities, rights, benefits, protection,
or other provisions of the Colorado Governmental Immunity Act, CRS 24-10-101 et seq. or the
Federal Tort Claims Act, 28 U.S.C. 2671 et seq. as applicable, as now in effect or hereafter
amended.
7. Limitation of Liability. Any limitation of Associate's liability in the Agreement shall be
inapplicable to the tenns and conditions of this Addendum.
8. Disclaimer. CE makes no warranty or representation that compliance by Associate with
this Addendum, HIP AA or the HIP AA Regulations will be adequate or satisfactory for
Associate's own purposes. Associate is solely responsible for all decisions made by Associate
regarding the safeguarding of PHI.
9. Certification. To the extent that CE determines an examination is necessary in order to
comply with CE's legal obligations pursuant to HIPAA relating to certification of its security
practices, CE or its authorized agents or contractors, may, at CE's expense, examine Associate's
facilities, systems, procedures and records as may be necessary for such agents or contractors to
certify to CE the extent to which Associate's security safeguards comply with HIPAA, the
HIP AA Regulations or this Addendum.
10. Amendment.
a. Amendment to Comply with Law. The parties acknowledge that state and federal
laws relating to data security and privacy are rapidly evolving and that amendment of this
Addendum may be required to provide for procedures to ensure compliance with such
developments. The parties specifically agree to take such action as is necessary to implement the
standards and requirements of HIP AA, the Privacy Rule, the Final HIP AA Security regulations
•
•
•
•
•
•
at 68 Fed. Reg. 8334 (Feb. 20, 2003), 45 C.F.R. § 164.314 and other applicable laws relating to
the security or privacy of PHI. The parties understand and agree that CE must receive
satisfactory written assurance from Associate that Associate will adequately safeguard all
Protected Information. Upon the request of either party, the other party agrees to promptly enter
into negotiations concerning the terms of an amendment to this Addendum embodying written
assurances consistent with the standards and requirements of HIPAA, the Privacy Rule or other
applicable laws. CE may terminate the Addendum upon thirty (30) days written notice in the
event (i) Associate does not promptly enter into negotiations to amend this Addendum when
requested by CE pursuant to this Section or (ii) Associate does not enter into an amendment to
this Addendum providing assurances regarding the safeguarding of PHI that CE, in its sole
discretion, deems sufficient to satisfy the standards and requirements of HIPAA and the Privacy
Rule.
b. Amendment of Attachment A. Attachment A may be modified or amended by
mutual agreement of the parties in writing from time to time without formal amendment of this
Addendum.
11. Assistance in Litigation or Administrative Proceedings. Associate shall make itself, and
any subcontractors, employees or agents assisting Associate in the performance of its obligations
under this Addendum, available to CE, at no cost to CE, to testify as witnesses, or otherwise, in
the event of litigation or administrative proceedings being commenced against CE, its directors,
officers or employees based upon a claimed violation of HIP AA, the Privacy Rule or other laws
relating to security and privacy of PHI, except where Associate or its subcontractor, employee or
agent is a named adverse party.
12. No Third Party Beneficiaries. Nothing express or implied in this Addendum is intended
to confer, nor shall anything herein confer, upon any person other than CE, Associate and their
respective successors or assigns, any rights, remedies, obligations or liabilities whatsoever.
13. Interpretation. The provisions of this Addendum shall prevail over any provisions in the
Agreement that may conflict or appear inconsistent with any provision in this Addendum.
Together, the Agreement and this Addendum shall be interpreted as broadly as necessary to
implement and comply with HIPAA and the Privacy Rule. The parties agree that any ambiguity
in this Agreement shall be resolved in favor of a meaning that complies and is consistent with
HIPAA and the Privacy Rule. This Agreement supersedes and replaces any previous separately
executed HIP AA addendum between the parties.
14. Survival of Certain Terms. Notwithstanding anything herein to the contrary, Associate's
obligations under Section 7(d) ("Effect of Termination") and Section 14 ("No Third Party
Beneficiaries") shall survive termination of this Addendum and shall be enforceable by CE as
provided herein in the event of such failure to perform or comply by the Associate.
15. Representatives and Notice.
a. Representatives. For the purpose of this Addendum, the individuals listed below
are hereby designated as the parties' respective representatives. Either party may from time to
time designate in writing new or substitute representatives.
b. Notices. All required notices shall be in writing and shall be hand delivered or
given by certified or registered mail to the representatives at the addresses as set forth in
paragraph 6 of Exhibit A of the Agreement.
16. Availability of Funds. Payment pursuant to this Addendum, if in any part federally
funded, is subject to and contingent upon the continuing availability of federal funds for the
purposes hereof. If any of said federal funds become unavailable, as determined by the CE, either
party may immediately terminate or seek to amend this Addendum.
17. Audits. In addition to any other audit rights in this Addendum, Associate shall permit CE
and any authorized federal agency to monitor and audit records and activities which are or have
been undertaken pursuant to this Addendum.
18. No Assignment. Except as otherwise provided, the duties and obligations of Associate
shall not be assigned, delegated or subcontracted except with the express prior written consent of
CE. Any subcontractors or agents used by BA to perform any services in connection with this
Addendum shall be subject to the requirements of this Addendum.
[Remainder of page intentionally left blank.]
•
•
•
•
•
•
ATTACHMENT A
This Attachment sets forth additional tenns to the HIP AA Business Associate Addendum
between the County/Covered Entity and the Associate/Contractor ("Addendum"). This
Attachment may be amended from time to time as provided in Section 12(b) of the Addendum.
l. Additional Pennitted Uses. In addition to those purposes set forth in Section 2(a) of the
Addendum, Associate may use Protected Information as follows: None except as otherwise
directed in writing through the County or the State.
2. Additional Permitted Disclosures. In addition to those purposes set forth in Section 2{b)
of the Addendum, Associate may disclose Protected Infonnation as follows: None except as
otherwise directed in writing through the County or the State.
3. Subcontractor(s). The parties acknowledge that the following subcontractors or agents of
Associate shall receive Protected Information in the course of assisting Associate in the
performance of its obligations under the Addendum: __ N=o=ne=.'--------------
4. Receipt. Associate's receipt of Protected Information pursuant to the Addendum shall be
deemed to occur as follows, and Associate' s obligations under the Addendum shall commence
with respect to such PHI upon such receipt: Associate's receipt of PHI pursuant to the
Agreement or Addendum shall be deemed to occur and their obligations shall commence with
respect to such PHI received uoon the effective date of the Addendum .
5. Additional Restrictions on Use of Data. CE is a Business Associate of certain other
Covered Entities and, pursuant to such obligations of CE, Associate shall comply with the
following restrictions on the use and disclosure of Protected Information: The County is a
Business Associate of other covered entities and. pursuant to such obligations of those Covered
Entities. the County shall comply with restrictions on the use and disclosure of PHI as may be
directed in writing by the State.
6. Additional Tenns. [This section may include specificatio11s for disclosure fomiat,
method of transmission, use of an intenuediary, use of digital signatures or PK/, authentication,
additional security of privacy specifications, de-idelltijication or re-identification of data and
other additional tenns.]
None
[Remainder of page intentionally left blank.]
Colorado Community Media
State of Colorado
County of Arapahoe
AFFIDAVIT OF
PUBLICATION
)ss
This Affidavit of Publication for the Englewood Herald, a weekly newspaper, printed
and published for the County of Arapahoe, State of Colorado, hereby certifies that
f
the attached legal notice was published in said newspaper once in each week, for :1
successive week(s), the last of which publication was made the 6th day of ,'.
November A.O., 2015, and that copies of each nu~ber of said g aper in w ~i16h ;~~d .• /
Public Notice was published were delivered by carriers or transmitt~d by mail to ' ·· ..
each of the subscribers of said paper, according to their accusto ~~~ h1oqe of (. ),
business in this office . . , l '
State of Colorado )
County of Arapahoe
~ ¥
i· \
"
~ i ~
?t'.'. r
sf.,:, ~/ < ,
The above Affidavit and Certificate of Publication ~as subscribed and sworn to \ .,, __ -~
before me by the above named Gerard Healey, p Oblisher of said newspaper, who 1 # ....... ;/~·,h·, •
is personally known to me to'~e th e identieal person in the above certificate on this
• ii' )!
6th day of November AD., 20\E)·
'ti
\,, .• ·f
Notary Public,
y,
llARIWIA KAY ITOLTE
NOTARY l'lalC
llTATE OF COLDllADO
NOTARY ID 11174111221
llY~-1tl1Jn111
My Commission Expires 10/12/16
CITY OF ENGLEWOOD
-· NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
' .: ~OVEMBER 16, 2015
·Notice la hereby given ihat the City
-Council of the City of Englewood,
Colorado wlll hold a Public Hearing
on Monday, NOVEMBER 16, 2015, at
7:30 p.m., In the City C(!uncll
·Chambeni at Englewood Civic
.. Centar, 1000 Englewood Parkway, "
Englewood, Colonido. _Th• purpose
i · of the hearing la to receive citizen .. "
Jl)Pll.t.~011~.f!rn.l.!19 .the Jlppea.1 !!f.ea'e
2015-09, 4635 South Peart Street,
Urban Lot Development
Interested parties may expreas
opinion• In person at the Public
Hearing, or in writing, to be rece ived
by the City Clerk by 5:00 p .m. on
November 16, 2015. A sign-up sheet
wlll be available at. the door for
. _. ;anyone wishing to speak at the
· Public Hearing. ·· • , ... ,
By order of the En11lewood Clfy
Council '·
• Loucrtshla A. £Ills, MMC ·
: City Clerk, City of Englewood
1000 Englewood Parkwsr • ,
.. Englewood, Colorado 801 10 .. .
:Legal Notice No.".'569SS ·-• ··~ • ·
First Publication: November 5, 2015
Last Publication: November 5, 2015 _
. Publisher. 'The Eng~ Herald
PROOF OF PUBLICATION
City of Englewood , Colorado
Official Website
www.englewoodgov .org
I, Loucrishia A. Ellis , City Clerk, for the C ity of Englewood , do solemnly swear
that the attached legal notice (Notice of Public Hearing on November 16, 2015
to receive citizen input concerning the appeal of case 2015-09 , 4635 South Pearl Street,
Urban Lot Development) was published on the Official City of Englewood Website from
November 4, 2015 through November 16, 2015 . .t:
State of Colorado
SS
County of Arapahoe
Subscribed and sworn to before me on this 161h day of November, 2015 .
My Commission Expires : O\oocll L 1019
SEAL
STEPHANIE CARLILE
NOTARY PlJ!;.~nl'\
STATE OF COlVfV"lo'V MY~~m4°~12,2C>19
CITY OF ENGLEWOOD
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
NOVEMBER 16, 2015
Notice is hereby given that the City
Council of the City of Englewood,
Colorado will hold a Public Hearing
on Monday, NOVEMBER 16, 2015, at
7:30 p.m., in the City Council
Chambers at Englewood Civic
Center, 1000 Englewood Parkway,
Englewood, Colorado. The purpose
of the hearing is to receive citizen
input concerning the appeal of case
2015-09, 4635 South Pearl Street,
Urban Lot Development.
Interested parties may express
opinions in person at the Public
Hearing, or in writing, to be received
by the City Clerk by 5:00 p.m. on
November 16, 2015. A sign-up sheet
will be available at the door for
anyone wishing to speak at the
Public Hearing.
By order of the Englewood City
Council
Loucrishia A. Ellis, MMC
City Clerk, City of Englewood
1000 Englewood Parkway
Englewood, Colorado 80110
PUBLISHED: November 4, 2015
Official Website of the
City of Englewood, Colorado
~ ~
r>
"" (/) Q-Jl \.. ..Q
J ~ ·-~ -0 ~ ·;i f3. t ~ ~ '>. :J. ~
1\ 06~ ti(?
1
\
\
.::!.. ~ '---.... -~"-'~-
ADJ.. (V\P.A.GC.
~---------------:~-;,~-~:~~--------------;~,:~~~~--:::-~--~;:-;,-~~-------------~-~-~-------------------------81.~-------------T--------~:;;J~-::-~------T ~ PllfJf'ERn l.l~iff GRASS "NP I ,r--K,wl
~ j m------i,_ ---. : f,-mmmmmmmmmmmm/~Ll mm!? I
=Nf; 8EO
~ ~ •' . . r ••• ••• ~ ', I l.Ji ----~:;~.~ ---------~ 1----·--~~~--_ ----J-~,=~= ·--i. _ _ _ _________
1
= Jl.=Pl_~~~Gir~-___ _ __ ~-
: ~. -·IJ't ... '\f.fl:NG ~Ei(J t I "fUfff !;f<A...~ 'f'(t>
' M PR<JPF..N.TY" t~F: -I
I 'l' SlfJF: Sr:rAACJo; 27.0C'/ ·• "'3.&4'----------
ADJ.Gt..~c:K.
() I R~f.S M:N. 2-112' r.;Atlt'HI D<.ClXK.ltJ.~ ()I~ f.' <T"f Al.L Wf.R(.;/;fi~N
.'\CJ. RESCEtiCf
Q M!N . fJF {~:°f} ~ Gl\i .:.oN 3HF:l.ift3
u·;: ~;rtf:' :-. 31:.:!1 ~ i::
BUrt.nt.c;.-; CCVf.~'\Gr: i:. aA5 SC FT i~~}
OPIZ~~ SPA.CE • 114'.'.l !3•:t Fi ~fi&~Jh}
U\NOSCAF'E ARE>. • 1405 SO Fl' (45%)
1-
UJ
UJ
0::
1-
(f)
_J
0:::
<(
UJ a..
(f)
~?~1.~!~11 ..
,.0,80)(29
MEAO.CAX.~lllMCI
PHONE1 -.e31·177'9
FAXl~N2
"' a: "' 0
!
Ill s
0 :a
B
~
"' S!
"'
d ~~ l:i ·~ ..... i~ ..
~
0.. ~· I ~
SITE PLAN
1" = 10'-0"
t!
Ill
N ~-*~-E~: w A2. !
S z~• i ~
~ i i~ti -:;;~
~ '=S ov
30
c=:> ,, s~ 1 ~ -~ ~ ~ ~
. I C) -~ o~
l V)
<::)
l
c:)
Q &=>
ADJ..(;.,ARAGC
N· ~ Ar.J.lfiF.S!DENCE
I
~--------------;. s 1;;,;.:;~;----------~:i:. s~::----t~-~~:-;~~------------~25nu: ___________________ ,__ s1 .~----------------F------------·------;;m--------·----------•
I
-1 ffi'.if'f.Rl'Y UNE t-=~!7..fr SETSACY.
>--~-~~~~t ' :,II : '-~~~ ' f l -; .I ='n~---
W Of<!\J«"''"' . I I I iii '~ ....1 !3 ., -'
-;j_ 1~ /~ ; j ', {_ ~l-1 -----~~~-
. -------~~/._ ------i n':~:l ~~ ---~· ~ ---· ---~ ~ U I ---~-= --------· ---· ---------=! ~ Jl~~~~~~----·-----
: f") IJ:,'\f·JT:N!; ~f.) I I 1'JP.F !.F.Affg 'f"(})
""-'<.JPfR1"'fl .il"~'------------1-..---------
~ 3' s 1nr; SE1'9AC1<
----43.&I''-------------
ADJ. w~~Gf.
.... -------21.Dlr------~
C., .1 iRC:f-_$ "-i:t'lrl. 2-1!'2~ GAL IPf.fl. CCCl1llt'~US t.°)R f.' ..(r .f.A!.L ~\'~H:(~.f:'.f;N
.'illJ . RcSCEtiCf
Q MiN-OF (1:-i)!i C'..,t\i .l..CJN 3HP.l .'63
l '!';: ~>rtF. ··-31~!1 f;Q :::
8Ultf.)ltir; CCVf:lV\(',t; '·ass SC FT (32~)
nn;~c ~er;: a 214".l 5-:t r-T (~"58%;
L~NOSC•.PE AR'£>.• 14•)5 SO FT i43%)
:< ~ "' Q
"' ~
"' ?
t-w
UJ
((
I-
(/)
-' a::
<(
UJ
CL .
(/)
~~~~i.!!~~t~
PQ.BOX38
t.EAD. CO..OfW>O «ll!MO
PHONE1103-ll31·17'18
FAX!~W
I
OI
ill ~ ' lii
B
!
~
ii
I lii~
la .f i!
z
~
Q.
SITE PLAN
1" = 10'-0"
~
Ill
N IEE-3•
*E=3· E~· w A2. .•
s '"'
City of Englewood
1000 Englewood Parkway
Englewood, CO 80110
Cynthia Brown
4633 S Pearl
Englewood , CO 80113
October 21, 2015
Attn : Erik Keck, Englewood City Manager & Englewood City Council
Re: Appeal Zoning Decision 4635 S Pearl
10~
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
OCT 2 1 2015
ENG LEWOOD, CO LORAD O
• I am appealing the 9-22-2015 Planning and Zoning decision to allow a 2 story home on the 25 ft lost located on
the of my property and home at 4635 S Pearl.
• My property is negatively affected by this decision .
• I was unable to exercise my right to protest at the 9-22 Public Hearing because I was in the hospitaif 7
• My neighbors told the Commission that I was in the hospital, yet the Commission used my non attendance to
support their approval.
• As approved this creates a fire hazard for my home and property.
• This decision denies my home and property light.
• This decision creates potential drainage issues for my property.
• This decision diminishes the use of my property, my privacy, my enjoyment and value of my home.
• This decision does permanently impair the use or development of adjacent conforming properties.
• This decision does alter the essential character of the neighborhood.
• Please accept this as notice that I am disabled and requesting appropriate accommodations for this process.
• Due to my disability I am requesting all communication and correspondence be copied to : Cassandra & Jeremy
Letkomiller 303-260-8249 cletko@hotmail.com.
Sincerely,
\\\~ ~ )fnt~~
Cynthia Brown
From: Jeremy Letkomiller [mailto :jershann@gmail.com ]
Sent: Thursday , October 22 , 2015 1 :25 AM
To: Eric Keck ; Council ; Julie Bailey
Subject: Request For Rehearing Related To The Zoning Variance At 4635 S Pearl
This is a request for a rehearing on the zoning variance related to the property at 4635
S Pearl. In relation to the city municipal code 16-2-16, as an interested 3rd party, we
believe that the planning and zoning commission has not performed due diligence on
this matter, specifically related to fire safety , right to light/overshadowing (as outlined in
the municipal code), and drainage issues . There is evidence that was not originally
presented at the time of the first hearing and we believe that this information is
necessary in order to make a rational , fair and educated decision.
Use of this variance will cause a decrease in property values to the adjacent homes and
a loss of use that these neighbors on either side of 4635 purchased their property
for . This could create a situation where the city could be sued .
We are acting as representatives for the next door neighbor to this property as she was
hospitalized at the time of the original hearing and will not be able to attend the next
hearing due to medical issues .
Please contact us with any questions on this matter and we look forward to enlightening
you with further details on this matter at the next hearing.
Jeremy and Cassandra Letkomiller
303-981-1781 , 303-260-8249
4655 S Pearl Street
Englewood , CO 80113
October 19, 2015
Englewood City Council
1000 Englewood Parkway
Englewood , CO 80110
RE : Appeal of Case #2015-09 4635 South Pearl Street Urban Lot Development
Dear City Council Members;
Historically, the City of Englewood has not had zoning regulations in place to effectively allow building of
structures on non-conforming lots. In 2013 , at the recommendation of the Community Development
Department ("CDD "), the Planning and Zoning Commission ("Commission ") began to explore
Amendments to Title 16 : Unified Development Code regarding Small Lot Development Standards .
In the Council Communication dated August 4, 2014, the CDD provided background to the Englewood
City Council ("Council ") concerning the Commiss ions fact finding process . This included proposed
amendments, summary and analysis to relevant sections for Title 16 of the UDC. According to
Englewood City Council minutes, on September 2, 2014, Ordinance No. 45 Series of 2014 (Ordinance)
was approved on second reading .
For the purposes of the subject development at 4635 S. Pearl Street, the relevant ordinance outlines
what has been deemed "Urban Lots ." These are lots zoned R-1 -C with lot width greater than or equal to
25', but less than 37'; and with lot area greater than or equal to 3,000 sf, but less than 4500 sf.
Specifically, the Ordinance states
Whereas, the proposed amendments will effectively regulate small residential lots
{hereafter called "Urban Lots ") that contain or contained a one unit dwelling existing on
or before February 23, 2004, and have 25 feet or more of Lot Width, 3,000 square feet of
more of Lot Area, and will establish a process for the possible development of vacant
Urban Lots of that size .
