Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2008-06-16 (Regular) Meeting Minutes• • 1. Ca l' to Order ENGLEWOOD CITY COUNCIL ENGLEWOOD, ARAPAHOE COUNTY, COLORADO Regular Session June 16 , 2008 The regu lar meeting of the Englewood City Council was called to order by Mayor Woodward at 7:42 p.m . 2. Invocation The invocation 1<as given by Council Member Mccaslin. 3 . Pledge of Allegiance The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Council Member Mccaslin. 4. Roll Call Present: Absent: A quorum was present. Council Members Jefferson , Moore , Penn , Mccaslin, Wilson , Wrodward Council Member Oa kley Also present: City Manager Sears City Attorney Brotzman Deputy City Manager Flaherty City Clerk Ellis Deputy City Clerk Bush Director Gryglewicz , Finance and Administrative Services Director Kon ish i, Information Technology Eng ineering Technician I Dye , Public Works Director White , Community Development Sen ior Planner Langon , Community Development Housing Finance Specialist Grimmett, Community Development Police Chief Vandermee , Police Department Police Commander Watson, Poli ce Departme,1I 5. Consideration of Minutes of Previous Session (a) COUNCIL MEMBER JEFFERSON MOVED, AND COUNCIL MEMBER PENN SECONDED, TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JUNE 2, 2008 . Mayor Woodward as ked if there were any revisions or modifications. There were none . Vo te results : Motion carried. Ayes : Nays: Absent: Coun cil Members Penn , Mccaslin , Moore , Woodward , Jefferson , Wilson None Council Member Oa kley Recognition of Scheduled Public Comment (a) El lie Cox, an Arvada res ident and a representative from Arvadan s for Responsible Transportation, said first I want to thank you for letting me co me and make th is presentatio n. There are ,na jor Englewood City Council June 16, 2008 Page 2 traffic con cerns in the northwest C1,rridor and ,n the news you ,ea d about the beltway , the toll road , connecting the loo~ and bu ckle the beltway ar.d we just wanted to make a short presentation to give you the alternat ive view ... l1,,J best vlew ... tne be st op l,•Jn to~ sol vln g tt:.ffic problemr i, the northwest co rridor . So , how do we solvu traffi c r,rcb ler,,s in the northwest corridor? St,., s,1'd wit h a plan th at actuall y eases conges tion , that does not drive de 't!lopment , io phy oically respons ive !~ Ihe needs of the area , hi;I connects the northern suburbs to C- 470 and the 1-7 0 corridor a11d that pres ef'1es tne beauty al Iha area . A brie f history : in 1989 , Jeffco vo ters said No to tar.~• to f,nd a be ltway connect ion ily a 4 to \ margi n; ,n 2000, the Northwest Quadrant Feasibility Study , which was co r11missl9ned by ORCOG . Arvada , Broomfield , Golden , Lakewood , Westminster and Wheatridge , sh owed that the best ~oMion .:as to imp rove al·~ady ex isting north/south arter ial roads ; in 2001 , Governor Owens and CDCT spe nt $17 mill :or, fur an EIS stu~y •.o determ ine how to improve traffic problems in the northwest quadrMt; In 2003 , the Sta1e determined 1nat the;a was ins uffi cien t public funds lo build the beltway ; in 2006 , talk of the toll roa d began , but COOT co ncede s that : new toll road would still requ ire substantial tax subsidies becac;, of lack cf need an,1 demand ·, in 200' CRA Internat io nal analyzed the COOT and Federal Highway Adm inistration EIS data and also detumined 11,at improving local roads was the best solution ; in May of th is year Arvada , Broomfield and Jefferson County established the Pub lic Hig hway Authority to find non- public funding sources for a toll road . In June , 2008 ... last week ... CDOT ended its environmental impact surve )' of the area and abandoned the toll road , due to lack of fund ing and lack of consensus of interested part ies . This is what we have now ... we have C-4 70 , E-470 all the way up to 1-25 and the Northwest Parkway . We also have 93 and Ind ian a Street on the west. Th is is what the proposed beltway would be ... th is dotted line . !Clerk's note : • Ms . Cox used PowerPo int slides during her presentat ion .] There are several different variations , but th is is a close representation of where it would fall . This is what we re co mmend . These are improvements on Hig hway 93 , im provements on Indiana Street , improvements on Highway 128 and Hig hway 