On September 22 , 2015 , I attended a regular meeting of the Commission. I spoke in opposition at the
public hearing for Case #2015-09 4635 South Pearl Street Urban Lot Development ("Development"), as
did several of my fellow neighbors . During the same Commission hearing, the CDD provided a memo
that the subject property, in the South Broadway Height Subdivision ("Subdivision "), has never
contained a "dwelling unit". CDD Planner, Brook Bell, also stated for the record "research of the
property records revealed that the lot has been vacant since at least 1952 . The result of the research is
inconclusive with regards to the origins of the lot." Mr. Bell also clarified to the Commission that the
purpose of the hearing was to " ... approve the development on an Urban Lot based upon drawing
submitted by the applicant." City records indicate the lot on where this House will be built, is exactly 25
feet wide and 125 feet deep with 3,125 square feet . Ultimately, a motion was passed , 8-1 by the
Commission to allow for a single family house ("House").
I am writing to you today, to appeal the Commissions ' decision and ask that Council deny the
Applicant the right to develop the planned House for the following reasons :
• The ordinance recommended by the Commission and passed by Council on Sept 2, 2014
states an Urban Lot 25 feet or greater in width, and 3,000 feet or more of square
footage must contain , or have contained , a one unit dwelling before February 23, 2004.
• City records and Applicant renderings show the Development is 25 feet in width and
3,125 square feet.
• The CDD testified before the Commission on September 22, 2015 the property has been
vacant since 1952 and has never contained a dwelling.
• Given 1) the Development is 25 feet wide and 2) has never contained a one unit
dwelling, 3) Ordinance dictates the said property at 4635 S Pearl Street is not eligible
for development of any one until dwelling.
• Based on Ordinance, the Commission should have denied the Applicants proposal to
develop the said property at 4635 S Pearl Street .
• Therefore, on appeal before Englewood City Council the proposal to develop the said
property at 4635 S Pearl Street must be denied .
I look forward to your response .
Regards
~::;~s
Enclosure
ORDINANCE NO. '-15'
SERIES OF 2014
BY AUTHORITY
COUNCIL BILL NO . 45
INTRODUCED BY COUNCIL
MEMBER WILSON
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE 16, CHAPTER 2, SECTION 2; TITLE 16, CHAPTER
6, SECTION 1, PARAGRAPH B; TITLE 16, CHAPTER 9, SECTION 4; AND TITLE 16,
CHAPTER 11, SECTION 2, PARAGRAPH B, OF THE ENGLEWOOD MUNICIPAL CODE
2000, PERTAINING TO SMALL LOTS.
WHEREAS, the Unified Development Code, adopted in 2004, does not regulate "small lot"
residential properties in terms of Development Standards and associated Dimensional
Requirements; and
WHEREAS, any residential lot not meeting the minimal dimensional standards is treated as a
non-conforming lot; and
WHEREAS, currently the following properties are not effectively regulated:
• In R-1-A and R-1-B Zone Districts: Properties with lot width greater than or equal to
25', but less than 50'; and with lot area greater than or equal to 3,000 sf, but less
than 6,000 sf(+ -13 Total in the City).
• In R-1-C Zone Districts: Properties with lot width greater than or equal to 25 ', but
less than 37'; and with lot area greater than or equal to 3,000 sf, but less than 4,500
sf(+ -40 Total in the City).
• In R-2 or R-3 Zone Districts: Properties with lot width greater than or equal to 25',
but less than 40'; and with lot area greater than or equal 3,000 sf, but less than 4,000
sf ( + -176 Total in the City).
• In Medical Zone Districts: Properties with lot width greater than or equal to 25'; but
less than 40'; and with lot area greater than or equal 3,000 sf, but less than 4,000 sf+
-1 Total in the City).
• In Residential and Medical Zone Districts: Properties with lot width of less than 25 ';
and with lot area less than 3,000 sf(+ -45 Total in the City).
WHEREAS, these properties do not fit the "small lot" criteria and do not have any minimum
setback, maximum height, or maximum lot coverage requirements . There are approximately 275
of these properties within the City; and
WHEREAS, the nonconforming status of these lot create uncertainty for lenders, who are then
reluctant to lend on a property where the entitlements are vague or unknown; and
l
9 bi
WHEREAS, these regulations for smaller residential lots, will provide greater certainty for
property owners; and
WHEREAS, the Englewood Planning and Zoning Commission held a Public Hearing on
November 19, 2013 to consider amendments to the Unified Development Code to establish
regulations for 'smaller lots; and
WHEREAS, the November 19, 2013 Englewood Planning and Zoning Commission Public
Hearing was reopened on March 4, 2014 and continued to March 18, 2014; and
WHEREAS, the proposed amendments will effectively regulate smaller residential lots {hereafter
called ''Urban Lots") that contain or contained a one-unit dwelling existing on or before February 23,
2004, and have 25 feet or more of Lot Width, 3,000 square feet or more of Lot Area, and will
establish a process for the possible development of vacant Urban Lots of that size; and
WHEREAS, the proposed amendments will establish criteria and a process for the possible
development of Urban Lots with less than 25 feet of Lot Width or less than 3,000 square feet of Lot
Area that contain an existing dwelling unit or are vacant; and
WHEREAS, additions, redevelopment, or development of these properties will be possible if
approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission at a public hearing which insures due process and
appropriate public notice; and
WHEREAS, this proposed amendment is consistent with Roadmap Englewood: 3002 Englewood
Comprehensive Plan and. encourages housing investments that improve the housing mix, including
both smaller and larger unit sizes; and
WHEREAS, additional review criteria will create a clear basis for development of these small
lots; and
WHEREAS, the Planning and Z.Oning Commission recommended that appeals from the Planning
and Zoning Commission's decisions on nonconforming lots be brought to City Council for a de novo
determination.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ENGLEWOOD, COLORADO, THAT:
Section 1. The City Council of the City of Englewood, Colorado hereby authorizes amending
Title 16, Chapter 2, Section 2, entitled Summary of Development Review and Decision-Making
Procedures of the Englewood Municipal Code 2000, to read as follows:
16-2-2: Summary Table of Administrative and Review Roles.
The following table summarizes the review and decision-making responsibilities of the entities
that have specific roles in the administration of the procedures set forth in this Chapter. For
pwposes of this table, an "(Approval) Lapsing Period11 refers to the total time from the
application's approval that an applicant bas to proceed with, and often complete, the approved
action. Failure to take the required action within the specified "lapsing period" will automatically
void the approval. See Section 16-2-3.L EMC, "Lapse of Approval," below.
2
•
Adaptive Reuse of 16-5-3 ./ R R D ./ ./ None
Designated Historical
Buildings
Administrative 16-2-17 ./ D A None
Adjustments
Administrative Land 16-2-11 ./ D A 60 days to
Review Permit record
Amendments to the Text 16-2-6 R R D ./ None
of this Title
Annexation Petitions 16-2-5 ./ R R D ./ ./ None
Appeals to Board 16-2-18 ./ D ./ None
Comprehensive Plan 16-2-4 R R D ./ None
Amendments
Conditional Use Permits 16-2-12 ./ R D A ./ ./ 1 year
Conditional Use -16-7 ./ R D A ./ ./ ./ None
Telecommunication
Development Agreements 16-2-15 R D As stated in
Agreement
Floodplain Dev't. Permit See Chapter 16-4 for applicable procedures and standards
and Floodplain Variances
Historic Preservation 16-6-11 ./ R R D ./ ./ None
Landmark Sign 16-6-13 ./ D A ./ ./
Limited Review Use 16-2-13 ./ D A 1 year
Permits
Major Subdivisions 16-2-10
Preliminary Plat ./ R R D ./ ./ ./ 6 months to
submit Final
Plat
Final Plat R R D ./ ./ ./ 60 days to
record
Simultaneous Review ./ R R D ./ ./ ./ 60 days to
Preliminary Plat/Final record
3
Plat
Recorded Final Plat None
Minor Subdivision 16-2-11
Preliminary Plat ./ D A 6 months to
submit Final
Plat
Final Plat D A 60 days to
record
Recorded Final Plat None
ligWQ;?gfQWliDi Ls21~ ~ ./ & 12 A ./ ./ ~ ---
Official Zoning Map 16-2-7 ./ R R D ./ ./ ./ None
Amendments (Rez.onings)
PUD and TSA Rezonings 16-2-7 ./ R R D ./ ./ ./ None
Temporary Use Permits 16-2-14 ./ D A As stated in
Permit
Unlisted Use 16-5-1.B ./ D A None
Classifications
Zoning Site Plan 16-2-9 D A 3 years
Zoning Variances 16-2-16 ./ R D ./ ./ 180days
CM/D ==City Manager or Designee (Including the Development Review Team)
PC• Planning and Zoning Commission
CC = City Council
BAA= Board of Adjustment and Appeals
1 Notice Required: See Table 16-2-3.1 Summary of Mailed Notice Requirements
4
Section 2. The City Council of the City of Englewood, Colorado hereby authorizes amending Title 16, Chapter 6, Section 1, Paragraph B,
Table I.I, entitled Summary of Dimensional Requirements for Principal Structures of the Englewood Municipal Code 2000, to read as follows:
Summary Table of Dimensional Requirements for Principal Uses and Structures. All principal structures and uses shall be subject to the intensity
and dimensional standards set forth in the following Table 16-6-1.1. These standards may be further limited by other applicable sections of this
Title. Additional regulations for the residential districts, and special dimensional regulations related to lot area, setbacks, height, and floor area
are set forth in the subsections immediately following the table. Rules of measurement are set forth in subsection 16-6-1.A EMC. Dimensional
requirements for accessory structures are set forth in subsection 16-6-1.I EMC.
R-1-A District
One-Unit I 9,000 INone 135 175 132 125 17 120
Dwelling
One-Unit I 6,000 INone 140 150 132 125 15 120
Dwelling on a [4]
Small Lot [5]
Pnc-lb!i1 l2llC;lliu• 1 JJl!ll! ll:l!!m; 1~ 1~ I~ I~ ll I~
OD an Vrban Lot [6] UJ I1l
All Other 24,000None35200 132 125 125 125
Allowed Uses
R-1-B District
One-Unit I 7,200 !None 140 160 132 125 15 120
Dwelling
One-Unit I 6,000 !None 140 150 132 125 15 120
Dwelling on a [4J
Small Lot [5]
5
Qg;-11Di1 ll»:sclli1n~ JJli2{l ~ ~ ~ Jl ~ l ~
'2D ~D Urbm [.Qi [(2] Ill Jll
All Other 24,000 None 40 200 32 25 25 25
Allowed Uses
R-1-C District
One-Unit 6,000 None 40 so 32 25 5 20
Dwelling
One-Unit 4,500 None ~~ 37 32 25 3 20
Dwelling on a [4]
Small Lot [5)
Qgg-Uni1 12.'1:g1Jigg JJll!Q ~ ~ ~ JZ ~ J. Z.Q
gg ilD lltbiUI 1&1 [(2] L7J L7J
All Other 24,000 None 40 200 32 25 25 25
Allowed Uses
R-2-A District
One-Unit 6,000 None 40 50 32 25 5 20
Dwelling
One-Unit 4,000 None ~ia 40 32 25 3 20
Dwelling on a
Small Lot [5]
Oosc-lloit Dll:s;lliug JJlg,Q ~ iQ ll JZ ~ l 22
S2D iW Urh1g 1"21 [gJ L7J !.1.l
Multi-Unit 3,000 per unit None 40 25 per 32 25 5 20
Dwelling unit
(Maximum2 [4]
units)
All Other 24,000 None 60 200 32 25 25 25
Allowed Uses
6
R-2-B District
One-Unit 6,000 None 40 50 32 25 5 20
Dwelling
One-Unit 4,000 None ~iQ 40 32 25 3 20
Dwelling on a
Small Lot (5]
Qns:-lhlit I2»:s:llwg ~ ~ ~ ll ~ ~ l ~
gu 1w. .umiw I-gt l~J Ill ill
Multi-Unit 3,000 per unit None 60 25 per 32 25 5 20
Dwelling unit
(Maximum [4]
Units Based
on Lot Area
& Lot Width)
All Other 24,000 None 60 200 32 25 25 25
Allowed Uses
MU-R-3-A District
One-Unit 6,000 None 40 50 32 25 5 20
Dwelling
One-Unit 4,000 None ~~ 40 32 25 3 20
Dwelling on a
Small Lot [5)
Qo;-:UoiL I2~s:mm~ l.Wl2 ~ ~ ~ ~ 25. J. ~
gg iW l.l.cbiW 1.sg, [~] Ill Ill
Multi-Unit 3,000 per unit None 60 25 per 32 25 5 25
Dwelling unit
(Maximum [4]
Units Based on
Lot Area&
7
Lot Width)
Private 12,000 None 70 None n/a 25 15 15
Off-Street
Parking Lots
Office, Limited 15,000 1.5 (Excluding the 50 None 32 25 IS 25
gross floor area of
parking structures)
All Other 24,000 None 60 200 32 25 25 25
Allowed Uses
MU-R-3-B District (See Additional Regulations Following the Table)
One-Unit 6,000 None 40 50 32 15 5 20
Dwelling
One-Unit 4,000 None ~~ 40 32 ~.u 3 20
Dwelling on a
Small Lot [5]
£ln5'·:Unit ll~;lliaa lJW.Q li.wlc ~ ll JZ ll l ~
gg Im lld2111 I&l [Ci] 12l 1Zl
Multi-Unit 2-4 units; 3,000 per None 75 None 2-4 units: 15 2-4 units: 5 25
Dwelling unit; Each additional 32 More than 4 units:
(Maximum Units unit over 4 units: More 15
Based on Lot Area 1,000 per unit [4] than4
&LotWidth) units; 60
Office, Limited 24,000 1.5 75 None 60 15 15 [3] 2S
(Excluding the
gross floor area of
parking structures)
All Other 24,000 None 75 None 60 15 15 25
Allowed Uses [4]
MU-R-3-C District (See Additional Regulations Following the Table)
8
One-Unit 6,000 None 40 50 32 15 5 20
Dwelling
One-Unit 4,000 None ~10 40 32 15 3 20
Dwelling on a
Small Lot [5]
s;m,-lJDil ~;lli.D~ ~ ~ iQ ~ ~ ll l ~
llD iW Urh1m Lgt [tiJ L2J Ill
Multi-Unit 6,000 None 75 None 40 15 5 20
Dwelling
Office, Limited 6,000 None 75 None 40 15 5 20
All Other 24,000 None 75 None 40 15 5 20
Allowed Uses [4]
M-1, M-2, M-0-2 Districts (See Table 16-6-1.la)
MU-B-1 District (Sec Additional Regulations Following the Table)
Live/Work None None None None 100 0 and no more than 5 0 5
Dwelling feet
Multi-Unit None None None None 100 0 and no more than 5 0 5
Dwelling [4] feet
All Other Nooe None None None 100 0 and no more than 5 0 5
Allowed Uses feet
MU-B-2 District (See Additional Regulations Following the Table)
Multi-Unit None None None None 60 0 and no more than 5 0 5
Dwelling [4] feet
All Other None None None None 60 0 and no more than 5 0 5
Allowed Uses feet
TSA District
Please refer to Section 16-6-14 EMC, oft/iis Chapter
9
and the applicable Station Arca Design Standards and Guidelines
lfor Intensity and dimensional standards.
1-1 ANDl-2
All Allowed None 2:1 None None None Where a building abuts upon, adjoins, or is
Uses Except adjacent to a ,.-esidential zone disbict, minimum
Manufactured setbacks of 10 ft on all sides are required, except as
Home Parks required in Section 16-6-7 .G, "Screening
Requirements."
Manufactured Home See Section 16-5-2.AJ, above.
Parks
Notes to Table:
(1] The minimum side setback stated in this table for one-unit attached and multi-unit dwellings shall apply to the entire dwelling structure, and
not to each individual dwelling unit located in the structure.
[2) The minimum side setback standard for principal residential dwellings in the residential (R) zone districts, as stated in this Table, shall apply
to such dwellings that existed on the Effective Date of this Title. However, principal residential dwellings existing on the Effective Date of this
Title, and which as of that date are not in compliance with the minimum side setback standards established in this Table, shall not be considered
nonconforming structures due solely to the dwelling's noncompliance with the minimum side setback. Such dwellings are "grandfathered," and
shall be considered legal, conforming structures for the purposes of sale and development under this Title and other City building and safety
regulations. See Section 16-9-3 (Nonconforming Structures), below.
[3] The minimum separation between principal buildings located on the same or adjoining lots, whether or not the lots are under the same
ownership, shall be fifteen feet (151.
(4) See Section 16-6-1.C for additional dimensional standards appropriate to the zone district.
(SJ Small lot ofrecord on or before February 23, 2004. w Urh1111 Jg1 gf ~gm lb115'QD11WHill gt 5''2D11iDli I ggsamil d»:SiUiD& lbi11 lii2'ili1"1'211.121: ~r121:; lli; tiff,.5'lil!l:i 12115' Qf U:&ili IJ11; !J::;bruarv 2~.
2Wlfl. ~Ai;;l\Dt Urh~g Ls21:i ftilll2!: lilam' J2~'1!1i Wi ;tjgg"gJJf';n:mil'.12 Lg~. ~;~ SG5'UWl l ~-2~.
[7] fg&: U&:bilD l,.Ql:i ~im lliilili &b111 J,WlQ liQ1 11. gfl.gl Are1 Qt hi!ili 11urn 2~ 11. gf 1&1 ~idib fc;zllg»: liAWSi &lISUCSiH H ligg11ggfc;z&miug Ll211i1 liSiSi
~Si"ti'2D J 6-~
10
Section 3. The City Council of the City of Englewood, Colorado hereby authorizes amending Title 16, Chapter 6, Section 1, Paragraph B,
Table I .a, entitled Summary of Dimensional Requirements for Principal Structures Located Within Medical Z.One Districts and Overlays of the
Englewood Municipal Code 2000, to read as follows:
Min Max Min Max Max Minimum Setbacks (ft)
Lot Lot Lot Height Retail Front Front Side: Side: Side: Side: I Rear Area Coverage Width (ft) Gross Upper Adjacent Adjacent Adjacent Adjacent (sq ft) (%) (ft) Floor Story Street Alley Side Side Area Setback [1] & [2] [1] & [2] [1] & [2] [I] & [2] (sq ft) Above (Lots (Lots
60 Feet fronting fronting
Hampden, all other
Jefferson streets)
or the
3500
blocks of
Logan and
Clarkson)
M-1 and M-2 Districts and M-0-2 Overlays (Sec Additional Regulations Following the Table)
Live/Work 6,000 None None 32 10,000 0 and no NA Oandno 5 0 15 1~4] Dwelling [4] [4] more more than
than IO 10
One-Unit 6,000 40 50 32 NA 15 NA 5 15 15 15 120
Dwelling
One-Unit 14,000 1~~ 140 f 32 INA I 15 INA 13 13 13 13 120
Dwelling on a
Small Lot [5]
11
Que-Unit J.Jlilil ~ ~ JZ liA ll liA J. J. J. J. ~
J2>¥;11iga gu im fll Ul
Ur)}fm LQJ [§J
All Other 6,000 None None Height Zone 10,000 0 and no 20 Oandno 5 0 5 5
Allowed Uses [4] 1: 145 Height [4] more (4] more than [4]
Zone2:60 than IO 10
Height Zone
3:32 [4]
Notes to Table:
(1) The minimum side setback stated in this table for one-unit attached and multi-unit dwellings shall apply to the entire dwelling structure, and
not to each individual dwelling unit located in the structure.
(21 The minimum side setback standard for principal residential dwellings in the residential (R) zone districts, as stated in this table, shall apply
to such dwellings that existed on the effective date of this Title. However, principal residential dwellings existing on the effective date of this
Title, and which as of that date are not in compliance with the minimum side setback standards established in this table, shall not be considered
non-conforming structures due solely to the dwelling's non-compliance with the minimum side setback. Such dwellings are "grandfathered," and
shall be considered legal, conforming structures for the purposes of sale and development under this Title and other City building and safety
regulations. See section 16-9-3 (Non-Conforming Structures), below.
(3) The minimum separation between principal buildings located on the same or adjoining lots, whether or not the lots are under the same
ownership, shall be fifteen feet (15~.
[4] See section 16-6-1.C for additional dimensional standards appropriate to the zone district.
(5) Small lot of record on or before February 23, 2004.
lfil ,Urban Jg& gfmimll that 'g,gf.liw:ll QI 'liWIAiua A QDG:MDi& ~s;Um& lbAt Gllii:i&s:d g,g QI bGr~ Ills; J;fr~~ C!UG g[lbi:i IiUs; <Februarv .6J.
~QQ~l. l::ilSiiDt !Jdum LSJl:i fc;21112~ ~Amsc gw"~~ M tlgo"12w~umi11I' l.gl§. 1i!;5' Ss;s;sii;uJ 1'2-2~.
l:zJ E12c Urhau 1.g&li ~illi ISClili SblHI l 000 liQ fl. gfl.g& at'l 12C l=ili &b~D '~ii. 12fl.12S ~idlll fgJlg~ awsc J2~fiilili u l'::iggs;ggfQrmiga LQt.'i. lifiifii
S"'iigg l '2-2~.
12
Section 4 . The City Council of the City of Englewood, Colorado hereby authorizes amending
Title 16, Chapter 9, Section 4, entitled Nonconforming Lots of the Englewood Municipal Code
2000, to read as follows :
16-9-4: Nonconforming Lots.
A. Nonconforming Vae&Bt Lot.
1. A nonconfomting ¥aeafH lot may be used only for a use permitted in the zone district
in which the lot is located . The City Meeager or desiguee Planning and Zoning
Commission may waive or modify miaim\l£B epes 513aee lot coyerage, J!larkiBg lot
area, bulk plane. height. setback, 6f lot width. or other requirements for any
nonconforming lot ifM.lshe .U finds that the propose<l developmept meets the criteria
liste<l belgw:
a. The lot cannot othciwise be used for any purpose permitted within the zone
district applicable to the property; and
b . The waiver, or modification. if granted, is necessary to afford relief with the
least modification possible of the development or dimensional standards
otherwise applicable to the property~
~ The prooosed deye1 00 ment js consistent with the spirit and intent of the
Comprehensiye Plan: and
Q. The lot cgyerage. bulk plane. height. sctbac'ks. and wassing gf the prooosesi
deyelo 0ment will not yazy substantjally from the swroµpding properties or
alter the essentia] character of the neighborhood: and
~ The prooosed deye!opmem is compatible with the e§tab!ished deyelonmept
patterns apd intept of the zone distrjct
2. ."aty 1ij3peal from the City Maaager or eesigBee's eeeisioa shall ee ta the 'Beare .
The Planping and Zoning Commission's decision on any dcye!onmept ofa
nooconformjng lot shall be made at apublic hearing that has been published and
OOsted as required jn Section 16-2-3CGl of this Title.
J.. Any appeal frgm the Plaoojpg apd zqning Cgromissjgn's decisign shall be tg Cjtv
'oµpcil as a de novq reyiew. Such appeal shall be filed no more than thirtv (30)
Q§YS from the date of the Planning ao4 Zoning Commjssign's final decjsign.
; ~· No nonconforming lot shall be further subdivided or shall have its boundaries altered
in any manner that would compound, expand, or extend the nonconforming
characteristic(s) of the lot.
Section 5. The City Council of the City of Englewood, Colorado hereby authorizes amending
Title 16, Chapter 11, Section 2(B), entitled Definitions of Words, Terms, and Phrases of the
Englewood Municipal Code 2000, by the addition of the following definition in alphabetical
order to read as follows:
13
Lot, Urban: A legal Jot ofrccord existing on the effestiye date of this Iit1e <February 23, 2004)
were the lpt widtb gr lot area is less than the miuinwm standaul . for a ope-unit dwelling gp a
small lot in the zgpe district ip which the lot is located,
Section 6. Safety Clauses, The City Council hereby finds, determines, and declares that this
Ordinance is promulgated under the general police power of the City of Englewood, that it is
promulgated for the health. safety, and welfare of the public, and that this Ordinance is necessary
for the presei:vation of health and safety and for the protection of public convenience and
welfare, The City Council further determines that the Ordinance bears a rational relation to the
proper legislative object sought to be obtained,
Section 7. Severabilitv. If any clause, sentence, paragraph, or part of this Ordinance or the
application thereof to any person or circumstances shall for any reason be adjudged by a court of
competent jurisdiction invalid, such judgment shall not affect, impair or invalidate the remainder
of this Ordinance or it application to other persons or circumstances,
Section 8. Inconsistent Ordinances, All other Ordinances or portions thereof inconsistent or
conflicting with this Ordinance or any portion hereof are hereby repealed to the extent of such
inconsistency or conflict.
Section 9. Effect of reocal or modification . The repeal or modification of any provision of
the Code of the City of Englewood by this Ordinance shall not release, extinguish, alter, modify,
or change in whole or in part any penalty, forfeiture, or liability, either civil or criminal, which
shall have been incurred under such provision, and each provision shall be treated and held as
still remaining in force for the purposes of sustaining any and all proper actions, suits,
proceedings, and prosecutions for the enforcement of the penalty, forfeiture, or liability, as well
as for the pmpose of sustaining any judgment, decree, or order which can or may be rendered,
entered, or made in such actions, suits, proceedings, or prosecutions.
Section 10. Penaltv. The Penalty Provision of Section 1-4-1 EMC shall apply to each and
every violation of this Ordinance.
Introduced, read in full. and passed on first reading on the 21st of July, 2014.
Published by Title as a Bill for an Ordinance in the City's official newspaper on the 25th of
July, 2014.
Published as a Bill for an Ordinance on the City's official website beginning on the 23rd day
of July, 2014 for thirty (30) days,
A Public Hearing was held on August 4, 2014,
Read by title and passed on final reading on the 2nd day of September, 2014,
Published by title in the City's official newspaper as Ordinance No.~ Series of 2014, on
the 511i day of September, 2014.
Published by title on the City's official website beginning on the 3n1 day of
September, 2014 for thirty (30) days.
14
This Ordinance shall take effect thirty (30) days after publication following final passage.
~y P. Penn, Mayor
~ucrishi8' A Ellis, City Clerk
L Loucrishia A Ellis, City Clerk of the City of Englewood, Colorado, hereby certify that the
above and foregoing is !/Se copy of the Ordinance passed on final reading and published by
title as Ordinance No. Series of2014. /\
-/ Loucrishia A Ellis
15
•
•
•
COUNCIL COMMUNICATION
Meeting Date: Agenda Item: Subject:
November 16 , 2015 Public Hearing on the
10a Appeal of Case 2015-09
4635 South Pearl Street -
Urban Lot Development
Initiated By: Staff Source:
Commun ity Development _Department Brook Bell, Planner II
PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION
Council unanimously approved Ordinance 45 , Series of 2014 on September 2, 2014 ,
which amended the City's Unified Development Code pertaining to the allowable
dimensions bf residential lots and established the Urban Lot designation Ordinance 45,
Series of 2014 is attached as Exhibit A
RECOMMENDED ACTION
The Community Development Department recommends that City Council consider
testimony during Public Hearing on the appeal of Case 2015-09 4635 South Pearl
Street -Urban Lot Development ; and that City Council uphold the Planning and Zoning
Commission 's decision to approve the proposed development at 4635 South Pearl
Street.
BACKGROUND
Counc il Ordinance 45, Series of 2014 (Exhibit A), included amendments that
established Urban Lot development standards which accomplished the following three
objectives .
1. Urban Lots -The code revisions regulate smaller residential lots (defined as "Urban
Lots ") that contain or contained a one-unit dwelling existing on or before February
23 , 2004, and have 25 ft . or more of Lot Width , but less than the zone district
minimum Lot Width, and with 3000 sq. ft. or more of Lot Area. These Urban Lots are
no longer considered nonconforming and now have appropriate development
standards codified in the Unified Development Code (UDC). This amendment
provides approximately 215 residential properties a high degree of certainty for the
purposes of appraisal , sale , additions , redevelopment , etc.
2. Vacant Urban Lots -The code revisions established a process for the possible
development of Vacant Urban Lots that legally existed on or before February 23 ,
2004, and have 25 ft . or more of Lot Width , but less than the zone district minimum
Lot Width, and with 3000 sq . ft . or more of Lot Area. Development of these Vacant
Urban Lots is possible if approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission at a
public hearing . Any appeals to the Planning and Zoning Commission 's decision go to
City Council. The appeal currently before City Council is one of these Vacant Urban
1
Lots. Overall, there are approximately 15 properties in the City that meet this size
criteria.
3. Urban Lots less than 25' Wide -The code revisions established a process for
regulating Urban Lots with less than 25 ft. of Lot Width or less than 3,000 sq. ft. of
Lot Area. These lots may be vacant or could have an existing dwelling unit on the
property. Additions, redevelopment, or development of these properties is possible if
approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission at a public hearing. Any appeals
to the Planning and Zoning Commission's decision go to City Council. There are
approximately 45 properties in this category, although 31 of the properties are
unlikely to see any redevelopment activity since they are attached townhomes.
Since Council approved the Urban Lot code revisions in 2014, two Urban Lot cases
have come before the Planning and Zoning Commission, each with the required Public
Hearing.
1. The first case was an irregularly shaped property with approximately 1,680 square
feet of lot area. The property owner proposed an addition and pop-top to the existing
388 square foot house that would result in total square footage of 815 square feet.
The proposed addition would encroach approximately 14 feet into the 25 foot front
setback and 12 feet into the 15 foot rear setback. The proposed site plan and
elevations complied with all the other dimensional requirements for a one-unit
dwelling on an Urban Lot.
•
The Planning and Zoning Commission voted 7-0 to approve the addition and pop-top •
on the property. The project is currently under construction.
2. The second Urban Lot case, for a proposed development at 4635 South Pearl
Street, came before the Planning and Zoning Commission on September 22, 2015
and the required public hearing was held. The Planning and Zoning Commission
voted 8-1 to approve the proposed development of the Urban Lot. The Planning and
Zoning Commission staff report (Exhibit B), original application materials (Exhibit C),
minutes (Exhibit D), and findings of fact (Exhibit E) are attached.
On October 2 pt and 22nd , 2015, the City received written correspondence from three
parties appealing the Planning and Zoning Commission's decision. The three
appeals are by:
• Katie Coons -4655 South Pearl Street
• Cynthia Brown -4633 South Pearl Street
• Jeremy and Cassandra Letkomiller (on behalf of Cynthia Brown) -2856 South
Lincoln Street
The written appeals from the three parties are attached as Exhibits F, G, and H.
2
•
• APPEAL PROCESS
For Nonconforming Lots, UDC section 16-9-4:A.3. states:
Any appeal from the Planning and Zoning Commission's decision shall be to City
Council as a de nova review. Such appeal shall be filed no more than thirty (30)
days from the date of the Planning and Zoning Commission's final decision.
For Appeals, UDC section 16-2-18:C. states:
Appeals from Commission . Any person aggrieved by any decision made by the
Commission pursuant to the provisions of this Title may appeal the decision to
the Council, unless this Title specifies that the appeal shall be to another body.
Such appeal shall be filed within thirty (30) days from the date of receipt of such
final decision in the manner provided by the Rules of Procedure adopted by the
Council. The Council shall, at its next regular meeting, schedule a public hearing
on the appeal, after which it shall approve, modify, or reverse the Commission's
actions and shall remand the matter to the Commission for further proceedings
consistent with Council's decision . Such appeals shall be reviewed by the
Council pursuant to the same criteria used by the Commission in making the
decision being appealed. The decision of the Council shall be in writing, and a
copy of the written decision shall be given to the appellant.
ANALYSIS FROM PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION CASE 2015-09 -4635
• SOUTH PEARL STREET -URBAN LOT DEVELOPMENT
•
Request
The applicant is requesting approval to construct a One-Unit Dwelling on an Urban Lot.
Property Zoning and Location
The property is zoned R-1-C, Single Unit Residential District (Small Lot Size).
Properties to the north, south, east, and west are also zoned R-1-C.
Department Review
The proposed plans were distributed to six City Departments and Divisions for review;
there were no objections to the proposed development.
Process for Vacant Urban Lots
The subject property is 3, 125 square feet in area and has 25 feet of lot frontage along
South Pearl Street. Per UDC Table 16-6-1 .1: Summary of Dimensional Requirements
for Principal Structures, this property qualifies as an Urban Lot in the R-1-C zone
district.
UDC Table 16-6-1.1 provides dimensional requirements for Urban Lots of record that at
one time contained or currently contain a One-Unit Dwelling on or before the Effective
Date of this Title. However, vacant Urban Lots that do not meet this definition may
follow the same process for development as Nonconforming Lots. Nonconforming Lots
require a public hearing before the Planning and Zoning Commission. Appeals of
3
Planning and Zoning Commission decisions on Nonconforming Lots are heard by City
Council at a public hearing .
History
It does not appear that the subject property has ever contained a dwelling unit. The
subject property is part of the South Broadway Height Subdivision which was platted in
1889 and predates the establishment of the City of Englewood by 14 years . The first
zoning ordinance enacted in Englewood was in 1940 . Under this Ordinance the subject
property and surrounding area was zoned R-1 .
The R-1 district regulations in the 1940 Ordinance specified a minimum lot area of 6,000
square feet but did not require a minimum lot frontage . The 1940 Ordinance did permit
the development of lots smaller than 6,000 square feet, as long as the lot was in
separate ownership prior to enactment of the 1940 zoning Ordinance. It is unclear when
the subject property originally came into separate ownership ; however, it is clear by a
1952 Quit Claim Deed that the subject property was in separate ownership at least as
far back as 1952.
•
The City revised the zoning Ordinance in 1955, 1963, 1985, and 2004; these revisions
(to varying degrees) did not permit the development of a lot in the R-1-C zone district
with less than 4,500 square feet of lot area and 37 lineal feet of lot width . In 2013 it
became apparent that a number of smaller residential properties were not regulated in
terms of Development Standards and associated Dimensional Requirements . Any lot
not meeting the minimal dimensional standards was treated as a non-conforming lot. •
Council was made aware of some instances in the prior 2-3 years where an owner
couldn 't sell or refinance a house because of the non-conforming lot status. This issue
prompted code revisions intended to address this concern for a majority of non-
conforming lots in the City .
The issue was addressed in 2014, when the Planning and Zoning Commission and City
Council enacted amendments to the UDC that permitted the development of Urban Lots
with a minimum of 3000 square feet of lot area and a minimum of 25 feet of lot width.
The code revisions also contained provisions for development of nonconforming lots
with less than 3000 square feet of lot area and 25 feet of lot width.
Criteria
Per UDC Section 16-9-4: Nonconforming Lots. A nonconforming lot may be used only
for a use permitted in the zone district in which the lot is located. The Planning and
Zoning Commission may waive or modify lot coverage, lot area, bulk plane, height,
setback, lot width or other requirements for any nonconforming lot if it finds that the
proposed development meets the criteria listed below:
a. The lot cannot otherwise be used for any purpose permitted within the zone district
applicable to the property; and
The only permitted use for a 3, 125 square foot lot in an R-1-C zone district is a one-•
unit dwelling on an Urban Lot. The subject property cannot be used for any other
4
•
•
•
principal or accessory uses listed in Table 16-5-1.1: Table of Allowed Uses . The
applicant is requesting approval to construct a one-unit dwelling per the attached
drawings.
b. The waiver, or modification, if granted, is necessary to afford relief with the least
modification possible of the development or dimensional standards otherwise
applicable to the property and;
The proposed one-unit dwelling would not encroach into the required setbacks for an
Urban Lot. The proposed house would have approximately 1,660 square feet of
habitable space and a one car attached garage. The proposed site plan complies with
the minimum lot area, maximum permitted lot coverage, minimum lot width, maximum
height, minimum setbacks, and bulk plane requirements for an Urban Lot in the R-1-
C zone district.
c. The proposed development is consistent with the spirit and intent of the
Comprehensive Plan; and
The proposed one-unit dwelling is consistent with the Housing Goals and Objectives
listed in the Roadmap Englewood: 2003 Englewood Comprehensive Plan,
specifically:
• Objective 1-2: Encourage housing that serves different life-cycle stages including
housing for singles, couples, small and large families, empty nesters, and the
elderly .
• Objective 1-3: Encourage housing investments that improve the housing mix,
including both smaller and larger unit sizes, and a wider range of housing types,
including single-family, duplex, townhome, and condominium units .
• Objective 2-1: Encourage home ownership, property improvement, and house
additions.
d. The lot coverage , bulk plane , height, setbacks and massing of the proposed
development will not vary substantially from the surrounding properties or alter the
essential character of the neighborhood; and
As mentioned previously, the proposed site plan and elevations (attached in Exhibit
C) comply with the lot area, lot coverage, lot width, height, setback, and bulk plane
requirements for the zone district. A comparison of the dimensional requirements for
an Urban Lot in R-1-C Zone District and the proposed plans for 4635 South Pearl
Street is detailed in the table below .
Dimensional Requirements for Proposed Site Plan for
Requirement Urban Lot in R-1-C 4635 South Pearl
Zone District Street
Minimum Lot Area 3,000 Sq. Ft. 3, 125 Sq . Ft.
Maximum Lot Coveraqe 40% 32%
Minimum Lot Width 25' 25'
Maximum Heiqht 32' 29'
Minimum Front Setback 25' 27'
s
Minimum Side Setbacks 3' 3'
Minimum Rear Setback 20' 44'
Minimum Landscape 40% 45%
Area
In terms of building mass, the proposed living area of the 2 story house will be a total
of 1 ,660 square feet. The homes to the north and south of the subject property have
floor areas of approximately 1 ,325 square feet and 1 ,548 square feet respectively.
The home to the north is a one-story, while the home to the south is a split-level two-
story. The proposed development will not alter the essential character of the
neighborhood. The proposed home will improve what is currently a vacant lot in the
neighborhood.
e. The proposed development is compatible with the established development patterns
and intent of the zone district.
The established development patterns for the neighborhood include pre and postwar
wood frame and brick single family homes on a traditional city grid. Most homes have
sloping roofs and the architectural styles are varied. The proposed one-unit dwelling
is compatible with the established development patterns and intent of the zone district.
SUMMARY:
The applicant is requesting approval to construct a one-unit dwelling on an Urban Lot.
•
Staff recommends that the Council uphold the Planning and Zoning Commission's •
decision to approve the request based upon the following:
• The only permitted use for a 3, 125 square foot lot in an R-1-C zone district is a one-
unit dwelling on an Urban Lot.
• The proposed house has a footprint of approximately 985 square feet and is two
stories with a total of approximately 1,660 square feet of habitable space .
• The proposed house is consistent with the Housing Goals and Objectives listed in
the Roadmap Englewood: 2003 Englewood Comprehensive Plan.
• The proposed site plan and elevations comply with the lot area, lot coverage, lot
width, height, setback, and bulk plane requirements for an Urban Lot in the R-1-C
zone district.
• The proposed one-unit dwelling will improve what is currently a vacant lot in the
neighborhood and is compatible with the established development patterns and
intent of the zone district.
The written appeal from Mrs . Coons states that the original applicant should be denied
the right to develop the property because the Ordinance states that the property is not
eligible for development since it has never contained a one unit dwelling; however, Mrs .
Coons' appeal overlooks the fact that Ordinance 45 approved by City Council in 2014,
established a process for the development of vacant Urban Lots.
This process can be found in UDC Table 16-6-1.1: Summary of Dimensional
Requirements for Principal Structures, in #6 of the "Notes to Table". Note #6 states : •
"Vacant Urban Lots follow same process as Nonconforming Lots, see Section 16-9-4 ."
6
•
•
•
Section 16-9-4 requires that the Planning and Zoning Commission consider
nonconforming lots at a public hearing, and make their decision based on the criteria
included in the UDC. The same section addresses appeals to the Planning and Zoning
Commission's commission.
ALTERNATIVES
City Council has the following alternatives with respect to a decision on the proposed
Urban Lot Development.
1. Uphold the Planning and Zoning Commission's decision on the proposed
development of a One-Unit Dwelling at 4635 South Pearl Street.
2. Modify the Planning and Zoning Commission's decision on the proposed
development of a One-Unit Dwelling at 4635 South Pearl Street.
3. Reverse the Planning and Zoning Commission's decision on the proposed
development of a One-Unit Dwelling at 4635 South Pearl Street.
The UDC also outlines possible post-decision actions, UDC section 16-2-18:0 states:
Further Appeals from the Board or Council. Any person or persons aggrieved by
any final decision of the Board or the Council, or any resident, taxpayer, or other
officer, department, Board or Commission of the City, may appeal such final
decision by appropriate legal action to a court of record having jurisdiction. Such
appeal shall be filed no more than thirty (30) days from the date of the Board or
Council final decision.