72 . Th is completes th e beltway . I wanted to talk first about easing congestion . Buil ding the beltwa y reduces congestio n on 1-70 , Wadsworth and Kipling by only 1 to 3 percent. Improv ing th e existing Infrastructure produces a remarkably congest ive free area by 20/30 and th is is according to the CRA Internatio nal White Paper that looked at the COOT and Federal Highway Admin ist ration data . Studies show that few people will even use the toll road if ii is • built , therefore congestion on 93 , Wadsworth and Kipling ... all lhose north /south arterials will remain the same or get worse . Data shows that even during the morn ing rush hour , traffic on the toll road will be minimal. Non- compete clauses , that are Inherent with Ih a toll road , prevents local arterial improvem ent. Th e purpose for this is to drive commuters to use the toll road , thus insuring cont in uing cong est ion . Fiscally Responsive: Traffic modeling data shows that over th e ne xt 35 years a toll road would run a defic it of 513 mil lion dollars unless subs idized by ta xpay er s. Revenues from the toll road would only partially cover cap ital costs and it would cost , all th ings cons idered, six times more : bu ild a toll road than it will to improve existing infrastructure. The Northwest Parkway re centl y could not meet its bond debt and narrowly avo ided default by leas ing to an ov erseas company . Selling off public Infrastructure to private fore ign interests U as long as 99 ye ars , which is th : ,,se in the Northwest Parkway , is not in the public's best interest. Tolls on the Northwest Parkwa y are some al the highest in the nation . I th ink the last report I read we were number three in the natio n. If~ toll road is built through A,vada , we can ex pe ct the same . And higher fuel pr ices are here to stay , un fortun ately . Will a toll road be fiscally respons ive in the future when we are driv ing less or at least more econom ically ... will that work? Connect ing the loop ... you hear this all the time ... connect the loop , bu ck le the beltway ... only one in ten veh icles travel ing the Northwest Par kway need to reach the C-470/1-70 interchange . Everybody else is either staying in that area . coming down go ing to Arvada , Westm inster ... they are stayi ng on those same arte rial roads . Studies show that it will take the same amount or lime to travel the toll road as it will on ex isti ng infra structure from Broomfield to Golde n ... there is no chang e, there is not a faster wa y. An improved northwest art eria l does co nn ect the loop to State Highway 128 , State Higl,Nay 93, Highway 72 , Ind iana Street and Sta te Highway 58 . Preserving the Beauty. I am an Arvada nat ive ... ! was born and rai sed there ... so those or you who have been up in that area , it is beautiful . II is one of the la st places In Den ver that you can go and actuall y se e the na tive grass . We don 't need another road going through there. We have roads th ere that ara sufficient. Sustainab ility is key : Susta inability is a big issue today . How do we do more with what we have ... improve wh at we already ha ve? And a loll ro ad woul d only increase congestion in the area because , as I stated before , the non -compete clauses th e ro.:ids around it are not improved , therefo re , congestion incre ases . So everybody says , well th is is what you are up against , what do you support? This is what we support . The use of transportation money to • ease con gestion , not drive develo pment and we support a four lane improvement the whole length or Stale Highway 93 and Ind iana Street , and improvements to other north /south and easUwest arterials co nnecting Broomfield to Golden . Righi now if a toll ro ad is bu il t, there are no plans to improve Wadsworth or Kipl ing ... those road st ructures . So, we reco mmend that those also be improved to help with traffi c congesuon . • • • Englewood City Council June 16, 2008 Page 3 Others who are opposed to the beltway : the City of Boulder , the City of Lou isville , the City of Superior and the City of Golden ... lots of env iro nmental coalit ion groups , numerous HOAs and numerous res idents of ihe area, including Jefferson County and the Denver met ro area . What we need : We need support from other Denver metro cit ies staling that the toll