LIST OF ATTACHMENTS
Exhibit A: Ordinance 45, Series of 2014
Exhibit B: Planning and Zoning Commission Staff Report
Exhibit C: Original Application Materials, Site Plan and Elevations of Proposed
Development
Exhibit D: Planning and Zoning Commission -Minutes
Exhibit E: Planning and Zoning Commission -Findings of Fact
Exhibit F : Katie Coons -Appeal
Exhibit G: Cynthia Brown -Appeal
Exhibit H: Jeremy and Cassandra Letkomiller -Appeal
7
•
•
•
EXHIBIT A
ORDJNANCE NO . L/f.i
SERIES OF 2014
BY AUTHORITY
COUNCIL BILL NO. 45
JNTRODUCEDBYCOUNCIL
MEMBER WILSON
AN ORDJNANCE AMENDJNG TITLE 16, CHAPTER 2, SECTION 2; TITLE 16, CHAPTER
6, SECTION 1, PARAGRAPH B; TITLE 16, CHAPTER 9, SECTION 4; AND TITLE 16,
CHAPTER 11, SECTION 2, PARAGRAPH B, OF THE ENGLEWOOD MUNICIPAL CODE
2000, PERT AJNJNG TO SMALL LOTS.
WHEREAS, the Unified Development Code, adopted in 2004, does not regulate "small lot"
residential properties in terms of Development Standards and associated Dimensional
Requirements; and
WHEREAS, any residential lot not meeting the minimal dimensional standards is treated as a
non-confonninglot; and
WHEREAS, currently the following properties are not effectively regulated:
• In R-1-A and R-1-B Zone Districts: Properties with lot width greater than or equal to
25', but less than 50'; and with lot area greater than or equal to 3,000 sf, but less
than 6,000 sf(+ -13 Total in the City).
• In R-1-C Zone Districts: Properties with lot width greater than or equal to 25 ', but
less than 37'; and with lot area greater than or equal to 3,000 sf, but less than 4,500
sf(+ -40 Total in the City).
• In R-2 or R-3 Zone Districts: Properties with lot width greater than or equal to 25',
but less than 40'; and with lot area greater than or equal 3,000 sf, but less than 4,000
sf(+ -176 Total in the City).
• Jn Medical Zone Districts: Properties with lot width greater than or equal to 25'; but
less than 40'; and with lot area greater than or equal 3,000 sf, but less than 4,000 sf+
-1 Total in the City).
• Jn Residential and Medical Zone Districts: Properties with lot width ofless than 25';
and with lot area less than 3,000 sf(+ -45 ·rotal in the City).
WHEREAS, these properties do not fit the "small lot" criteria and do not have any minimum
setback, maximum height, or maximum lot coverage requirements. There are approximately 275
of these properties within the City; and
WHEREAS, the nonconforming status of these lot create uncertainty for lenders, who are then
reluctant to lend on a property where the entitlements are vague or unknown; and
1
9 bi
WHEREAS, these regulations for smaller residential lots, will provide greater certainty for
property owners; and
WHEREAS, the Englewood Planning and Zoning Commission held a Public Hearing on
November 19, 2013 to consider amendments to the Unified Development Code to establish
regulations for smaller lots; and
WHEREAS, the November 19, 2013 Englewood Planning and Zoning Commission Public
Hearing was reopened on March 4, 2014 and continued to March 18, 2014; and
WHEREAS, the proposed amendments will effectively regulate smaller residential lots (hereafter
called ''Urban Lots") that contain or contained a one-unit dwelling existing on or before February 23,
2004, and have 25 feet or more of Lot Width, 3,000 square feet or more of Lot Area, and will
establish a process for the possible development of vacant Urban Lots of that size; and
WHEREAS, the proposed amendments will establish criteria and a process for the possible
development of Urban Lots with less than 25 feet of Lot Width or less than 3,000 square feet of Lot
Area that contain an existing dwelling unit or are vacant; and
WHEREAS, additions, redevelopment, or development of these properties will be possible if
approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission at a public hearing which insures due process and
appropriate public notice; and
WHEREAS, this proposed amendment is consistent with Roadmap Englewood: 3002 Englewood
•
Comprehensive Plan and. encourages housing investments that improve the housing mix, including •
both smaller and larger unit sizes; and
WHEREAS, additional review criteria will create a clear basis for development of these small
lots; and
WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended that appeals from the Planning
and Zoning Commission's decisions on nonconforming lots be brought to City Council for a de novo
dete:nnination .
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF TIIE CITY OF
ENGLEWOOD, COLORADO, TilAT:
Section l. The City Council of the City of Englewood, Colorado hereby authorizes amending
Title 16, Chapter 2, Section 2, entitled Summary of Development Review and Decision-Making
Procedures of the Englewood Municipal Code 2000, to read as follows :
16-2-2: Summary Table of Administrative and Review Roles.
The following table swnmarizes the review and decision-making responsibilities of the entities
that have specific roles in the administration of the procedures set forth in this Chapter. For
purposes ofthis table, an "(Approval) Lapsing Period" refers to the total time from the
application's approval that an applicant has to proceed with, and often complete, the approved
action. Failure to take the required action within the specified "lapsing period" will automatically
void the approval. See Section 16-2-3.L EMC, "Lapse of Approval,'' below.
2
•
•
Adaptive Reuse of 16-5-3 I R R D ./ ./ None
Designated Historical
Buildings
Administrative 16-2-17 I D A None
Adjusbnents
Administrative Land 16-2-11 I D A 60 days to
Review Permit record
Amendments to the Text 16-2-6 R R D I None
of this Title
Annexation Petitions 16-2-5 I R R D I I None
Appeals to Board 16-2-18 I D I None • Comprehensive Plan 16-2-4 R R D I None
Amendments
Conditional Use Permits 16-2-12 I R D A I I 1 year
Conditional Use -16-7 I R D A I I I None
Telecommunication
Development Agreements 16-2-15 R D As stated in
Agreement
Floodplain Dev't. Permit See Chapter 16-4 for applicable procedures and standards
and Floodplain Variances
Historic Preservation 16-6-11 I R R D I ./ None
Landmark Sign 16-6-13 I D A I I
Limited Review Use 16-2-13 I D A 1 year
Permits
Major Subdivisions 16-2-10
Preliminary Plat I R R D I I ./ 6 months to
submit Final
Plat
Final Plat R R D I I I 60 days to
record
Simultaneous Review I R R D I I I 60 days to • Preliminary P lat/Final record
3
Plat • Recorded Final Plat None
Minor Subdivision 16-2-11
Preliminary Plat ./ D A 6 months to
submit Final
Plat
Final Plat D A 60 days to
record
Recorded Final Plat None
Non"i;mfonnigg Ld21~ ~ ./ R ll ~ ./ L ~ --
Official Zoning Map 16-2-7 ./ R R D ./ ./ ./ None
Amendments (Rezonings)
PUD and TSA Rezonings 16-2-7 ./ R R D ./ ./ ./ None
Temporary Use Permits 16-2-14 ./ D A As stated in
Permit
Unlisted Use 16-5-1.B ./ D A None
Classifications
Zoning Site Plan 16-2-9 D A 3 years
Zoning Variances 16-2-16 ./ R D ./ ./ 180 days
CM/D = City Manager or Designee (Including the Development Review Team) • PC =Planning and Zoning Commission
CC = City Council
BAA= Board of Adjustment and Appeals
1 Notice Required: See Table 16-2-3.1 Summary of Mailed Notice Requirements
•
4
• •
Section 2. The City Council of the City of Englewood, Colorado hereby authorizes amending Title 16, Chapter 6, Section l, Paragraph B,
Table 1.1, entitled Summary of Dimensional Requirements for Principal Structures of the Englewood Municipal Code 2000, to read as follows:
•
Summary Table of Dimensional Requirements for Principal Uses and Structures. All principal structures and uses shall be subject to the intensity
and dimensional standards set forth in the following Table 16-6-1.1 . These standards may be further limited by other applicable sections of this
Title. Additional regulations for the residential districts, and special dimensional regulations related to lot area, setbacks, height, and floor area
are set forth in the subsections immediately following the table. Rules of measurement are set forth in subsection 16-6-1.A EMC. Dimensional
requirements for accessory structures are set forth in subsection 16-6-1.I EMC.
R-1-A District
One-Unit I 9,000 I None '35 !1s 132 l2s 11 120
Dwelling
One-Unit 6,000 None 40 50 32 25 s 20
Dwelling on a [4]
Small Lot [5]
One-Unit Dwelling lJlO.n ~ iU ~ IJZ 122 ll 1~
op an Urban Lot C61 Ill Ul
All Other 24,000 None 35 200 132 l2s 125 125
Allowed Uses
R-1-B District
One-Unit I 7,200 )None 140 160 132 125 15 120
Dwelling
One-Unit I 6,000 !None 140 150 132 125 15 120
Dwelling on a (4]
Small Lot [5]
5
Qg;-1.!oi1 1lwclli1ut ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ l 2.0
on an Urban L:Ql [6] Ill 1Zl
All Other 24,000 None 40 200 32 25 25 25
Allowed Uses
R-1-C District
One-Unit 6,000 None 40 50 32 25 5 20
Dwelling
One-Unit 4,500 None ~!a 37 32 25 3 20
Dwelling on a [4]
Small Lot [5]
Qn,-Unit D~;lling ~ ~ .40 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
QD an llcbiW Lgt [6J ill Ul
All Other 24,000 None 40 200 32 25 25 25
Allowed Uses
R-2-A District
One-Unit 6,000 None 40 50 32 25 5 20
Dwelling
One-Unit 4,000 None ~~ 40 32 25 3 20
Dwelling on a
Small Lot [5]
Qg;-Ugit Dwelling ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ J ~
QD an Urbi!,Q Lot [~J UJ L7J
Multi-Unit 3,000 per unit None 40 25 per 32 25 5 20
Dwelling unit
(Maximum2 [4]
units)
All Other 24,000 None 60 200 32 25 2S 25
Allowed Uses
6 • • ••
• • •
R-2-B District
One-Unit 6,000 None 40 50 32 25 5 20
Dwelling
One-Unit 4,000 None ~iQ 40 32 25 3 20
Dwelling on a
Small Lot [5]
Qn~-Unit J:2~;lliDg ~ ~ !1.Q ll ~ ~ ~ 2.ll
'211 ~ Urban I !gt rnJ ill m
Multi-Unit 3,000 per unit None 60 25 per 32 25 5 20
Dwelling unit
(Maximum [4]
Units Based
on Lot Area
& Lot Width)
All Other 24,000 Nooe 60 200 32 25 25 25
Allowed Uses
MU-R-3-A District
One-Unit 6,000 None 40 50 32 25 5 20
Dwelling
One-Unit 4,000 None ~~ 40 32 25 3 20
Dwelling on a
Small Lot [5]
Qo1<-Unit Dw~lliug ~ ~ iQ ~ ll ~ .l ~
QQ ~ Urban Lot [gJ ill ill
Multi-Unit 3,000 per unit None 60 25 per 32 25 5 25
Dwelling unit
(Maximum [4]
Units Based on
Lot Area&
7
Lot Width)
Private 12,000 None 70 None n/a 25 15 15
Off-Street
Parking Lots
Office, Limited 15,000 1.5 (Excluding the 50 None 32 25 15 25
gross floor area of
parking structures)
All Other 24,000 None 60 200 32 25 25 25
Allowed Uses
MU-R-3-B District (See Additional Regulations Following the Table)
One-Unit 6,000 None 40 50 32 15 5 20
Dwelling
One-Unit 4,000 None ~~ 40 32 ~ll 3 20
Dwelling ona
Small Lot [5]
Qgs;-Unit [,h)o:,llwK ~ ~ ~ ~ JZ .u ~ l.Q
QD an Urh~ Lot [6) Ul ill
Multi-Unit 2-4 units: 3,000 per None 75 None 2-4 units: 15 2-4 units: 5 25
Dwelling unit; Each additional 32 More than 4 units:
(Maximum Units unit over 4 units: More 15
Based on Lot Area 1,000 per unit [4] than4
& Lot Width) units: 60
Office, Limited 24,000 1.5 75 None 60 15 15 [3] 25
(Excluding the
gross floor area of
parking structures)
All Other 24,000 None 75 None 60 15 15 25
Allowed Uses [4]
MU-R-3-C District (See Additional Regulations Following the Table)
8 • • •
• • •
One-Unit 6,000 None 40 50 32 15 5 20
Dwelling
One-Unit 4,000 None ~~ 40 32 15 3 20
Dwelling on a
Small Lot [5]
Qne-1,lQit Dwi:.lling ~ ~ i2 ~ 3.2 ll l ~
QD iW Urban Lg' [.{iJ Ul L1l
Multi-Unit 6,000 None 75 None 40 15 5 20
Dwelling
Office, Limited 6,000 None 75 None 40 15 5 20
All Other 24,000 None 75 None 40 15 5 20
Allowed Uses (4]
M-1, M-2, M-0-2 Districts (See Table 16-6-1.la)
MU-B-1 District (See Additional Regulations Following the Table)
Live/Work None None None None 100 0 and no more than 5 0 5
Dwelling feet
Multi-Unit None None None None 100 0 and no more than 5 0 5
Dwelling [4] feet
All Other None None None None 100 0 and no more than 5 0 5
Allowed Uses feet
MU-B-2 District (See Additional Regulations Following the Table)
Multi-Unit None None None None 60 0 and no more than 5 0 5
Dwelling [4] feet
All Other None None None None 60 0 and no more than 5 0 5
Allowed Uses feet
TSA District
Please refer to Section 16-6-14 EMC, of this Chapter
9
and the applicable Station Area Design Standards and Guidelines
!for intensity and dimensional standards.
I-1 AND I-2
All Allowed None 2:1 None None None Where a building abuts upon, adjoins, or is
Uses Except adjacent to a residential zone district, minimum
Manufactured setbacks of 10 ft on all sides are required, except as
Home Parks required in Section 16-6-7 .G, "Screening
Requirements."
Manufactured Home See Section 16 -5-2.A.3 , above .
Parks
Notes to Table:
[1) The minimum side setback stated in this table for one-unit attached and multi-unit dwellings shall apply to the entire dwelling structure, and
not to each individual dwelling unit located in the structure .
(2) The minimum side setback standard for principal residential dwellings in the residential (R) zone districts, as stated in this Table, shall apply
to such dwellings that existed on the Effective Date of this Title. However, principal residential dwellings existing on the Effective Date of this
Title, and which as of that date are not in compliance with the minimum side setback standards established in this Table, shall not be considered
nonconforming structures due solely to the dwelling's noncompliance with the minimum side setback. Such dwellings are "grandfathered," and
shall be considered legal, conforming structures for the pwposes of sale and development under this Title and other City building and safety
regulations. See Section 16-9-3 (Nonconforming Structures), below.
[3) The minimum separation between principal buildings located on the same or adjoining lots, whether or not the lots are under the same
ownership, shall be fifteen feet (15').
(4] See Section 16-6-1 . C for additional dimensional standards appropri ate to the zone district.
(SJ Small lot of record on or before February 23, 2004 .
W :Urh~ la& gfrc~ctd &bill 5'QD,!linssd ~u; "'2DliliD:i ii 12us;-1mit d»:~lli.ug thQ' "2'i§tGd gg Qt bSifo~ ibSi ;ea~tilS 12ill5' gt;~i!i DU~ ~bm!lll: ~3.
~ll!l~l. ~il!.!Wll l.ZtbiW Le~ C1;2llim: li!Mll~ 1!1J2~jijS:i ill! ~gi.;gnfoanigg Lo~, sec S'~i'211 l ~-2~.
[7J f'2t Urb~ ~~ ~Ub ls~:i li th!W J,ggg 11g , fl, g[Lgt ~ii ~n: IS:lili ~an'~ t\. g[Lgt ~iddl fQll'2:i: liilms:i 12~css iS Noni;auf<;umigg Lof.:i, I!;~
S!iictign I ~-2~,
10 • • •
• •
Section 3. The City Council of the City of Englewood, Colorado hereby authorizes amending Title 16, Chapter 6, Section 1, Paragraph B,
Table I .a, entitled Summary of Dimensional Requirements for Principal Structures Located Within Medical Zone Districts and Overlays of the
Englewood Municipal Code 2000, to read as follows :
Min Max Min Max Max Minimum Setbacks (ft)
•
Lot Lot Lot Height Retail Front Front Side:
Width (ft) Gross
Side: Side: Side: Rear
Area Coverage Upper Adjacent (sq ft) (%) (ft) Floor Story Street Area Setback [1] & [2] (sq ft) Above
60 Feet
M-1 and M-2 Districts and M-0-2 Overlays (See Additional Regulations Following the Table)
Live/Work 6,000 None None 32 10,000 0 and no NA 0 and no
Dwelling [4] [4] more more than
than 10 IO
One-Unit 16,000 140 150 132 !NA 115 NA 5
Dwelling
One-Unit 14 ,000 1~~ 140 '32 INA lis INA 13
Dwelling on a
Small Lot [5]
11
Adjacent Adjacent
Alley Side
[1] & [2] [l] & [2]
(Lots
fronting
Hampden,
Jefferson
or the
3500
blocks of
Logan and
Clarkson)
5 0
5 5
13 b
Adjacent
Side
[1] & [2]
(Lots
fronting
all other
streets)
5
5
13
1~4]
20
120
Qns:i-lJDit irulQ iQ ~ ~ ~ .u & l l l J ~
DwsslJing 0111m Ul fll
1,lrhan Ls21 [~]
All Other 6,000 None None Height Zone 10,000 0 and no 20 0 and no 5 0 5 5
Allowed Uses [4] 1: 145 Height [4] more [4] more than (4]
Zone2:60 than 10 10
Height Zone
3:32 [4]
Notes to Table:
(1) Tue minimum side setback stated in this table for one-unit attached and multi-unit dwellings shall apply to the entire dwelling structure, and
not to each individual dwelling unit located in the structure .
[2) The minimum side setback standard for principal residential dwellings in the residential (R) zone districts, as stated in this table, shall apply
to such dwellings that existed on the effective date of this Title. However, principal residential dwellings existing on the effective date of this
Title, and which as of that date are not in compliance with the minimum side setback standards established in this table, shall not be considered
non-conforming structures due solely to the dwelling's non-compliance with the minimum side setback. Such dwellings are "grandfathered," and
shall be considered legal, conforming structures for the purposes of sale and development under this Title and other City building and safety
regulations. See section 16-9-3 (Non-Conforming Structures), below.
[3] The minimum separation between principal buildings located on the same or adjoining lots, whether or not the lots are under the same
ownership, shall be fifteen feet (15').
[4] See section 16-6-l.C for additional dimensional standards appropriate to the zone district.
(5) Small lot of record on or before February 23, 2004.
Uil Urban lot g(1,;s.ga1 tbat i;o12111im"'1 cc i;:QUl§in§ ~ ~-11nU dw,lli11g &hat c2Ys&Gd QQ 121: ~(go; lJlSj Etf~lixc Date of&bili IitlSi (Icbll!ll.l: 23.
~004}, ~ASiilDt IJw~ 1~ fullo~ amf! g~ss u t:WuQ2ufc;uming Lo~. 5" Sectigg l 6-Y
171 fi:n: lld:!ilU Mi~ :tXitb l;ss lbgg J Qi!Q :ag, 0,. g( Lgt Area w; ls~§:i lbag ~~ 0 gf LQ£ l:Yid~ fgJlgJ&: liiillmi m;ocess A:! tl1201::agfg~i11g Lg~. ~
~'"Ugg l {l-2:1,
12 • • •
•
•
•
Section 4. The City Council of the City of Englewood, Colorado hereby authorizes amending
Title 16, Chapter 9, Section 4, entitled Nonconforming Lots of the Englewood Municipal Code
2000, to read as follows:
16-9-4: Nonconforming Lots.
A. Nonconforming Veeaat Lot.
1. A nonconforming ;iaeam lot may be used only for a use permitted in the zone district
in which the lot is located. The Ci~ ~48Bf!ger er Elesignee Planning and Zoning
Commission may waive or modify ~ epea spaee lot coye@ge, parking lot
area, bulk plane. height, setback, er lot width, or other requirements for any
nonconforming lot if he.lsfte i1 finds that the proposed deyelownept meets tbe criteria
Usted be)ow:
a . The lot cannot otherwise be used for any purpose permitted within the zone
district applicable to the property; and
b . The waiver, or modjfication, if granted, is necessary to afford relief with the
least modification possible of the development or dimensional standards
otherwise applicable to the property~
'6 The proposed deyelopmept is consjstenl with the soirit apd intent gf the
Comprebepsiye Plan: apd
The lot coye@ge, bulk plane. hejght. setbaclcs and massipg of the proposed
deyeloprnept will ngt yarv subStaptia!Jy frgm the surrounding properties Or
alter the esseptial character of the n;jghbgrhggd: and
~ The propgsed deyelgpmenl js !jPmpatible with the establjshed deyelopmept
patterns and intept of the zone district.
2 . 2'\&y eppea:l frem ~e City Mwger er eesignee's eeeisieB sBall ee te ~e :8e6ffi.
The Plannjng apd Zoajng Commissign's decisjgn on anv deyelgpmenl ofa
ngncgnforming lgt shall be made at a public hearing that has beep published apd
pgste4 as required in Sectign 16-2-3(Gl of this Title,
J., Anv appeal from the Plagning and Zoajng Cgmmissjon's decision shall be to Cjty
Coµg!(il as a de now reyiew, Sucb appsal shall be filed ng more thap thirtv (30>
days from the date gfthe Planning and Zonjng Cgmmission's final decisign,
,; ~· No nonconforming lot shall be further subdivided or shall have its boundaries altered
in any manner that would compound, expand, or extend the nonconforming
characteristic( s) of the lot.
Section S, The City Council of the City of Englewood, Colorado hereby authorizes amending
Title 16, Chapter 11, Section 2(B), entitled Definitions of Words , Terms , and Phrases of the
Englewood Municipal Code 2000, by the addition of the following definition in alphabetical
order to read as follows :
13
Lot. Urban: A legal lgt of record existing on the effectiye date oftbis Title (Fcbruarv j3, 2004)
where the lot width or )gt area is less than the mjnitpwn staruiard for a ope-unit slwelling au
small lot in the mpe district in which the lsli is locatgi,
Section 6, Sa(etv Clauses, The City Council hereby finds, determines, and declares that this
Ordinance is promulgated under the general police power of the City of Englewood, that it is
promulgated for the health, safety, and welfare of the public, and that this Ordinance is necessary
for the preservation of health and safety and for the protection of public convenience and
welfare. The City Council further determines that the Ordinance bears a rational relation to the
proper legislative object sought to be obtained,
Section 7, Severabilitv, If any clause, sentence, paragraph, or part of this Ordinance or the
application thereof to any person or circumstances shall for any reason be adjudged by a court of
competent jurisdiction invalid, such judgment shall not affect, impair or invalidate the remainder
of this Ordinance or it application to other persons or circumstances,
Section 8. Inconsistent Ordinances, All other Ordinances or portions thereof inconsistent or
conflicting with this Ordinance or any portion hereof are hereby repealed to the extent of such
inconsistency or conflict
Section 9. Effect of repeal or modification, The repeal or modification of any provision of
the Code of the City of Englewood by this Ordinance shall not release, extinguish, alter, modify,
or change in whole or in part any penalty, forfeiture, or liability, either civil or criminal, which
shall have been incurred under such provision, and each provision shall be treated and held as
still remaining in force for the pwposes of sustaining any and all proper actions, suits,
proceedings, and prosecutions for the enforcement of the penalty, forfeiture, or liability, as well
as for the pwpose of sustaining any judgment, decree, or order which can or may be rendered,
entered, or made in such actions, suits, proceedings, or prosecutions,
Section 10 , Penalty, The Penalty Provision of Section 1-4-1 EMC shall apply to each and
every violation of this Ordinance,
Introduced, read in full, and passed on first reading on the 21st ofJuly, 2014,
Published by Title as a Bill for an Ordinance in the City's official newspaper on the 25th of
July, 2014,
Published as a Bill for an Ordinance on the City's official website beginning on the 23rd day
of July, 2014 for thirty (30) days ,
A Public H earing was held on August 4, 2014,
Read by title and passed on final reading on the 2nd day of September, 2014 ,
Published by title in the City's official newspaper as Ordinance No, ~Series of 2014, on
the 51b day of September, 2014,
Published by title on the City's official website beginning on the 3n1 day of
September, 2014 for thirty (30) days.
14
•
•
•
•
•
•
This Ordinance shall take effect thirty (30) days after publication following final passage.
I, Loucrishia A. Ellis, City Clerk of the City of Englewood, Colorado, hereby certify that the
above and foregoing is a true copy of the Ordinance passed on final reading and published by
title as Ordinance No. qs, Series of2014 .
15
{'
EXHIBIT B
c T y 0 F ENGLEWOOD
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
TO:
THRU:
Planning and Zoning Commission
Michael Flaherty, Deputy City Manager
Harold Stitt, Senior Planner
FROM:
HEARING
DATE:
SUBJECT:
Brook Bell, Planner II
September 22, 2015
Case Number: 2015-09
Public Hearing on Construction of a One-Unit Dwelling on a Vacant Urban
Lot at 4635 South Pearl Street
APPLICANT:
Matthew Martin, Trustee
The Law Office of Matthew A. Martin, P.C. Trust
598 Leicester Lane
Castle Pines, CO 80108
PROPERTY OWNER:
Amber Alsadi
463 5 South Pearl Street
Englewood, Colorado 80113
REQUEST:
The applicant is requesting approval to construct a One-Unit Dwelling on an Urban lot. A
public hearing before the Planning and Zoning Commission is required per Unified
Development Code (UDC) Section 16-9-4: Nonconforming lots.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Planning and Zoning Commission approve Case Number 2015-
09 to allow the construction of a One-Unit Dwelling on a vacant Urban Lot at 4635 South
Pearl Street per the attached drawings.
PROPERTY ZONING AND LOCATION:
The property is zoned R-1-C, Single Unit Residential District (Small Lot Size). Properties to
the north, south, east, and west are also zoned R-1-C.
1000 Englewood Parkway Englewood, Colorado 80110 PHONE 303-762-2342 FAX 303 783-6895
www.englewoodgov.org
•
•
•
•
•
•
DEPARTMENT AND AGENCY REVIEW:
The proposed plans were distributed to six City Departments and Divisions for review;
there were no objections to the proposed addition.
BACKGROUND:
1. The subject property is 3, 125 square feet in area and has 25 feet of lot frontage along
South Pearl Street. Per UDC Table 16-6-1.1: Summary of Dimensional Requirements for
Principal Structures, this property qualifies as an Urban Lot in the R-1-C zone district.
UDC Table 16-6-1.1 provides dimensional requirements for Urban Lots of record that at
one time contained or currently contain a One-Unit Dwelling on or before the Effective
Date of this Title (February 24, 2004); however, vacant Urban Lots that do not meet this
definition are required to follow the same process for development as Nonconforming
Lots, which includes a public hearing before the Planning and Zoning Commission.
2. It does not appear that the subject property has ever contained a dwelling unit. The
subject property is part of the South Broadway Height Subdivision which was platted in
1889 and predates the establishment of the City of Englewood by 14 years. The first
zoning ordinance enacted in Englewood was in 1940. This Ordinance zoned the
subject property and surrounding area R-1.
The R-1 district regulations in the 1940 Ordinance specified a minimum lot area of
6,000 square feet but did not require a minimum lot frontage. The 1940 Ordinance did
permit the development of lots smaller than 6,000 square feet, as long as the lot was in
separate ownership prior to enactment of the 1940 zoning Ordinance. It is unclear
when the subject property originally came into separate ownership; however, it is clear
by a 1952 Quit Claim Deed that the subject property was in separate ownership at least
as far back as 1952.
The City revised the zoning Ordinance in 1955, 1963, 1985, and 2004; these revisions
(to varying degrees) did not permit the development of a lot in the R-1-C zone district
with less than 4,500 square feet of lot area and 37 lineal feet of lot frontage. In 2014 the
Planning and Zoning Commission, and City Council of Englewood enacted
amendments to the UDC that permitted the development of Urban Lots with a
minimum of 3000 square feet of lot area and a minimum of 25 feet of lot frontage. The
amendments also contained provisions for development of nonconforming lots with
less than 3000 square feet of lot area and 25 feet of lot frontage.
3. The proposed house on the subject property has a footprint of approximately 985
square feet and is two stories with approximately 1,660 square feet of habitable space.
The proposed site plan complies with the minimum lot area, maximum permitted lot
coverage, minimum lot width, maximum height, minimum setbacks, and bulk plane
requirements for an Urban Lot in the R-1-C zone district.
ANALYSIS:
Per UDC Section 16-9-4: Nonconforming Lots, A nonconforming lot may be used only for a
use permitted in the zone district in which the lot is located. The Planning and Zoning
Commission may waive or modify lot coverage, lot area, bulk plane, height, setback, lot
width or other requirements for any nonconforming lot if it finds that the proposed
development meets the criteria listed below:
a. The lot cannot otherwise be used for any purpose permitted within the zone district •
applicable to the property; and
The only permitted use for a 3, 125 square foot lot in an R-1-C zone district is a one-
unit dwelling on an Urban Lot. The subject property cannot be used for any other
principal or accessory uses listed in Table 16-5-1.1: Table of Allowed Uses. The
applicant is requesting approval to construct a one-unit dwelling per the attached
drawings.
b. The waiver, or modification, if granted, is necessary to afford relief with the least
modification possible of the development or dimensional standards otherwise
applicable to the property and;
The proposed one-unit dwelling would not encroach into the required setbacks for
an Urban Lot. The proposed house would have approximately 1,660 square feet of
habitable space and a one car attached garage. The proposed site plan complies
with the minimum lot area, maximum permitted lot coverage, minimum lot width,
maximum height, minimum setbacks, and bulk plane requirements for an Urban Lot
in the R-1-C zone district.
c. The proposed development is consistent with the spirit and intent of the
Comprehensive Plan; and
The proposed one-unit dwelling is consistent with the Housing Goals and Objectives
listed in the Roadmap Englewood: 2003 Englewood Comprehensive Plan, specifically: •
• Objective 1-2: Encourage housing that serves different life-cycle stages including
housing for singles, couples, small and large families, empty nesters, and the
elderly.
• Objective 1-3: Encourage housing investments that improve the housing mix,
including both smaller and larger unit sizes, and a wider range of housing types,
including single-family, duplex, townhome, and condominium units.
• Objective 2-1: Encourage home ownership, property improvement, and house
additions.
d. The lot coverage, bulk plane, height, setbacks and massing of the proposed
development will not vary substantially from the surrounding properties or alter the
essential character of the neighborhood; and
As mentioned previously, the proposed site plan and elevations comply with the lot
area, lot coverage, lot width, height, setback, and bulk plane requirements for the
zone district. A comparison of the dimensional requirements for an Urban Lot in R-1 •
C Zone District and the proposed plans for 4635 South Pearl Street is detailed in the
table below.
•
•
•
•
Dimensional Requirement Requirements for Urban Lot Proposed Site Plan for 4635
in R-1-C Zone District South Pearl Street
Minimum Lot Area 3,000 Sq. Ft. 3, 125 Sq. Ft.
Maximum Lot Covera ge 40% 32%
Minimum Lot Width 25' 25'
Maximum Height 32' 29'
Minimum Front Setback 25' 27'
Minimum Side Setbacks 3' 3'
Minimum Rear Setback 20' 44'
Minimum landscap e Area 40% 45%
In terms of building mass, the proposed living area of the house will be 1,660 square
feet. The homes to the north and south of the subject property have floor areas of
approximately 1,325 square feet and 1,548 square feet respectively. The home to
the north is a one-story, while the home to the south is a split-level two-story. The
proposed development will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood.
The proposed home will improve what is currently a vacant lot in the neighborhood.
e. The proposed development is compatible with the established development patterns
and intent of the zone district
The established development patterns for the neighborhood include pre and
postwar wood frame and brick single family homes on a traditional city grid. Most
homes have sloping roofs and the architectural styles are varied. The proposed one-
unit dwelling is compatible with the established development patterns and intent of
the zone district.
SUMMARY:
The applicant is requesting approval to construct a one-unit dwelling on a Urban Lot. Staff
recommends that the Planning and Zoning Commission approve the request based upon
the following:
• The only permitted use for a 3, 125 square foot lot in an R-1-C zone district is a one-unit
dwelling on an Urban Lot.
• The proposed house has a footprint of approximately 985 square feet and is two stories
with approximately 1,660 square feet of habitable space.
• The proposed house is consistent with the Housing Goals and Objectives listed in the
Roadmap Englewood: 2003 Englewood Comprehensive Plan .
• The proposed site plan and elevations comply with the lot area, lot coverage, lot width,
height, setback, and bulk plane requirements for an Urban Lot in the R-1-C zone district.
• The proposed one-unit dwelling will improve what is currently a vacant lot in the
neighborhood and is compatible with the established development patterns and intent
of the zone district.
ATTACHMENTS:
Vicinity Map
Aerial View
Application Materials
Drawings
•
•
•
• l. • 4573 ·--. -_ . ...,..
"T\JI V
4574 4577 4572 4573 4e City of Englewood, Colorado 4591 4574
4580 4579 4590 ~ 0) 45
0) Vicinity Map: 4595 4584 4581 4596 <o 4580 4e
463 5 South Pearl St • .. s TUFTS TUFTS R-1-C TUFTS
4601 4606 4601 4600 4601 4600 46 LEGEND
4609 4610 4609 4608 4609 4606 46 D Subject Property
4617 4614 4625 4616 4621 4612 46 D Parcels
4625 s 4624 4633 4630 4629 4616 46 c:J Zoning
4629 ~ 4630 4635 , 4638 4635 ~ 4620 46 § IJ ~ f2 4635 ~ 4644 4641 us 4648 4645 (!) 4630 46 September 2015
4637
(/')
4654 ~ 4640 ~ 4650 4655 Q.. 4651 l: 46 (/')
4673 ~ 4660 4663 4660 4659 ~ 4650
46
4677 4670 4665 4668 4669 4660 j.':'I .... 46 w 4681 4676 4675 4676 4677 4670 v1/fl D D f''l :·.-46 4689 4682 4684 4685 4680 ~ '. J u rJ fl ·-·i ..
4697 4690 4697 c 4695 4690 46 LJ [J ~~ 1] [J -r .
<o LJ ~·-
[_ [l rn 0 I
iN , •••• -... i. -·-L.J L
--... -.. ""' .. ' -· .. ~-1-8 VI 'I I._,, 'I 1• n r 1
"1 r-.., ... l
4701 4701 4702 "f!I~ l.1 l"l -1 '' 4700 470 r
4700 4701 ., .. .. ~ -!"""'! 4709 -' 4711 4708 471 4710 4715 4720
4715 4717 3oof!!et ~ " 4720 4722 4710 471 0 100 200 q 4719 ~ 4735 ~ :: 4726 ~ N
~ A7"JA ~"9--4724 472
•
•
•
City uf Englewood
Community Development Department
1000 Englewood Parkway
Englewood, CO 80110
303-762-2342
englewoodgov.org
APPLICATION FORM
APPLICATION FOR: PCJ!M2.02ec((he,-/Jvf ~h&J.
(Altacli Clrec/JiS( anJali required documents -Incomplete applications \Jii not be accepted.)
EXHIBIT C
PROPERTY ADDRESS: ~ L, ~ s ~ I r J< (\_rl ' z:.ns\.e iliJ fJ I Ci] &):) I '2'
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: (Provide at kast onl! of the following)
Lot(s) Ye Block led-Subdivision ~DL·.:..t"' '1rvo.~ \~°'(r l~'~.:\1
Parcel Identification No. ____ -__ • _ -__ • __ _
Metes and Bounds Legal Description-------------
APPLICANT
Name: \A"' D)5•1c:.e o\ l-1A_ft\1'el.V ~ · ~U.'&'\1ry \.\
Company: fie_ TI vs.+
Address: 5'1 '\j I e.\ c.e~ 1-~y Ul01-fL
C.o.s t IQ P....:nRr . c 1) 801 oY
Telephone Number: 30?, · 7;) '5· OO(f
Print Name
(Attach separate sheet if necessary)
PROPERlY OWNER
Name: Arn \Jg,y= ~\~Sc~ i.
Company: ___________ _
Address: 48h5": 5, ,Peucf 6f=
£Ad/e.w@cl,, CL2 @Ol /2
Telephone Number:. ________ _
Fax Number: ·~-------------~--
Em a i I Address: -------------~-~
Avthof'tr:ufun Ifft Cenf.mc.f-
Signature
Amhe,(' At~cft·
Print Name
l Staff Use Only
-Date Received: fl01./IZ: Zone District; /<.-! ·C-
Received By:1 Planner Assigned: 13../3. -
Fee Received:=$~...__.____ Case/Proje<;t No.: AP@2121.?-!)?7
' -Application Fees are NorrRefundable · ·
lune :!011
This letter is to serve as written justification for the proposed single family residence to be built
on the non-conforming lot at 4635 S. Pearl Street, Englewood, CO.
a. This lot at 25 feet wide and 125 deep is currently and has been vacant. The lot as it sits
is serving no purpose beneficial to the residents or the City of Englewood. However,
with the addition of a new, custom single family home, the visual aesthetics of the lot
improve, as there will be a brand new custom home on the lot complete with
professional landscaping. Additionally, the Buyer of the home will presumably
contribute to the population and tax base In the City of Englewood and the State of
Colorado .
b. The Waiver or Modification is necessary to afford relief as there are no options available
for modifying the lot size. As the lot sits, the only other option Is for it to remain vacant,
serving no constructive purpose for the city of Englewood or its current owner.
c. The proposed development is consistent with the spirit and intent of the
Comprehensive plan. The Planning and Zoning Commission has specifically allowed for
this process to improve the aesthetics and use of land in Englewood, and this home will
do just that. An unused, somewhat neglected piece of land will become a single family
home, with a yard and occupants who will care for the home yard . Additionally, existing
houses on 25 foot lots are entitled to modification and/or replacement; building a new
home on the lot is consistent with this allowance.
d . The proposed project falls within all of the lot coverage, bulk plane, setbacks and
massing required by the city and will not alter the character of the neighborhood. The
Builder and Architect have worked closely with representatives of the City/Commission
to ensure that the proposed home meets these criteria. The home has been designed
to blend with both the design of older homes in the neighborhood, as well as other
recent new build/custom homes in Englewood .
e. The proposed development is designed to be compatible with the established
development patterns and intent of the zone district. The proposed development will
likely encourage the betterment of the neighborhood: both visually and from a
population standpoint, the addition of one new single family home where currently
there Is an unused, not visually aesthetic lot, can only be a positive contribution to the
City.
•
•
•
• •
PROPOSED RESIDENCE AT
4635 S. PEARL STREET
LABEL
7'\1
A2
A3
A4
A5
A6
A7
AS
LAYOUT PAGE TABLE
•
P.O. BOX26
MEAD. COLORADO 80540
PHONE : 30J...931 -1n6
FAX: 303-484-4832
U) a: w
0
..J
5
ID
:::;:
0
I-
U)
::::>
(J
U)
0 z
<(
..J
:i::
Cl :c
0
I-0
:ll~ a: 0
I-..J
U) 0
..J (J
a: -<( 0
~8
ui ~ .,,_,
:;i Cl
"'Z w
I-w w
I
l/l
a:: w > 0 u
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
TITLE DESCRIPTION COMMENTS _ i COVER SHEET_ --+ -~
SITE PLAN
j 1 ST FLOOR PLAN
2CD FLOOR PLAN
.EAST ELEVATION
NORTH ELEVATION
WEST ELEVATION
SOUTH ELEVATION
I
REVISIONS
ORIG. 8/2-V 01 5 I
1 I REV2
REV3
co
EV5
G
>-w
__J
__J
<(
ADJ GARAGE ADJ RESIDENCE
...... ---------------------------------12500'----------------------------------
4375· 81 .25· I· 25 .oo·------
3· SIDE SETB ACK REAR 35% -+-FRONT 65% FRONT SETBACK T -PROPERTY LINE
1 ------~~~=,--~ ~ -' ---: =-r -----'""°°'""""----------r1t ~"O"---
~ ~ J 1-1= ~~~~ -1 I -
-_ Q_ --T :~O<''~~~ --' ---.;;,~..;-,;;;------------------~1())_ -::;;fts--
3· SIDE SETBACK
'4-----------4 3 .84 '----------~-i
ADJ GARAGE
•
PROPERTYLINE --------------1--------------~
14---------27 00'------..
0 TREE S· MIN 2-112" CALIPER DE CIDUOU S OR 6'-0" TALL EVERGREEN
ADJ RE SIDENCE
•
Q MIN OF (13) 5 GALLON SHRUBS
LOT SIZE= 3125 SQ FT
BUILDING COVERAGE= 985 SQ FT (32%)
OPEN SPACE = 21 40 SQ FT (68%)
LANDSCAPE ARE A= 1405 SQ FT (45%)
" ~ w
0
iii
()
::;
ID :> a_
1-w w
0:::
I-
C/)
__J
0:::
<(
w
0...
(/)
P.O . BOX 26
MEAD. COLORAOO 80540
PHONE· 303-931 -1776
FAX :lOJ-484-4832
0 ,_ 0
:ll~ ~o ,_ ..J
"'o
..JU ~ -~g a.a
ui~
"'..J :;: Cl
"'Z w
z
:5
"-
UJ
SITE PLAN t:;
Vl
1" = 10'-0"
REVISIONS
N ORIG. e/20r.2015
""'' ,,
w·'[~ REV3
EVS
•
,
q
~
• •
20'-0"
3050DH 3050DH
I ~ .~
I fT I
I
I I
I ~ I, I GARAGE
I 19'-6" x 9'-6"
11
I
I
I l _J
-
~~ ,IJ g I
2668 r MUD ROOM
LP :(() 11 '-8" x 7'-0"
I
34'-0"
2020FX 2020FX
1
J
c~
•
.;,_.;;1~ D e_filgri.