road is a bad idea and that exist ing road improvement is the answur . What does th is mean to the City of Englewood? Traffic free, and min im al congestion on roads, drives econonilc development for the region . The proposed toll way does not decrease congestion . We also ne ed \1elp insuring that the to ll road does not get a designation of fiscally constrained or any other des ignation by DRCOG . We need lo look for funding options that will finance the besl solution , which is improved infrastructure and we need to not settle on the toll road . simply because we might be able to get it funded by an overseas company . The Bottom Line : The beltway toll road is a bad idea . Studies show that even if the area is developed to its fullest capacity out there, there has never been a demonstrated need for a toll road ... not today or not in the future . The Northwest Parkway Is a prime example of bad planning . It recently almost defaulted on its' bond . The proposed toll road would do no better . And , all the stu dies , to date , show that impro ving the existing Infrastru cture is the best solut ion . So if we work together , we can speak out against the beltway toll road option a, ,d do what is the best solution, which is improve th e Infrastructure of the roads that are already out there . As I said , I am with ART , I am with Arvadans for Responsible Transportation . Another group that is also involved is CINQ ... Citizens Involved in the Northwest Quadrant. That is our contact information . I hope that as th is issue comes to you and you are asked to consider these that you keep th is in mind , we are always available to come to a Study Session where you can ask us questions . I ca n give you copies of the surveys that you can read for yourself and you can see that we are not making this up . This is in print ... that improving infrastructure is the best option . So , I thank you for your time ... Thank you . Mayor Woodward said thank you . 7. Recogn itio n of Unscheduled Public Comment (a) Cynthia Searfoss , an Eng lewood res ident , said quite honestly I don 't kno w where to start. I am so shocked by what I read on the Agenda item tonight , that I really don't know what to say . Th is is brought to Englewood Council by Chief Thomas Vandermee . It is Council Item number 35 ... it is the recommended action to change conditio ns for our rights to pub lic assembl y here in the City of Englewood . I've been on the Englewood Dangerous Dog Task Force for 18 months . We've had lots of arguments . We've even had yelling . I don 't like some of the people on the Englewood Dog Task Force , but I still thought that Englewood was a real nice City and my neighbors werb ;iced and Englewood was a nice safe place to be and that things went well here and we could come and speak our piece and that we cou ld work th ings out fairly and I've come and spoken here to City Coun··• several times about thing s that I was uncomfortable with in the City of Engl ewood and I thought that I was 11stened to and that we had an open forum here in Englewood . And th en I read about the Englewood Pol ic1 wanting to change our rights to public assem bly and that we have had an increased number of organized civil demonstrations in recent months in Englewood , Colorado . And that the Englewood Police ex pect to respond to many more events here in Englewood in the future and that we have a general threat to public safety from public demonstrations and public assembly . I was unaware of this and I thought I had been fairly outspoken here in Englewood and if anybody was a threat, I was . So , I would like Chief Vandermee to explai n th is. I th ink that we need a publ ic disc uss ion on lhis is sue . I would like to know whe re th is language cam e from and when this became such an imm inerit threat to public safety in Englewood that we need such an agg ressive re spo nse to th e righl to assembly . I gues~ thal if I ca rry an umbrella now to one of our summer concerts out here ... lhat is a problem . I guess If when the kids are play ing with a super soaker out here during a conc ert , that's a problem . I guess if the punk rocke rs down here want to wear a gas mask as part of the ir ensemble , for some god awful reason , that's a problem . I didn 't realize that Englewood was so dangerous . I didn 't realize tha