..,_'l>c & ~o
'"" Enu1neer1nu
P.O. BOX26
MEAD, COLORADO 80540
PHONE: 303-931 -lns
FAX : JOJ..464-4832
IQ
w c
..J
5
ID
=a
:::;;
t: 0 r ~
u ::> ' (.) 3 ,,, , c
z <
1 1
..J
:I:
(!)
1 1
:I:
0
1 1
11
~ PORCH 1 1
s·-11 " x 18'-1" I I
1-C
:ll~ a: 0
I-..J <llo
-'U a: -<tC WO
11.Q
ui ~ .,,_,
::lC> .. z w
1 1
1 1
1 1 ex:
I
I
=-.., ~ -~ ---------=191
0 oz u: :5
I ™'" ,. .•.•• "" ,,.'" ™'" I ,_,_J
LIVING AREA
m.fillfl
1 ST FLOOR PLAN
1/4" = 1'-0"
f--Q_
If) ,....
REVISIONS I
ORIG. 812512015
'"'Vl REV2
REV3
CD
l ~EVS
I ~~I
I
0
~
I
0
~
2020FX
•
2020FX 2020FX
3040DH 3040DH
3040FX
i ~
54'-0"
LIVING AREA
931 sq ft
•
3040FX
2020FX
I
0
~
I
~
2020FX
041'/ I & ...__f En111naar1n11
'-"",.:.';-p esign
9
"'
P.O. BOX 2S
MEAD, COLORAOO 80540
PHONE: 303-931-ln6
FAX.: 303-484-4832
!Q
w c
-' 5
ID
::E ~ ~
Q U)
~ i3 ~ U)
Q c
z
<(
-' :I:
C>
:I:
0
I-c
ttl~ a: 0
I--'
U) 0
-' u ~c WO c..o
cli~
~a
"'Z w
ex:
0
Oz
Lt :5
oo..
u
N
REVISIONS
ORIG. 812512015
"oVl
2CD FLOOR PLAN
1/4" = 1'-0"
REV2
REVJ
co
EV5
I
I
I
I
'
I ~: I
•
•
9
i-
•
,...-----------------25'-0"-----------------+.
..b..
AS PH ALT SHIN G LE S T YP I
~
1XB TEX HRDBRD FASC IA TYP
I
~
I
~ [I][I] ~ HARDIEPANEL VERT.
SIDIN G TYP
I 7 ~ ---=::: 1L_____L~6~~E~Es\~~DBRD 7~ >----= I I
~~~~
............... ........
I rnrn I L , -""~"'"'""'
[Ill] 342'J ~ .. ,_ ~HIB ~~v
~ I
II 1'Cl l I
~
•
'-,-6e, pesign
o.q-c I &
,<fY En111neer1n11
P _Q _ BOX 26
MEAD, COLORAOO 80540
PHONE : 303-931-1n6
FAX: 303-484-4832
0
1-C
ttli:! a: 0 ......... <llo
....1(.) a: ..
<C WO
11.Q
ui ~
"'....o ~(!) •z w
z
0
I--
l/l ~
<( >
UJ UJ
...J
UJ
I
I
I
REVISIONS I
ORIG. 8125120 15
EAST ELEVATION
1/4" = 1'-0"
1
REV2
REV3
CD
EV5
I ~:I
I
S~3C11n8 WOl.Sn::> SCNlf1H~IH ""1:10-:J 03NfJ/S30 oa~010::> 'aOOM31~N3 l.33~1.S 1~1f3d ·s St91> D ~
D <------
D <------
<------
<------
<------
D
D
NOLL'lf/\313 HHION
D
D
D
D
~ ~ Q;~ ~~ ~
-
~S1 ~ z 0 ~ > w ..J = wo I J:~ I-II 0::: -o~ z~ •
•
•
= ; Cl ol5 'C oQ II '(i)I II ~ Cl ; -(,) = '.<; ; • ~1 Ill ov. ~
ll d
•
lid
•
S~3011n8 WO.LSn::> SONV1H~IH "tJO::J Q3N!llS30 00~010::> 'OOOM31~N3 .l33~.LS 1~V3d ·s S£9t
--lid --lid --li d --,-----l i d --li d
/
/
/
/
/
/ /
/ /
/ /
/ /
/
/ /
/ /
/ /
/
/ /
/ /
/ /
/ / B /
/ / -/ /
/
" B " " " " -" ', " " " " " " " ', " " " " " " " " " " ....
" " " " " " •Stt
--li d --li d --l i d~--
I
NOUV'f\313 153M
--li d --li d --
f;
~ A I ~
~
f--
"1 . / I
c ~ CJ
~ c::l
~ ~
CJ c::
c:: ~ c::J
~ ~
c::J c:::J
CJ c=:
\'l
.. O-.H
l i d -
l i d -
§ r;J cj~N ~~~ ~S 1 ~ z 0 ~ > WO ..J I w~ .... II fl) -w-3:~
S~3a11na WO.LSn::> SCNlflH~IH ""l:JD:J 03N:JIS3 Q ~ g oa~OlO::> 'aOOM3l~N3 .L33~.LS l~lf3d ·s 9£91> D ~
D ~
B .....___
B .....___
NOil'V/\313 ~ H1nos ~ 0 .... "' §~~ ~
D
D
D
D
I
~s~ z 0 ~ > w ..J = wo I :c~ t-II :::> -0 ;;,. Cl) ;::: •
•
•
•
•
•
H
I.
CITY OF ENGLEWOOD PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS
September 22, 2015
CALL TO ORDER
EXHIBIT D
The regular meeting of the City Planning and Zoning Commission was called to order at 7:00 p.m.
in the City Council Chambers of the Englewood Civic Center , Chair Fish presiding.
Present:
Absent:
Staff:
lB
Bleile, Brick, Freemire, King, Kinton (arrived 7:03), Knoth, Madrid, Townley, Pittinos ,
Fish
None
Mike Flaherty, Deputy City Manager
Dugan Comer, Deputy City Attorney
John Voboril, Planner II
Brook Bell, Planner II
II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
• September 9, 2015 Minutes
Knoth moved;
Freemire seconded: TO APPROVE THE SEPTEMBER 9 , 2015, MINUTES AS AMENDED.
Chair Fish asked if there were any modifications or corrections. Mr. Brick requested that on page
two of the minutes, his comment regarding City Manager Keck be changed to add that he would
like to hear Mr. Keck's comments on the mission and vision statement recently adopted by the City.
Minutes will be amended to reflect this change.
AYES:
NAYS:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT :
Brick, Freemire, Kinton, Knoth, Fish
None
Bleile , King, Madrid, Townley
None
Motion carried .
II~
Ill. Public Hearing Case 2014-02 Walk and Wheel Master Plan and Program
Freemire moved;
Knoth seconded: To open the public hearing for Case 2014-02 Walk and Wheel Master Plan and
Program
AYES:
NAYS:
Motion passes .
Ble ile , Brick, Freemire, King, Kinton, Knoth, Madrid, Townley, Fish
None
Staff Presentation
II
John Voboril, Planner II, Community Development Department, was sworn in. Mr. Voboril stated
one correction to his staff report, the notice of public hearing was posted on the City website from
September 9, 2015 through September 22, 2015.
Mr. Voboril presented the staff recommendation for approval by the Commission and a favorable
recommendation for adoption by City Council of the Walk and Wheel Master Plan and Program
which supports the Comprehensive Plan.
Ms. Townley asked about the funding for the study; Mr. Voboril responded that the entire study
was paid for by the grant from Kaiser Permanente. Mr. Kinton asked if the list of "quick wins" was
exhaustive or if there are other projects that may be included. Mr. Voboril replied that some tasks
that were presented during the study will be outlined in a white paper separate from the Master
Plan and Program and will be shared with the Commission when completed.
B.
Public Testimony
No members of the public presented to testify.
B
Discussion
•
The Commissioners did not have any questions for Mr. Voboril. • e
Brick moved;
Bleile seconded: To close the public hearing for Case 2014-02 Walk and Wheel Master Plan and
Program
AYES:
NAYS:
Motion passes.
lD
Knoth moved;
Bleile, Brick, Freemire, King, Kinton, Knoth, Madrid, Townley, Fish
None
Madrid seconded: To approve Case 2014-02 Walk and Wheel Master Plan and Program as written
and forward to City Council with a favorable recommendation.
Discussion
B
Mr. Brick stated that he feels that the Master Plan and Program supports the ideals of the authors of
the 2003 Comprehensive Plan and will facilitate implementation of the vision of the Comprehensive
Plan.
lD
Vote
Bleile -Yes, he agrees with Mr. Brick that the plan supports the vision that was laid out in 2003.
Brick -Yes, he thanked Mr. Voboril for developing a plan that can be implemented. He stated that
he particularly likes the regional cooperation between Sheridan and Greenwood Village as •
•
•
•
well as the business and employment goal. He feels that the plan will enhance the quality
of life for the residents of Englewood.
Freemire -Yes, the plan offers the opportunity for the citizens of Englewood to participate in biking
and walking activities and will improve the community.
King -Yes, the plan is consistent with the original Comprehensive Plan and supports the new
Comprehensive Plan.
Kinton -Yes, he commented that he feels the plan is a step in the right direction for improving the
pedestrian and bicycling experience in Englewood.
Knoth -Yes
Madrid -Yes
Townley -Yes, the plan ties in well with the goals and objectives outlined earlier. She congratulated
Mr. Voboril on writing the grant and receiving the funding. She feels that it is an actionable
plan with reasonable recommendations. The plan ties in well with the Surgeon General's
call to action for walking and walkable communities as well as the Governor's initiative to
invest in biking and walking infrastructures.
Fish -Yes, agrees with the previous comments and thanked the staff and consultants for putting
together a great plan that will benefit the Commission by providing a resource to guide
future decisions regarding projects.
AYES:
NAYS:
Motion passes.
I.I
Bleile, Brick, Freemire, King, Kinton, Knoth, Madrid, Townley, Fish
None
IV. Public Hearing Case 2015-09 4635 South Pearl Street Urban Lot Development
Knoth moved;
King seconded: To open the public hearing for Case 2015-09 4635 South Pearl Street Urban Lot
Development
AYES:
NAYS:
Motion passes.
II
Bleile, Brick, Freemire, King, Kinton, Knoth, Madrid, Townley, Fish
None
Staff Presentation
Brook Bell, Planner II, was sworn in. Mr. Bell reviewed the applicable zoning regulations and the
history of the property. The Commissioners were supplied with drawings of the proposed
development, a single family home. The property meets all requirements for development of an
Urban Lot and staff recommends approval of the case.
Mr. Knoth asked if the case would be forwarded to City Council. Mr. Bell responded that the only
approval needed for the case is by the Planning and Zoning Commission.
The Unified Development Code (UDC) requires that development on vacant Urban Lots go through
the same process for approval as non-conforming lots which includes a public hearing. Mr. Bell
reviewed the dimensions of the proposed single family home and corresponding dimensional
requirements of the UDC. The five criteria to be met for approval are:
1. The lot cannot otherwise be used for any purpose permitted within the zone district
applicable to the property.
2. The waiver, or modification, if granted, is necessary to afford relief with the least
modification possible of the development or dimensional standards otherwise applicable to
the property.
3. The proposed development is consistent with the spirit and intent of the Comprehensive
Plan.
4. The lot coverage, bulk plane, height, setbacks and massing of the proposed development
will not vary substantially from the surrounding properties or alter the essential character of
the neighborhood.
5. The proposed development is compatible with the established development patterns and
intent of the zone district.
Mr. Fish asked how the lot was created, Mr. Bell replied that research of the property records
revealed that the lot has been vacant since at least 1952. The result of the research is inconclusive
with regards to the origins of the lot.
•
Mr. Freemire asked how the lot coverage of the proposed development compared to the rest of the
neighborhood. Mr. Bell responded that it was his estimation that most of the homes in the
neighborhood were built to less than the 40% maximum with many near 30% lot coverage. •
Mr. Madrid commented on the property to the south of the subject property that has a structure built
over the property line. The properties are under the same ownership but have not been combined;
however if the structure were demolished, two single family homes could be constructed.
Mr. Bell provided clarification to the Commission regarding the reason for the hearing. The hearing
is for the Commission to approve development on an Urban Lot based on the drawings submitted
by the applicant. The drawings were supplied to illustrate the proposed setbacks, lot coverage and
bulk plane dimensions of the structure.
B
Applicant Presentation
Christine Martin, 598 Leicester Lane, Castle Pines, CO 80108, was sworn in. Ms. Martin and her
husband, Matthew, are going to purchase the lot contingent on approval of the development by
the Commission. Their intent is to build a single family home for sale at a future date. She and the
builder, Carl Fuhri, have previously completed two single family homes in Englewood, 4785 South
Sherman Street and 4136 South Grant Street. Both of the homes were purchased by young
couples. She believes that their development activities are in conformance with the
Comprehensive Plan by providing housing to suit a variety of life cycle stages.
IJ1
Mr. Brick asked if the homes on either side of the lot are rentals; Ms. Martin responded that she did
not know. Mr. Brick asked if the intention is to sell the property, Ms. Martin replied that they do
intend to self the property once the home is completed.
•
•
•
•
Mr. King asked if they intend to have a basement; Ms. Martin explained that it will be slab grade,
24 inches deep.
D
Public Testimony
Karen Schwartzkopf, 4616 South Pearl Street, was sworn in. Ms. Schwartzkopf is opposed to the
development because the lot is too narrow and she feels that it is not aesthetically pleasing.
B.
Stacy Denbow, 4609 South Pearl Street, was sworn in. Mr. Denbow is opposed to the proposed
development because the architecture is inconsistent with the other homes on the street. Mr.
Kinton asked for clarification on his comment that it is inconsistent; Mr. Denbow replied that there
are no other small lots on the street and a two story home would look strange. e
Chris Ransick, 4654 South Pearl Street, was sworn in. Mr. Ransick agrees with Mr. Denbow that
the lot is very narrow and a two story structure would be out of character. He encouraged the
Commissioners to visit the site. He is concerned about the home becoming a rental.
II
Katie Coons, 4655 South Pearl Street, was sworn in. Ms. Coons expressed concern about a
structure on such a small and narrow lot. She has concerns about construction disrupting the
residents in the neighborhood.
t.I
Mr. Bleile asked if Ms. Coons is aware that Englewood does not have design standards. She is
aware and fears that without oversight the development in the neighborhood will be very
inconsistent with the original homes .
B
Rebuttal
Ms. Martin stated that the home will be substantially similar to the elevation drawing submitted for
the hearing. It is her opinion that because Englewood is more affordable than Denver for young
families it will most likely be sold to a young family. Mr. Madrid asked if the value of the home
will be comparable to other homes in the neighborhood. Ms. Martin said it will be comparable
and may possibly help improve property values in the area.
H
Mr. King asked how Ms. Martin learned that the lot was for sale; Ms. Martin replied that there was
a sign on the property and it was listed in the MLS (Multiple Listing Service). Mr. Madrid asked
about the setback requirements; Mr. Bell stated that the required setback for an Urban Lot is three
feet. Mr. King added that there are many homes in the vicinity that were built with three foot
setbacks. Mr. Madrid asked if there are any other uses for the property; Mr. Bell responded that
there are no other uses for the property other than a single unit dwelling.
B
Ms. Townley asked if other properties could be modified with a second story; Mr. Bell responded
that any of the other homes in the area could be changed without approval from the Commission.
B
Bleile moved;
Freemire seconded: To close the public hearing for Case 2015-09 4635 South Pearl Street Urban
Lot Development
AYES: Bleile, Brick, Freemire, King, Kinton, Knoth, Madrid, Townley, Fish
NAYS: None
Motion passes. e.
Knoth moved;
Madrid seconded: To approve Case 2015-09 4635 South Pearl Street Urban Lot Development
Discussion
II
Freemire -The zoning is the same for all properties within the district and provides protection to all
properties equally and affords equal rights to all property owners. Housing styles change over time
in all communities due to market conditions, personal preferences and demand. The proposed
structure is in compliance with the zoning code and allows development to take place impartially.
The dwelling is consistent with what is available in the zone district.
Brick -The Commissioners are community representatives and the Commission is ruling not only
on the conformity but also the appropriateness of the development.
Fish -The Commission should focus on the criteria that applies and whether or not the development
meets the criteria in the zoning code. While the Commission does have the authority to apply a
condition to the development, he is unsure that restricting the structure to one story is the correct
action.
lU
Townley -It would be difficult to restrict the structure to one story since all property owners in the
•
surrounding neighborhood have the right to add a second story to their homes. •
B
Kinton -He has personal experience with a home in his neighborhood that was demolished and a
two story home was constructed. He does not feel that a height restriction should be imposed. e
Madrid -The property owner has the right to build a two story home.
King-The proposed house does not vary substantially from the surrounding properties because they
have the right and ability to build a two story house if they choose.
H
Knoth -He is glad to see empty lots developed. e
Vote
Bleile -He is glad that the Commission spent time creating the Urban Lot Development standards.
He expressed appreciation to the neighbors who attended the hearing and the applicant. There are
no negatives that contradict the Comprehensive Plan and the owners have a legal right to build. His
vote is yes.
B
Brick -No, he feels that this particular property is not in character with the neighborhood. He
agrees with Mr. Freemire's opinion that the owner does have rights but feels that the proposed house
does not promote the general welfare of the area.
B
Freemire -Yes, he appreciates that this is a difficult decision but using the criteria put forth in the
code, the development is acceptable. •
•
•
•
IJI
King -Yes, it is a tough decision but it is more difficult when the Commission goes through the
public process to change the code without citizen involvement until it becomes a relevant issue.
H
Kinton -Yes, it has been established that there is no other use for the lot and this use is compatible
with the neighborhood. It is his hope that the developer will work with the neighborhood to
minimize the impact of the construction.
Knoth -Yes
Madrid -Yes, neighborhoods are not static and there is no way to predict future development in the
neighborhood. He agrees with Mr. Bleile and he does not agree with taking away use of the
arty.
Townley -Yes, this is not an easy decision and it is difficult to look at a vacant lot and and visualize
the change that would occur especially with a small lot like this. Change is happening across the
City and this is positive for the community and will help create a variety of different houses in
rlewood. Property owners have the right to change the character of their homes.
Fish -Yes, he agrees with the other Commissioners in that they completed the public process to
allow owners of Urban Lots to develop to the standards in the code.
Motion passes 8-1 .
B
IV. PUBLIC FORUM
No members of the public were present to address the Commission.
if
V. A TIORNEY'S CHOICE
Deputy City Attorney Comer advised the Commission that he will be bringing information
rlrding alterations to the sign code to the study session October 61h.
VI. STAFF'S CHOICE
Mr. Bell informed the Commissioners that staff has formulated some ideas about how to proceed
with the sign code revisions. He will share information regarding a Council Request on the topic of
development standards in the R-2 zone districts. Future meetings will include a PUD (Planned Unit
Development) revision, the sign code and the Comprehensive Plan public hearing . Chair Fish
requested an electronic copy of the Comprehensive Plan be distributed to the Commission as soon
as possible. It should be available to the Commissioners by October 21st when the public meeting
is held. Mr. Flaherty added that lot coverage and solar access will be included with the examination
of development standards.
H
V. COMMISSIONER'S CHOICE
Mr. Knoth commented on a recent Denver Post edition that featured the Governor biking but did
not expand on the improvements that are planned. Ms. Townley added that funding should be
available with the Governor's program to mitigate air pollution issues .
Mr. Brick congratulated Mr. Voboril on his work on the Walk and Wheel Plan and Program.
Mr. Kinton commented on the upcoming election and the lack of information that has been available
to date. He stated that the local election will have more impact on the Community than the national
election.
Mr. Madrid commented that there seems to be an increasing number of vacancies on Broadway.
He asked what the City is doing to actively market the City; Mr. Flaherty responded that he will
arrange to have Darren Hollingsworth, Economic Development Manager, attend a Commission
meeting.
The meeting adjourned at 9:00 p.m.
Isl lulie Bailey , Recording Secretary
•
•
•
...