t we were under such a public threat. I don 't understand why this language came about and I don 't understand what th e goal is of this language . If this is a response to the Democrat ic National Convention th is summer , I think that we need an open publi c forum to discuss how Englewood wants to respond to tha t. I th ink we could make a lot of money from that th is summer . I th ink we could have something pos itive come about from that th is summer and I think this language is someth ing that is going to change our rights ... our civic rights ... in Englewood and I th ink we ,,ave a pos itive open com mun ity . I think the dog ordinance we are hop ing to pass th is evening is ev idence of I~ at , that we look for positive solutions to our community's problems and that we are open to resolving our commu ,1ity's problems in a posit ive way , with a mind to growth and Interact ion with the com mun ity , and I don 't think tnis does that. I th ink tha t we need interaction . I th ink we nee d to know why Englewood City Council June 16, 2008 Page 4 th is cam e about and ,s th is really necessary because the loss of our rights to assembly or even anyth ing th at ca n damage our rights lo assemble is sort of like letting the tooth paste out of the tube , you cannot get it back in . Th is concerns me greatly . Thank yo u. (b ) Lorena Beauregard , an Englewood resident , said than k you for allowing me to speak and also allowing me to be part of the Task Force for the dog ordinance . I have been a ca rrier for twenty-three and a half years and a re sident of Englewood fo r twenty-three . It was important for me to become part of th is Task Force , not only to protect my fellow carriers , but also my children and also our canine community . Th is dog ordinance is something that we worked very hard on and we are very proud of and I really app reciate the support that we are getting at th is point in time and I hope that it passes without any problems . I think it is best for the safety of our community and for our animals . Than k you . Mayor Woodward said thank you . 8 . Communications , Proclamations and Appointments There were no communications , proclamat ions or appointments . 9. Consent Agenda COUNCIL MEMBER MOORE MOVED, AND COUNCIL MEMBER McCASLIN SECONDED , TO APPROVE CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS 9 (a) (I), and 9 (b) (I), (II). (a) Approval of Ordinances on First Reading (i) COUNCIL BILL NO . 33 , INTRODUCED BY COUNCIL MEMBER MOORE A BILL FOR AN ORDINANCE APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF THREE INTERGOVERNMENTAL SUBGRANTEE AGREEMENTS (CDBG ) FOR THE YEAR 2008 BETWEEN THE ARAPAHOE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AND THE CITY OF ENGLEWOOD , COLORADO . (b) Approval of Ord inances on Second Reading (i) ORDINANCE NO . 24 , SERIES OF 2008 (COUNCIL BILL NO . 26, INTRODUCED BY COUNCIL MEMBER MOORE) AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CERTAIN SECTIONS OF THE ENGLEWOOD MUNICIPAL CODE 2000 PERTAINING TO TH E LEGAL PUBLICATION PROCESS . (ii ) ORDINANCE NO . 25 , SERIES OF 2008 (COUNCIL BILL NO . 27 , INTRODUCED BY COUNCIL MEMBER MOuRE) AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE ACCEPTANCE OF A VIC TIM ASSISTANCE LAW ENFORCEMENT (VALE) GRANT FROM TH E VICTIM AS SISTANCE LAW ~NFORCEMENT BOARD OF THE 18'" JUDICIAL DISTRICT . Vote results : Mot io n carried . (c) Ayes : Nays : Absent: Council Members Penn , Mccaslin , Moore , Woodward , Jefferson , Wilson None Coun :il Member Oakley Res olutions and Motions There were no additi onal resolut ions or mot ions subm itted for approval . (See Agenda Item 11 .) • • • • • • Englewood City Council June 16 , 2008 Page 5 1 O. Public Hearing Items (a) Mayor Woodward said this is a Public Hearing to consider testimony on Counci l Bill No . 23 , as amended , authorizing the Denver Seminary/Kent Plac e Planned Unit Development (PUD), Amendment No . 2, site plan adjustments . Ma yor Woodward said I would just like to mention that th is is a unusual situation in that we ha ve had a Publi c Hearing prior to this meeti ng and we are having a seco nd one at th is lime to give citizens th e opportu nity to spea k who feel like they m&y not have had that opportunity or were un informed as to the proces s. Also, on our Agenda tonight , we ha ve second reading scheduled for the Kent Place PUD , Amendment No . 