•
•
•
CITY OF ENGLEWOOD PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
IN THE MATTER OF CASE #2015-09 4635
SOUTH PEARL STREET, URBAN LOT
DEVELOPMENT, FINDINGS OF FACT
AND CONCLUSIONS
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
INITIATED BY: )
Matthew Martin, Trustee )
The Law Office of Matthew A. Martin, P.C. Trust)
598 Leicester Lane )
Castle Pines, CO 80108 )
FINDINGS OF FACT AND
CONCLUSIONS OF THE
CITY PLANNING AND
ZONING COMMISSION
EXHIBIT E
Commission Members Present: Bleile, Brick, Fish, Freemire, King, Kinton, Knoth,
Madrid, Townley
Commission Members Absent: None
This matter was heard before the City Planning and Zoning Commission on September 22,
2015, in the City Council Chambers of the Englewood Civic Center.
Testimony was received from staff. The Commission received notice of Public Hearing,
the Staff Report, and a copy of the application which were incorporated into and made a
part of the record of the Public Hearing.
After considering the statements of the witnesses and reviewing the pertinent documents,
the members of the City Planning and Zoning Commission made the following Findings
and Conclusions.
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. THAT the Public Hearing on Case #2015-09 4635 South Pearl Street Urban Lot
Development, was brought before the Planning Commission by the Department of
Community Development, a department of the City of Englewood.
2. THAT notice of the Public Hearing was on the City of Englewood website from
September 9, 2015, to September 22, 2015, and published in the Englewood
Herald on September 10, 2015. Notice of the public hearing was posted on the
property from September 10, 2015, to September 22, 2015.
3. THAT the Staff report was made part of the record .
4. THAT public testimony was received by five members of the public who expressed •
opposition to the development.
5. THAT the application for development meets the criteria set forth in the Unified
Development Code Section 16-9-4: Nonconforming Lots, (a)-(e).
6. THAT the only permitted use for a 3, 125 square foot lot in an R-1-C zone district is
a one-unit dwelling on an Urban Lot.
CONCLUSIONS
1. THAT the proposed site plan and elevations comply with the lot area, lot coverage,
lot width, height, setback, and bulk plane requirements for an Urban Lot in the R-1 -
C zone district.
2 . THAT the proposed one-unit dwelling will improve what is currently a vacant lot in
the neighborhood and is compatible with the established development patterns and
intent of the zone district.
3. THAT the lot coverage, bulk plane, height, setbacks and massing of the proposed •
development will not vary substantially from the surrounding properties or alter the
essential character of the neighborhood.
4. THAT the proposed house is consistent with the Housing Goals and Objectives
listed in the Roadmap Englewood 2003 Englewood Comprehensive Plan.
DECISION
THEREFORE, it is the decision of the City Planning and Zoning Commission that Case
#2015-09 4635 South Pearl Street Urban Lot Development is approved.
The decision was reached upon a vote on a motion made at the meeting of the City
Planning and Zoning Commission on September 22, 2015, by Knoth, seconded by
Madrid, which motion states :
AYES:
NAYS:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
TO APPROVE CASE #2015-09 4635 SOUTH PEARL STREET URBAN LOT
DEVELOPMENT
Bleile, Fish, Freemire, King, Kinton , Knoth, Madrid, Townley
Brick
None
None
2 •
• Motion carried.
These Findings and Conclusions are effective as of the meeting on September 22, 2015.
: . ONING COMMISSION
--
Ron Fish, Chair
•
• 3
4655 S Pearl Street
Englewood, CO 80113
October 19 , 2015
Englewood City Council
1000 Englewood Parkway
Englewood, CO 80110
RE: Appeal of Case #2015-09 4635 South Pearl Street Urban Lot Development
Dear City Council Members;
EXHIBIT F
Historically, the City of Englewood has not had zoning regulations in place to effectively allow building of
structures on non-conforming lots. In 2013, at the recommendation of the Community Development
Department ("COD"), the Planning and Zoning Commission ("Commission") began to explore
Amendments to Title 16 : Unified Development Code regarding Small Lot Development Standards .
In the Council Communication dated August 4, 2014, the COD provided background to the Englewood
City Council ("Council") concerning the Commissions fact finding process. This included proposed
amendments, summary and analys is to relevant sections for ntle 16 of the UDC. According to
Englewood City Council minutes, on September 2, 2014, Ordinance No . 45 Serles of 2014 (Ordinance)
was approved on second reading .
For the purposes of the subject development at 4635 S. Pearl Street, the relevant ordinance outlines
what has been deemed "Urban Lots ." These are lots zoned R-1-C with lot width greater than or equal to
25', but less than 37'; and with lot area greater than or equal to 3,000 sf, but less than 4500 sf.
Specifically, the Ordinance states
Whereas, the proposed amendments will effectively regulate small resldentiol /ots
(hereafter called "Urban Lots") that contain or contained a one unit dwelling existing on
or before February 23, 2004, and have 25 feet or more of Lot Width, 3,000 square feet of
more of Lot Area, and will establish a process for the possible development of vacant
Urban Lots of that size .
On September 22, 2015, I attended a regular meeting of the Commission . I spoke in opposition at the
public hearing for Case #2015-09 4635 South Pearl Street Urban Lot Development ("Development"), as
did several of my fellow neighbors . During the same Comm ission hearing, the COD provided a memo
that the subject property, In the South Broadway Height Subdivision ("Subdivision"), has never
contained a "dwelling unit". COO Planner, Brook Bell, also stated for the record "research of the
property records revealed that the lot has been vacant since at least 1952 . The result of the research is
inconclusive with regards to the origins of the lot." Mr. Bell also clarified to the Commission that the
purpose of the hearing was to " ... approve the development on an Urban Lot based upon drawing
submitted by the applicant." City records Indicate the lot on where this House will be built, is exactly 25
feet wide and 125 feet deep with 3,125 square feet. Ultimately, a motion was passed, 8-1 by the
Commission to allow for a single family house ("House").
•
•
•
• I am writing to you today, to appeal the Commissions' decision and ask that Council deny the
Applicant the right to develop the planned House for the following reasons:
• The ordinance recommended by the Commission and passed by Council on Sept 2, 2014
states an Urban Lot 25 feet or greater in width, and 3,000 feet or more of square
footage must contain, or have contained, a one unit dwelling before February 23, 2004.
• City records and Applicant renderings show the Development is 25 feet in width and
3,125 square feet.
• The COD testified before the Commission on September 22, 2015 the property has been
vacant since 1952 and has never contained a dwelling.
• Given 1) the Development Is 25 feet wide and 2) has never contained a one unit
dwelling, 3) Ordinance dictates the said property at 4635 S Pearl Street is not eligible
for development of any one until dwelling.
• Based on Ordinance, the Commission should have denied the Applicants proposal to
develop the said property at 4635 S Pearl Street.
• Therefore, on appeal before Englewood City Council the proposal to develop the said
property at 4635 S Pearl Street must be denied.
• I look forward to your response .
Enclosure
•
City of Englewood
1000 Englewood Parkway
Englewood, CO 80110
Cynthia Brown
4633 S Pearl
Englewood, co 80113
October 21, 2015
Attn: Erik l<eck, Englewood City Manager & Englewood City Council
Re: Appeal Zoning Decision 4635 s Pearl
EXHIBIT G
• I am appealing the 9-22-2015 Planning and Zoning decision to allow a 2 story home on the 25 ft lost located on
the of my property and home at 4635 S Pearl.
• My property is negatively affected by this decision.
• I was unable to exercise my right to protest at the 9-22 Public Hearing because I was in the hospitaill•••
• My neighbors told the Commission that I was in the hospital, yet the Commission used my non attendance to
support their approval.
• As approved this creates a fire hazard for my home and property.
• This decision denies my home and property fight.
• This decision creates potential drainage issues for my property.
• This decision diminishes the use of my property, my privacy, my enjoyment and value of my home.
• This decision does permanently impair the use or development of adjacent conforming properties.
• This decision does alter the essential character of the neighborhood.
• Please accept this as notice that I am disabled and requesting appropriate accommodations for this process.
• Due to my disability I am requesting all communication and correspondence be copied to: Cassandra & Jeremy
Letkomlller
Sincerely,
Cynthia Brown
•
•
•
• Brook Bell
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
FYI
Julie Bailey
Thursday, October 22, 2015 7:35 AM
Michael Flaherty; Brook Bell; Dugan Comer
FW: Request For Rehearing Related To The Zoning Variance At 4635 S Pearl
From: Jeremy Letkomiller [mailto········
Sent: Thursday, October 22, 2015 1:25 AM
To: Eric Keck; Council; Julie Bailey
Subject: Request For Rehearing Related To The Zoning Variance At 4635 S Pearl
EXHIBIT H
This is a request for a rehearing on the zoning variance related to the propeny at 4635 S Pearl. In relation to the city municipal code 16-2-16,
as an interested 3rd party, we believe that the planning and zoning commission has not perfonned due diligence on this matter, specifically
related to fire safety. right to light/overshadowing (as outlined in the municipal code), and drainage issues . There is evidence that was not
originally presented at the time of the first hearing and we believe that this infonnation is necessary in order 10 make a rational, fair and
educated decision.
Use of this variance will cause a decrease in propeny values lo the adjacent homes and a loss of use that these neighbors on either side of
4635 purchased their propeny for. This could create a situation where the city could be sued.
We are acting as representatives for the next door neighbor to this property as she was hospitalized at the time of the original hearing and will
• not be able lo attend the next hearing due 10 medical issues .
Please contact us with any questions on this matter and we look forward to enlightening you with funher details on this matter at the next
hearing .
Jeremy and Cassandra Letkomiller
l
., >
• MEMORANDUM
To: Dao Brotzman, City Attorney
Eric Keck, City Manager
Mike Flaherty, Deputy City Manager
Lou Ellis, City Clerk
Brook Bell, Planner Il V
Harold Stitt, Senior Planner
From: Dugan Comer, Deputy City Attorney~ _,
Date: November 4, 2015
Regarding: City Council Hearing Procedures
Hearing procedures in front of City Council are governed by Title 1, Section 10 of the Englewood
Municipal Code. Englewood Municipal Code 1-10-2-6, states in part: If required, public notice of the
date, time and place of the public hearing shall be made. Since there is a provision for a public notice
regarding the hearing, the hearing is quasi-judicial in nature. The existence of an ordinance mandating
notice and a hearing is evidence that the governmental decision is to be regarded as quasi-judicial .
(See: State Farm v. City of Lakewood, 788 P.2d 808, 811(Colo.1990)
• Where the commencement of the hearing is due to an appeal, the following must take place:
•
1. A written notice of appeal must be filed with the City Clerk, within 30 days of the
decision of the board or commission by the aggrieved party. (EMC 1-10-2-4:
Commencement of Proceedings)
2. Once the City Clerk has received the appeal, the Clerk shall refer the appeal to the
hearing body, in this case the City Council, who will then set a date, time and place for
the hearing. The City Council may authorize the Clerk to set the date, time and place for
the hearing. (EMC 1-10-2-5: Referral to Hearing Body)
3. If required, public notice of the date, time and place of the public hearing shall be made
by publishing on the City's official website or published once in the newspaper
designated as the City's official newspaper, ten (10) days prior to the public hearing.
(EMC 1-10-2-6: Public Notice)
Hearing Procedures. Pursuant to EMC 1-10-2-7(A), all quasi-judicial hearings shall be conducted in the
following manner:
1. All parties and witnesses who appear and testify must do so under oath.
2. Cross-examination of all witnesses is allowed, upon the request of the interested parties.
3. All testimony must be recorded, verbatim, by stenographic or other recording system.
4. A written decision by the City Council which shall set forth the tactual basis for the
decision rendered.
The following order of procedure shall be followed in all Hearings: (EMC 1-10-2-7(B)
1. Documents shall be presented which show the commencement of the proceedings, and
the form of public notice which was given.
2. Staff presentation shall be given concerning the issue before City Council.
3. The applicants presentation of any material evidence may be presented, which may
include documents and testimony regarding the issue before the City Council.
4. Upon completion of the applicant's presentation of evidence, the City Council shall call
upon any member of the public who wishes to speak in favor of the applicant.
5. At the conclusion of the evidence and testimony in favor of the applicant, the City
Council shall call upon those individuals who wish to provide evidence through
testimony or documents that oppose the application, petition or appeal.
6. Upon the conclusion of the opponent's evidence, the applicant shall be given an
opportunity to present further evidence in rebuttal to the evidence presented by the
opponents.
7. All documents and/or physical evidence presented at the hearing shall be marked as
exhibits.
Since the hearing is quasi-judicial in nature the formal rules of evidence do not apply, and the City
Council may consider any matter which a majority conclude is reasonably reliable and which will assist
the Council in its deliberations and in reaching an accurate determination of the issues presented.
(EMC 1-10-2-7(C)
2
•
•
•
•
•
COUNCIL COMMUNICATION
Date Agenda Item Subject
November 16 , 2015 11ai Ordinance to approve the
extension of a moratorium on
new marijuana consumption
establishments.
INITIATED BY STAFF SOURCE
Community Development Department Michael Flaherty , Interim Director,
Community Development Department
PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION
Ordinance 28, Series of 2015 , created a moratorium on the establishment of new
marijuana consumption establishments.
BACKGROUND
City staff has worked with the affected departments and the Englewood Liquor and
Marijuana Authority to evaluate information and potential impacts of marijuana
consumption establishment. The Authority has created an Ad hoc committee to study
the issue. While the committee has made progress, they have not yet formulated final
recommendations to forward to City Council. Until Council has had the opportunity to
review recommendations of the and establish regulations for potential future marijuana
consumption establishments, the Community Development Department, through the
Planning and Zoning Commission , cannot establish zoning regulations for the
placement of potential new marijuana consumption establishment in the community .
RECOMMENDED ACTION
The Community Development Department recommends that City Council approve the
extension of the moratorium by six months to allow the Ad hoc committee of the
Englewood Liquor and Marijuana Licensing Authority to complete their review and
forward recommendations to City Council , and for City Council to act on the
recommendations of the Authority.
FINANCIAL IMPACT
There is no financial impact through the extension of the moratorium.
LIST OF ATTACHMENTS
• Proposed bill for an ordinance
•
•
•
BY AUTHORITY
ORDINANCE NO.
SERIES OF 2015
COUNCIL BILL NO. 59
INTRODUCED BY COUNCIL
MEMBER ------
A BILL FOR
AN ORDINANCE EXTENDING THE EMERGENCY MORATORIUM ON THE
ESTABLISHMENT OF NEW MARIWANA CONSUMPTION ESTABLISHMENTS FOR AN
ADDITIONAL SIX MONTH PERIOD .
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Englewood, Colorado established a moratorium
on the establishment of new Marijuana Consumption Establishments by the passage of
Ordinance No. 28, Series of 2015; and
WHEREAS, the original Moratorium was to run for six (6) months, terminating on January
21,2016;and
WHEREAS , the Moratorium was intended to provide time for staff to work with the
Englewood Liquor and Medical Marijuana Authority, and the Englewood Planning and Zoning
Commission to establish licensing and zoning regulations; and
WHEREAS , an Ad Hoc Committee was formed to discuss the issues of regulating and
licensing Marijuana Consumption Establishments with the goal of recommendations being
presented to the Englewood Liquor and Medical Marijuana Authority and the Englewood
Planning and Zoning Commission; and
WHEREAS, on October 22, 2015 the Englewood Liquor and Medical Marijuana Authority
indicated that it desired to be the licensing agency for Marijuana Consumption Establishments in
the City of Englewood; and
WHEREAS, the issue of zoning of Marijuana Consumption Establishments will be going
before the Englewood Planning and Zoning Commission in December; and
WHEREAS, the issue of regulating and licensing of Marijuana Consumption Establishments
went before the Englewood City Council at a Study Session on November 2, 2015; and
WHEREAS, the City Council referred the matter back to the Englewood Liquor and Medical
Marijuana Authority to further address and make recommendations concerning:
• Whether a six (6) month inspection by the Fire Marshal should be required;
• Whether sale of food should be allowed;
• Whether security measures similar to retail marijuana should be adopted;
• Whether sharing of marijuana should be prohibited;
• Whether premise/plan should be inspected in same manner as liquor;
• Whether visible products should be prohibited;
1
• How should employees be protected from smoke and fumes;
• Whether hours of operation should be limited;
• Whether distancing from schools, parks and places where children congregate is
appropriate;
• Whether requiring zoning to be located near public transportation is appropriate;
• Whether outdoor patios should be prohibited; and
WHEREAS, the Fire Marshal shall forward recommended changes to Englewood's Fire Code
to the Denver Fire Chief for approval; and
WHEREAS, an additional six month moratorium is needed to provide time for the drafting,
review, and public hearing on the proposed ordinances .
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ENGLEWOOD, COLORADO, THAT THERE SHALL BE A MORATORIUM ON THE
ESTABLISHMENT OF NEW MARIJUANA CONSUMPTION ESTABLISHMENTS.
Section 1. The passage of this ordinance will preserve public property, health, peace and
safety.
Section 2. The moratorium declares an additional six month moratorium on any new
marijuana consumption establishments. Marijuana consumption establishments shall mean an
organization, business, club, or commercial operation that allows its members or guests to burn,
smoke, inhale the vapors of, or otherwise consume marijuana in any form on the premises of the
business.
Section 3. During said moratorium the City Council directs City staff to develop appropriate
recommendations to Council, consistent with the Colorado Constitution and State and local
regulations.
Section 4. The City Council finds the provisions of this Ordinance are temporary in nature
and are intended to be replaced by subsequent legislative enactment so that the moratorium or
temporary suspension as specified in this Ordinance shall terminate on July 17, 2016.
Introduced, read in full, and passed on first reading on the 16th day of November, 2015.
Published by Title as a Bill for an Ordinance in the City's official newspaper on the 19th day of
November, 2015 .
Published as a Bill for an Ordinance on the City's official website beginning on the 18th day of
November, 2015 for thirty (30) days.
, Mayor
ATTEST:
Loucrishia A. Ellis, City Clerk
2
•
•
•
•
•
•
I, Loucrishia A. Ellis, City Clerk of the City of Englewood, Colorado, hereby certify that the
above and foregoing is a true copy of a Bill for an Ordinance, introduced, read in full, and passed on
first reading on the 16th day of November, 2015.
Loucrishia A. Ellis
3
•
•
•
COUNCIL COMMUNICATION
Meeting Date: Agenda Item: Subject:
November 16, 2015 11 bi Adoption of Official Corporate
City Seal-2nd reading
Initiated By: Staff Source:
City Clerk's Office Shelley Becker, Director of Finance and
Administrative Services
Loucrishia A. Ellis, City Clerk
PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION
The City adopted an Official Corporate City Seal by the passage of Ordinance No. 27 , Series of
1971.
On December 3, 2001 City Council passed Ordinance No. 72, Series of 2001 . This Ordinance
changed the Official Corporate City Seal by the addition of "City of Englewood, Colorado" and
"Seal" added around the perimeter of the City Mark.
On October 5, 2015 City Council passed Resolution No . 94, Series of 2015 adopting the City of
Englewood's Brand Platform, which included the new Logo .
RECOMMENDED ACTIO~ fl(}----J!Jf.
The City Clerk's Office~mmend~ Council adopt, on second reading, an ordinance
approving a new Official Corporate City Seal, by adding the ree~pnwed Logo.
BACKGROUND, ANALYSIS, AND ALTERNATIVES IDENTIFIED ~~ ~
It is customary for a City to have an Official Corporate City Seal as a representation of the ~
character of the City .
FINANCIAL IMPACT
Cost estimate -2 embossing tools and 2 rubber stamps: $170.00 each= $680 .00 total. This
cost was not included in the 2015 budget, but funds are available in the City Clerk's budget.
LIST OF ATTACHMENTS
Proposed Official Corporate City Seal
Proposed bill for an ordinance
•
•
•
ORDINANCE NO.
SERIES OF 2015
BY AUTHORITY
COUNCIL BILL NO. 57
INTRODUCED BY COUNCIL
MEMBER OLSON
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE 1, CHAPTER 9, SECTIONS 2 AND 3, OF THE
ENGLEWOOD MUNICIPAL CODE 2000 PERTAINING TO THE OFFICIAL CORPORATE
CITY SEAL.
WHEREAS, the City adopted a City Mark and Corporate Seal by the passage of Ordinance
No.27,Seriesof1971;and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Englewood amended Title 1, Chapter 9, Section 3
of the Englewood Municipal Code by the passage of Ordinance No. 72, Series of 2001; and
WHEREAS, the Englewood City Council adopted a new logo on October 5, 2015 by the
passage of Resolution No. 94, Series of 2015 supporting the adoption of the recommended brand
platform; and
WHEREAS, the passage of this Ordinance will change the Official Corporate City Seal to
incorporate the new logo .
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ENGLEWOOD, COLORADO, AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. The City Council of the City of Englewood, Colorado hereby amends Title 1,
Chapter 9, Section 2, of the Englewood Municipal Code 2000, by deleting in its entirety.
1 9 2: City Mark.
A City mark, or logo , is hereby established as a graphic re13resem:ation of the history and
character of the City. "Englewood" means "wooded 13lace" and de13icts an oasis of trees. It is,
therefore, ap13ro13riate that the City's mark be a re13resentation of a tree within a circle of green in
accordance 'Nith the following: A tree grov1s and blooms with branches and leaves . In ffH:lch the
same maRBer a city branches out 'Nith streets and blooms with industry and homes. The circle
re13reseffis order and 13rotection. Just as a city is never 13erfect or com13lete , an iffif)erfect and
incom13lete "E" is contained in the mark. The color green confirms life .
A manual of gra13hic standards, which incoff)orates the mark and typical a1313lications thereof, is
to be maim:ained in the official files of the office of the City Clerk.
Section 2. The City Council of the City of Englewood, Colorado hereby amends Title 1,
Chapter 9, Section 3, of the Englewood Municipal Code 2000, to read as follows:
1-9~ ~: Corporate Seal.
The e~orporate ~ s,S.eal of the City shall be an impression of the new City mafk: logo with
"City of Englewood, Colorado" and "Seal" around the outside perimeter= of the City Mark as
hereiReefore described.
Section 3. Inconsistent Ordinances. All other Ordinances or portions thereof inconsistent or
conflicting with this Ordinance or any portion hereof are hereby repealed to the extent of such
inconsistency or conflict.
Section 4. Effect of repeal or modification. The repeal or modification of any provision of
the Code of the City of Englewood by this Ordinance shall not release, extinguish, alter, modify,
or change in whole or in part any penalty, forfeiture, or liability, either civil or criminal, which
shall have been incurred under such provision, and each provision shall be treated and held as
still remaining in force for the purposes of sustaining any and all proper actions, suits,
proceedings, and prosecutions for the enforcement of the penalty, forfeiture, or liability, as well
as for the purpose of sustaining any judgment, decree, or order which can or may be rendered,
entered, or made in such actions, suits, proceedings, or prosecutions.
Introduced, read in full, and passed on first reading on the 2nd day of November, 2015.
Published by Title as a Bill for an Ordinance in the City's official newspaper on the 5th day of
November, 2015.
•
Published as a Bill for an Ordinance on the City's official website beginning on the 4th day of •
November, 2015 for thirty (30) days.
Read by title and passed on final reading on the 16th day of November, 2015.
Published by title in the City's official newspaper as Ordinance No._, Series of 2015, on
the 19th day of November, 2015.
Published by title on the City's official website beginning on the 18th day of
November, 2015 for thirty (30) days.
This Ordinance shall take effect thirty (30) days after publication following final passage.
, Mayor
ATTEST:
Loucrishia A. Ellis, City Clerk
•
•
•
•
I, Loucrishia A. Ellis , City Clerk of the City of Englewood, Colorado, hereby certify that the
above and foregoing is a true copy of the Ordinance passed on final reading and published by
title as Ordinance No._, Series of2015.
Loucrishia A. Ellis
•
COUNCIL COMMUNICATION
Date Agenda Item Subject
November 16, 2015 Resolution approving the
11 ci
extension of the agreement
with the Humane Society of
South Platte Valley for
continuation of animal
sheltering services.
INITIATED BY STAFF SOURCE
City Manager's Office Michael Flaherty, Deputy City Manager
PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION
The current agreement for animal sheltering services between the City of Englewood
and the Humane Society of South Platte Valley (HSSPV) was approved by City Council
Resolution 84, Series of 2014 .
RECOMMENDED ACTION
• Staff recommends approval of this Resolution.
•
BACKGROUND, ANALYSIS AND ALTERNATIVES IDENTIFIED
The current term of the City's agreement with HSSPV expires on December 31, 2015,
however, a renewal clause provides for extenstion of the agreement for an additional
four years, through December 31, 2019, subject to the agreement of both parties. The
operations of HSSPV have meet the requirements of the City and both parties have
tentatively agreed to the extension, subject to City Council approval.
FINANCIAL IMPACT
Under the terms of the agreement the City may renew for a additional four year term,
subject to the provisions of the TABOR amendment. The cost of services for 2016 is
$82, 103.38, based on the HSSPV Government Cost Allocation 2016 model, as
specified in the current agreement.
LIST OF ATTACHMENTS
City Council Resolution
Animal Sheltering Services Agreement Amendment
•
•
•
RESOLUTION NO .
SERIES OF 2015
A RESOLUTION APPROVING AN ADDENDUM FOR RENEW AL OF THE "CITY OF
ENGLEWOOD AGREEMENT FOR ANIMAL SHELTERING SERVICES" BETWEEN THE
CITY OF ENGLEWOOD AND THE HUMANE SOCIETY OF SOUTH PLATTE VALLEY.
WHEREAS, the City of Englewood provides animal shelter, food and veterinary treatment
essential to the health, safety and welfare of the City and its citizens; and
WHEREAS, the Englewood City Council authorized the City of Englewood to enter into an
agreement with the Humane Society of the South Platte Valley, Inc. to provide those services by
the passage of Resolution No. 80, Series of 2009; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Englewood authorized the City of Englewood to
enter into a renewal agreement with the Humane Society of the South Platter Valley, Inc. to
provide services to the City of Englewood by the passage of Resolution No. 85, Series of 2014;
and
WHEREAS, the passage of this Resolution authorizes the City of Englewood to enter into an
Addendum to extend the Agreement with the Humane Society of the South Platte Valley, Inc. to
provide services to the City of Englewood.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ENGLEWOOD, COLORADO, THAT:
Section 1. The Addendum extending the City of Englewood Agreement for Animal Sheltering
Services between the Humane Society and the South Platte Valley, Inc. until December 31, 2019,
attached hereto as Exhibit A, is hereby accepted and approved by the Englewood City Council.
Section 2. The Mayor and the City Clerk are hereby authorized to sign and attest said
Agreement for and on behalf of the City of Englewood, Colorado.
ADOPTED AND APPROVED this 16th day of November, 2015.
ATTEST:
, Mayor
Loucrishia A. Ellis, City Clerk
I, Loucrishia A. Ellis, City Clerk for the City of Englewood, Colorado, hereby certify the
above is a true copy of Resolution No. __ , Series of 2015 .
Loucrishia A. Ellis, City Clerk
ADDENDUM TO "CITY OF ENGLEWOOD AGREEMENT
FOR ANIMAL SHELTERING SERVICES"
1bis Addendum is to the Agreement for Animal Sheltering Services between the City of Englewood
("City'') and the Humane Society of the South Platte Valley, Inc., authorized by Resolution No. 84, Series
of 2014.
The City of Englewood and Humane Society of the South Platte Valley entered into an Agreement
relating to the Animal Sheltering Services on December 4, 2014; and
The Humane Society of the South Platte Valley Agreement expires December 31, 2015; and
The Humane Society of the South Platte Valley requested a renewal:
Per Section 3.1 of the Agreement, the initial term of the
Agreement with the Humane Society of the South Platte Valley,
Inc. (HSSPV) expires December 31, 2015, with a four (4) year
renewal option through December 31, 2019, which may be
exercised via a written amendment.
Both parties are in agreement that the term be renewed through December 31, 2019.
Agreed to on the __ day of ____ ~ 2015.
ATTEST:
By: -----------Lou c ri s hi a A. Ellis, City Clerk
STATE OF COLORADO
COUNTY OF ARAPAHOE
)
)ss.
)
CITY OF ENGLEWOOD:
By: __________ _
, Mayor
HUMANE SOCIETY OF THE
SOUTH PLATTE VALLEY
""\ f
By;\~<).~L t'Yr ~ ! .'.StW)t·U--~
Shelter Director
1
.E x
H
I .
B
I
T
A ·-
•
•
•
•
•
RESOLUTION NO.
SERIES OF 2015
A RESOLUTION SPECIFYING AID TO OTHER AGENCIES FOR 2016 BY THE CITY OF
ENGLEWOOD, COLORADO .
WHEREAS, Council has determined that it is more beneficial and cost effective to provide
services, it could otherwise provide to the public, through the non-profit agencies listed below;
and
WHEREAS, Council used an open and competitive process to make difficult decisions with
limited funding; and
WHEREAS, City Council of the City of Englewood, Colorado discussed the appropriations
for aid to other agencies for the year 2016 at the Study Session on October 26, 2015.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ENGLEWOOD, COLORADO, THAT:
Section 1. The following designations are hereby made to the appropriations in the 2016
Budget of the City of Englewood, Colorado for aid to other agencies;
SOURCE OF FUNDS:
Total 2016 Budget for Aid to other Agencies $ 18,250 .00
General Fund for In-Kind Services $ 2,121.25
DESIGNATIONS FOR USE:
MAXIMUM
AGENCY PAYMENT IN-KIND TOTAL
Metropolitan Mayors and
Commissioners Youth Award $ 200 $ 200
Arapahoe Philharmonic $ 100 $ 100
Arapahoe Santa Claus Shop $ 200 $ 200
Bessie's Hope $ 100 $ 100
Brothers Redevelopment $ 1,000 $ 1,000
Color Esperanza $ 100 $ 100
Cornerstone Food Bank $ 700 $ 700
Englewood Cultural Arts Center Asso.
Center Association $ 300 $ 300
EHS Homecoming Parade $ 650 $ 650
Englewood Historic Preservation Soc. $ 250 $ 250
Family Tree/House of Hope $ 2,500 $ 2,500
Freedom Service Dogs $ 600 $ 600
Gateway Battered Women's Shelter $ 1,000 $ 1,000
Greater Englewood Chamber $ 500 $ 500
Holy Cow Food Bank-Mosaic $ 700 $ 700
Hope-Helping Other People Excel $ 700 $ 700
Hospice Of Metro Denver $ 100 $ 100
Inter-Faith Task Force $ 5,000 $ 5,000
Meals on Wheels $ 3 ,000 $ 3,000
1
Pirates Youth Sports $ 1,000 $ 1,000
Special Olympics Program $ 800 $ 371.25 $ 1,171.25
Up Close and Musical $ 1,500 $ 1,500
Discretionill:Y $ 2,400 $ 1,750
Total $18,250 $2,121.25 $22,121 .25
ADOPTED AND APPROVED this 16th day of November, 2015.
ATTEST:
, Mayor
Loucrishia A. Ellis, City Clerk
I, Loucrishia A. Ellis, City Clerk for the City of Englewood, Colorado, hereby certify the
above is a true copy of Resolution No. __ , Series of 2015.
Loucrishia A. Ellis, City Clerk
2
•
•
•
•
•
•
" };zJFfl
ORDINANCE NO.
SERIES OF 2015
BY AUTHORITY
COUNCIL BILL NO. 58
INTRODUCED BY COUNCIL
MEMBER WILSON
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE 6, CHAPTER 1, SECTION 8, OF THE ENGLEWOOD
MUNICIPAL CODE 2000 ADOPTING SMOKING PROHIBITIONS, STATE ST AND ARDS,
FURTHER DEFINING PUBLIC BUILDINGS AND UNIFYING THE DEFINITION OF
TOBACCO THROUGHOUT THE CODE.
WHEREAS, Colorado Revised Statutes §25-14-207 permits a city to enact, adopt, and enforce
smoking regulations that cover the same subject matter as certain provisions of the Colorado Clear
Indoor Air Act; and
WHEREAS, no local authority may adopt any local regulation of smoking that is less stringent
than the provisions of part 2 of the Act; except that a local authority may specify a radius of less than
fifteen feet for the area included within an entryway; and
WHEREAS, the municipal courts or their equivalent in any city, city and county, or town
have jurisdiction over violations of smoking regulations enacted by a city; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Englewood, Colorado finds that further restricting
public areas where smoking is prohibited protects the public health safety and welfare of the
citizens of Englewood; and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that it is in the best interest of the City of Englewood to
protect non-smokers from involuntary exposure to smoke; and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the purpose of these regulations promote the public
health, safety, and welfare of the citizens of Englewood.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ENGLEWOOD, COLORADO, AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. The City Council of the City of Englewood, Colorado hereby authorizes amending
Title 6, Chapter 1, Section 8, of the Englewood Municipal Code 2000 to read as follows:
6-1-8: SMOKING RESTRICTIONS.
A. Definitions.
The definitions set forth in C.R.S. §25-14-203 shall annly unless the context otherwise requires or
such terms are more specifically set forth in the Englewood Municipal Code.
B. Public Building is further defined to include the property surrounding such building. including
but not limited to parking lots.
1
L General Smoking Restrictions:
Except as provided in Section 6-1-8(D) ofthis Chapter. and in order to reduce the levels of exposure
to environmental tobacco and marijuana smoke. smoking shall not be permitted and no person shall
smoke:
1. In any indoor area. including. but not limited to:
g. Public meeting places.
b. Elevators.
c. Government owned or operated means of mass transportation. including. but not limited to.
buses. vans. and trains .
d. Taxicabs and limousines.
e. Grocery stores.
[ Gymnasiums.
g. Jury waiting and deliberation rooms.
Courtrooms.
k Child daycare facilities .
.l · Healthcare facilities including hospitals. healthcare clinics. doctor 's offices. and other
health care related facilities.
!$;. Any place of employment that is not exempted. In the case of employers who own
facilities otherwise exempted from this Chapter. each such employer shall provide a smoke
free work area for each employee requesting not to have to breathe environmental tobacco
smoke. Every employee shall have a right to work in an area free of environmental
tobacco smoke.
l -Food service establishments .
n. Limited gaming facilities and any other facilities in which any gaming or gambling activity
is conducted.
o. Indoor sports arenas.
Restrooms. lobbies. hallways. and other common areas in public and private buildings.
condominiums. and other multiple-unit residential facilities.
2
•
•
•
•
•
•
Restrooms. lobbies. hallways. and other common areas in hotels and motels. and in at least
seventy-five percent C75%) of the sleeping auarters within a hotel or motel that are rented
to guests .
~ Bowling alleys.
~ Billiard or pool halls.
t. Facilities in which games of chance are conducted.
y,. The common areas of retirement facilities. publicly owned housing facilities. and nursing
homes. but not including any resident's private residential quarters or areas of assisted
living facilities.
v. Public buildings including the oroperty and parking lots surrounding such a property.
w. Auditoria.
x. Theaters .
v. Museums.
z. Libraries.
!· Public and nonpublic schools .
Other educational and vocational institutions.
m . The entryways of all buildings and facilities listed in above Subsections i and ii.
D . Exceptions to Smoking Restrictions .
This Chapter shall not apply to :
l · Private homes. private residences. and private automobiles: except that this Chapter shall anply if
any such home. residence. or vehicle is being used for childcare of day care or if a private vehicle
is being used for the public transportation of children or as part of healthcare or daycare
transportation:
i . Limousines under private hire .
~· A hotel or motel room rented to one or more gy,ests if the total percentage of such hotel or motel
rooms in such hotel or motel does not exceed twenty-five percent (25%).
~-Any retail tobacco business .
~-The Privately-Owned outdoor area of any business. except that the entryways of businesses
located in a building or facility listed in Section 6-1-8CC)C2) and outdoor areas referenced in
Section 6-1-8CC)Cl) shall be subject to the provisions ofthis Chapter .
3
6,. A place of employment that is not open to the public and that is under the control of an employer
that employs three (3) or fewer employees. •
1-A private. nonresidential building on a farm or ranch. as defined in Section 39-1-102 Colorado
Revised Statutes that has annual gross income of less than five hundred thousand dollars
($500.000.00) .
.8..,. The areas of assisted living facilities that are designated for smoking for residents. are fully
enclosed and ventilated and to which access is restricted to the residents or their guests. As used
in this Subsection CH), "assisted living facility" means a nursing facility. as that term is defined
in Section 25.5-4-103 of the Colorado Revised Statutes. and an assisted living residence. as that
term is defined in Section 25-27-102 of the Colorado Revised Statutes .
9 . Smoking in vehicles so long as the windows. roof. and doors are closed and sealed.
lQ_,_ Smoking areas designated by the Englewood Citv Manager.
Section 2. Uniform definition of Tobacco. The following definition of tobacco shall apply to
E.M.C. 6-1-8, and, E .M.C. 7-6E-8
Tobacco : Cigarettes. cigars. cheroots. stogies. and periques: granulated. plug cut. crimp cut. ready
rubbed. and other smoking tobacco: snuff and snuff flour: cavendish: plug and twist tobacco: fine cut
and other chewing tobacco: shorts. refuse scraps. clippings. cuttings. and sweepings of tobacco: and
other kinds and forms of tobacco. prepared in such manner as to be suitable for chewing or for
smoking in a cigarette. pipe. electronic smoking device. or otherwise. or both for chewing and
smoking. "Tobacco" also includes cloves and any other plant matter or product that is packaged for
smoking
Section 3. Safety Clauses. The City Council hereby finds, determines, and declares that this
Ordinance is promulgated under the general police power of the City of Englewood, that it is
promulgated for the health, safety, and welfare of the public, and that this Ordinance is necessary
for the preservation of health and safety and for the protection of public convenience and
welfare. The City Council further determines that the Ordinance bears a rational relation to the
proper legislative object sought to be obtained.
Section 4. Severability. If any clause, sentence, paragraph, or part of this Ordinance or the
application thereof to any person or circumstances shall for any reason be adjudged by a court of
competent jurisdiction invalid, such judgment shall not affect, impair or invalidate the remainder
of this Ordinance or it application to other persons or circumstances.
Section 5. Inconsistent Ordinances. All other Ordinances or portions thereof inconsistent or
conflicting with this Ordinance or any portion hereof are hereby repealed to the extent of such
inconsistency or conflict.
Section 6 . Effect of repeal or modification. The repeal or modification of any provision of
the Code of the City of Englewood by this Ordinance shall not release, extinguish, alter, modify,
or change in whole or in part any penalty, forfeiture, or liability, either civil or criminal, which
shall have been incurred under such provision, and each provision shall be treated and held as
still remaining in force for the purposes of sustaining any and all proper actions , suits,
proceedings, and prosecutions for the enforcement of the penalty, forfeiture, or liability, as well
4
•
•
•
•
•
as for the purpose of sustaining any judgment, decree, or order which can or may be rendered,
entered, or made in such actions, suits, proceedings, or prosecutions.
Section 7. Penalty. The Penalty Provision of Section 1-4-1 EMC shall apply to each and
every violation of this Ordinance.
Introduced, read in full, and passed on first reading on the 2nd day of November, 2015.
Published by Title as a Bill for an Ordinance in the City's official newspaper on the 5th day of
November, 2015 .
Published as a Bill for an Ordinance on the City's official website beginning on the 4th day of
November, 2015 for thirty (30) days.
Read by title and passed on final reading on the 16th day of November, 2015.
Published by title in the City's official newspaper as Ordinance No._, Series of 2015, on
the 19th day of November, 2015.
Published by title on the City's official website beginning on the 18th day of
November, 2015 for thirty (30) days.
This Ordinance shall take effect thirty (30) days after publication following final passage .
, Mayor
ATTEST:
Loucrishia A. Ellis, City Clerk
I, Loucrishia A. Ellis, City Clerk of the City of Englewood, Colorado, hereby certify that the
above and foregoing is a true copy of the Ordinance passed on final reading and published by
title as Ordinance No._, Series of2015 .
Loucrishia A. Ellis
5
•
•
•
RESOLUTION NO .
SERIES OF 2015
A RESOLUTION INCREASING THE ANNUAL SALARY FOR THE CITY MANAGER OF
THE CITY OF ENGLEWOOD, COLORADO FOR THE CALENDAR YEAR 2016.
WHEREAS, the City Council for the City of Englewood, by Section 49 of the Englewood
Home Rule Charter, has the responsibility of establishing the salary for the City Manager; and
WHEREAS , the City Council has determined to give the City Manager a 3% increase based
upon experience, competitive municipal city manager salaries and satisfaction with performance;
and
WHEREAS, the City Manager's current salary is $165,000 .00 and shall be increased to
$169,950.00; and
WHEREAS, in addition, the Englewood City Council has determined to give the City
Manager a one-time $3,000 bonus.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ENGLEWOOD, COLORADO, THAT:
Section 1. For the year 2016 the annual base pay for the City Manager shall be increased 3 %
to $169,950.00 commencing on January 1, 2016 .
Section 2. In addition, Englewood City Council has determined to give the City Manager a
one-time $3 ,000 bonus.
ADOPTED AND APPROVED this 16th day of November, 2015 .
ATTEST:
, Mayor
Loucrishia A. Ellis, City Clerk
I, Loucrishia A. Ellis, City Clerk for the City of Englewood, Colorado, hereby certify the
above is a true copy of Resolution No. __ , Series of 2015.
Loucrishia A. Ellis , City Clerk