2, and in the event that there is new informatio n that co mes forw ard and Counc il chooses to pull that from th e Age nda ... that is a poss ibility. COUNCIL MEMBER MOORE MOVED , AND COUNCIL MEMBER WILSON SECONDED, TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER TESTIMONY ON COUNCIL BILL NO. 23, AS AMENDED, AUTHORIZING THE DENVER SEMINARY/KENT PLACE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD), AMENDMENT NO. 2, SITE PLAN ADJUSTMENTS. Ayes : Council Members Penn , Mccas lin, Mo ore , Woodwa rd, Jefferson , Wilson Nays : None Absent: Council Member Oakley Motio n carried and the publi c hearing opened . All witnesses we re duly sworn . Senior Planner Langon said for this re-opened Publ ic Hearing , I have bee n asked to address the PUD process , so I am going to speak briefly on what the PUD process is, in general , and then specifically the public pro ce ss that has occurred through th e Den ver Seminarv PUD process from the original PUD application through the first and now the second amendmen t. Every PUD ,s an open publ ic process and per the Municipal Code , the first thing that is required is a neighborhood meeting and that is prio r to the submittal of any appli cat ion to the PUD . And the purpose of the neighborhood meeting is to ta ke input from the neighbors , prior to the application subm itt al , and that wo uld be so if there are quest io ns or conc erns from the neighbors , those can be he ard and perhaps addressed prior to being submitted to the City as part of the application . The notice for that ne ighborhood meeting is sent to property owners with in a 500 foot radius of the development site . On ce the applicat ion is su~mitted then there is a Public Hea ring before the Pla nning and Zo ning Commiss ion and th at Publ ic Hea ring is published in the official news paper and that ne ws paper is the Englewood Heral d. Also , the property su bje ct to the de ve lopme at is pos ted for 15 da ys prior to the Hearing . The n al City Counc il, th e same requirements are necessary for the Public Hea ring ... publicatio n in the offic ial newspape r an d posting of the property for 15 days prior to the Hea ring . And th en after the Hearing , if approved , there is a referendum period ... a 30 day perio d ... in which anyone co uld bring forward issues or co ncerns . Specifically , to the Denve r Seminary PUD for all three cases ... the original PUD in 2005 , Amendment 1 in 2007 and the current Amendment 2 ... all three have met the legal requirem en:~ fo r publicat io n and not ice for the neighborhood meetin gs, the Publ ic Hearings and the Council's Public Hearings . The or iginal PUD ... there wa s the required neighborhood me eting and in th at meet ing there probably , I would easil y say, 200 pe opl e present at that mee ting . Th ere we re 4 signs posted for both the Plann ing and Zon ing Com miss io n and th e City Coun ci l meet ing s. In add ition , Joh n Forstmann , the then appl icant , me t with representatives with a total of 12 meet ing s with representat ives fr om Kent Village ... those are the neighbors to the we st. Hampden Hills Archite ct ural Control Commitlee ... neig hb ors to th e north , Che rry Hill s He ig hts ... ne ighbors to th e east that are ,n Arapahoe Coun ty , representat ives from Buell Mansion area and also Cherry Hills Vi sta . Du ring Amendment 1, Continuum Partners again met with representatives from Kent Village , Ham pden Hills Arch itectural Control Committee , Cherry Hills He ig hts and th e Meridian . Under Amendm ent 2, Continuum met or spo ke with Kent Village representative , Hampden Hills Architectural Control COJ , 1ittee and Ch erry Hills He ig hts . Also , in our re vi ew of the City archives, sin ce Decemb er 2003 , when th e City wa s first notified of the propos ed app li cati on, th ere hav e bee n 36 articles or re fer ences in new spaper s and publ ica tions regard ing the De n'l er Seminary PUD Project . Th ose art ic les we re either In th e Eng lewo od Herald , th e Vi llag er, th e Post , the News or va rious journa ls such as th e Co lo rad o Bu siness Journal. Also there have been 12 artic les and referen ces in th e En glewood Citize n, t~e new sl ett er Englewood City Council June 16 , 2008 Page 6 Iha! is sen! lo eve ry available address in !he City . Every ne ighborhood mee!lng and Publ ic He mi ng was noticed on !he City 's webs ite , plus any citizen Iha! wishes lo be notified of any hearings can sign up for the City 's E- notifier messag ing and thal includes Pl ann in g and Zoning Commission agendas , City Council agendas and notices of Pub lic Forums and Community meet ings , In additio n, not ice of !his Publ ic Hear ing ... !h is add itional hear ing .. , was publi shed again in !he official newspaper, the Englewood Herald , on June 6, 2008 and !h e applicant, !hough no! required , re posted !he 4 signs Iha! had been prev io usly pos led , Probably , I would say , !his has been !he most publicized and do cumented publ ic process that I have seen in my tenure here In the Cily . The applicant has met and greally exceeded all the public notice requ irements and !he typical developer outreach efforts 10 citizens . If there are any questions regarding the PUD process , I would be happy to address them . Th ere were no:ie . [Clerk 's nole : Mr. Foltz used PowerPo int sl ides dur in g his presentation .] • Kevin Foltz said I am the Deve lo pment Direclor for Continuum Partners , First I would like to thank Council for the opportunity to pre sent ton ig ht. I know the primary focus of the Hearing ton ight is to discuss the process and bulk plane shadowing, but I do want to let you know that we have brought our full developm ent te am , including our traffic engineers, should you have an y questions, they are available for those types of related quest ions , I will try to keep this fa irly brief and move through the presentat io n and focus on the issues that have come up through !he first hearing and !he second read in g. I am going to start with refreshing some of the earlier sl id es !hat may be fam iliar to many f you . And really there are three plans that go back to numerous times as the driver of each of the PUDs and the subsequent revisions . I'll try not to go inlo too much detail on each one of the ~lans , but this is the original site plan as you are probably familiar with the six towers on the original plan , located in !he middle , 45 townhomes along the perimeter and appro xim ately 65,000 square feet of a:'owable retail and commercial use . The first PUD All' odment had a site plan !hat was downscaled to four to,,•ers ... two of !hem localed in an eslabl ished enve lope along !he northern portion of !he site, two of them remaining :n !heir original location and the other two of the six reduced down to townhomes . So again , about four towers, • approx imately 60 lownhomes and a reduction lo 51 ,500 square feet of retail and office , The current conceptual site plan , of which the PUD is now der ived, further modified the sile plan lo incorporate more ... still the polential for townhomes ... bu! more of the attached home concept , villas, on the western portion of the site as the commercial component has been increased, supposed lo be increased from 51 ,500 lo 75,000 sq uare feel localed adjacent to and on bolh sides of the inlerior slreels and !he lowers located in a northern envelope and in an envelope to the middle of !he sile , encompass ing up lo 300 residential unils . As you remember, !he PUD also establishes !he bulk plane enve lopes . These envelopes are deriv ed from that conceptual sile plan and they respect the exisling heigh! requirements of the existing PUD and the existing slepbacks !hat are shown here in dolled lines . Those are bulk planes , Iha! as you travel inwards lo the sile , !hose height limits may vary from one area to !he ne xl along !hose lines and those are shown very clearly in !he PUD sections to each one of these envelopes , To show the chronology of the bulk planes or the footprints !hat have been established , I am showing you an overlay of each one of the PUDs or the PUD mod ifi cat ions . Th is is !h e original PUD footprints . These have , as you can see , exacl fooI ~· .. 1Is of the lownhomes localed around !he per ime ter , !he exact foolprinls of the rela il build ings and the ~xact footprints of !he towers .. 6 lowers in !he club house on the interior . As we overlay !he PUD , one footprint and single envelope , you can see very slight adjustments were made lo the fo olpr inl locat ion s of !he lownhomes lo the west and very sl ighl mod ifications were made lo the retail al the intersection , very sl ight mod ific at io ns mad e to the townhomes to the northeast. Yo u can see here. this 1s where th e reduclion from 11 e lowers to the town homes occurred and in this Amendment , as the redu ction of height in !his locat ion was es sen tia ll y tran sferred to the building envelope , app roxima tely 47,000 square fool bu ild ing envelope , !hat is establ ished to !he north . You can see how Iha! line jogs a little bi!, because of !he heights , this was !he hig her area ... a LI-shaped higher area ... and !his was a lower area . The proposed PUD Amend men! No . 2, now establishes !hose bu ilding envelopes Iha! I de scribed prev iously . The western envelope encompass ing the entire western property line wilh the setback , are cons islenl wilh the setbacks Iha! were established in the original PUD , The firs! env,,lope here , Iha! has lower heights for the commercial area along the right-of-way and higher envelopes that allov ,s for tow ers in the center of the site and a third envelope towards !he northeast co rner of the site essenti,.1Iy shifts the envelope from the existing envelope from the PUD Amendment No . 1, • direclly east. You can see that lin e of bu ildi ng set back along the northern property line , or set back from th e northern property line , follows exaclly to the ea st. There is a sligr : enlargement of !he envelope , but essentially this is a roa d that co mes through there and that was only brought down to abu l the other envelope of Amendment No . 1 to ils south . Envelope No , 3 also has a stepba ck establishe d to where !here are lower • Englewood City Council June 16 , 2008 Page 7 he ighls ... 20 foo l heighls ... slepping up lo the all owa ble 179 fool height. Ba ck lo l he derivat io n of thos e envelopes and the conceptual si te plan lhal was used to derive the setbacks ... there are s!ill restrictions that need to be adhered lo when designing within these bul k plane envelopes . There is an imposed restr ictio n ... a self-imposed restriction ... th al we brought forward in the last Hearing and there are also natural des ig n related restrictions that comes along with design ing these to wers . Thos e restrictions he lp shape the des ign , once design ing within these envelopes . This is the floor plate con di tion that we imposed ... that we brought forward ... as a condition for appro va l. And without go ing into lhe exact wording ... essenlially ii says lhal th is bas ically restricts the tower building area to half of the footprint area . And , it is as simple as that. The tower areas that are within those envelopes are restricted lo one half of the total area of that tower envelope . In Amendment 1, as I mentioned , that ~riginal allowable area ... was 48 ,000 square feet of build able area ... up to the all owable height. This restriction , now within Amendment 2. drops that northern envelope lo 33 ,395 feet . Thal is a 31 percent reduction in allowable are a within that envelor,e. As I mentio ned . there are also practical design constraints . This is a section to our existing building , whir.n follo ws thos e pract ica l design constraints in a resident ia l tower . The tower is essentially 100 feet deep , but tha t is driven by the components inside . Res idential unit depths are approximately 40 to 45 feel maximum . which are governed by day lig hting . putting yo ur bedroom and living areas along the per imeters. and really overall smart des ign and saleable design . You know the configuration of the tower has ... a residential un it, corrid or, residential unit. The length of the tower is also constrained by , really by cost and the service corridors within tr~m. so we don 't have two or three elevator cores . So . there are certainly practical design constraints in the building programming that come into play ... when designing these towers within lhe envelopes . At a previous Hea , ;ng ... in talking about .hadowing ... in a previous Hearing , I presented the shadows using the full envelope of what the PUD a11 1endment proposes . We now have a 50 percent envelope constraint that is placed on these envelopes . We also ha ve practical constraints that are placed wi:hin these envelopes . You can see that there is 4uite a dramatic difference between the shadowing , as those constraints are la ye red on within the design of the buildings within these envelopes To do a similar comparison , th is is th e same 50 percent , so basically taking • that existing envelope ... the northern tower envelope ... and apply ing that 50 percent rule on the western side of the envelope and basically doing a shadow study at 9 a.m .. noon and 3 p.m. You can see that there is quite a difference in the shadowing based on that 50 percent requirement and as I said. the 30 percent reduction in area between the existi ng entitlement of the U-sha•;e versus the proposed 50 percent. That same study can be done by basically taking an eastern portion of the site, and looking at the shadowing and how that relates lo the streets , lo the width of the shadow on a comparative lev el to lhe existing PUD . Now looking at the practical constraint and say ing with in that . as I described , you are not going lo build a bo x that looks like that. Thal doesn 't foll ow those types of constraints . Th is does , th is is a conceptual layout of a building that is approximately ... jusl over 30 ,000 square feet in floor area . So. it is very close to the 50 percent of allo wable in the tower. You can see ... the practical constraint...putting a very long . linear , L-shaped tower in its co mpari so n. is significantly better than , obviously, showing the existing full envelope as we had before . And ii also shows lh al it is no worse than what is currently approved under the ex ist ing enlitlemenls. Another example of how you could build cul that envelope to approximately the 50 percent floor area now with two towers ... one slightly larger and one na rrow, simiiar to what was originally designed ... obviously no wo rse than what is currently entitled . Now . going back to the conceplual plan which was lhe driver in laying out th es e envelopes and what really is our conceptual plan In today 's res idential environmenVmarket...with a single larger lower , not reaching the 50 percent requirement . but still be ing fa irly centered with in that envelope , yo u can see how that is designed and how tha t would essentially casl shadows . And just note . I am only showing for simplicity , the winier months , the win ter f,olstice , because that is the longest shadow . Th e summer solst ic e, wou ld , obviously , as we have shown befo re be back on our property and the equ inox would be somewhere in the middle of that length , bul for sim pl11;ity 's sake , the winter solstice has been demonstrated here . So , ta ki ng th is conceptual plan and now comparing ii, even back to the orig inal PUD , you can see that the conceptual plan and thes e plans that I have shown in the past ... the conceptual plan is vastly impro ved from either one of these conditions ... whether it was the origi nal PUD or the Amendment. Th is is the winter solstice at 'J a.m .. again ag ainst the original PUD Amendment 1 ano the cu rrent site plan . at noon and at 3 o'clock . So , in addition lo lhe deta ils concerni ng the uni t counts , the square footages . the allowable uses presented in th e previ ous Hear ing, I thoroughl y bel ieve that we have demonstrated that the shadowing , that the bul k plane issu es that have been brought up ... we have • clearly demonstrated lhal these are no worse than what is current ly proposed and really argue thal it prov ides an opportunity for improvements from the currenl U-shap ed ent itlement of that lower envelope . And , I also expect lhal you will hear from representatives of our neighb ors lo the west . lo the north and to the easl lonight about our commun ic at io ns , successfu l co mmuni cations , in th e pa st two yea rs and our PUD process and th,ough Englewood City Council June 16 , 2008 Page 8 th e mul ti ple co mm unic at ion poi nts tha t we ha ve ha d .. num ero us mee tings, as Ms . Lango n presented, and als o ph one calls. I lh ink we ha ve enjoyed a good rel at ionshi p with the immed iate ne ighbors . Thal is all I have so now I wou ld be hap py lo answer any questions . Mayor Wo odwa rd sa id nothing now , thank you fo r the presen tat ion . • Jim Nelson , an Eng lewood res ident , sa id Mr. Ma yo, and Counc il , thank you for th is opportunity lor me lo speak . After years of sludy , planning and work , we are now scmewhere deep in the eleventh hour of the Kent Place Project . I Just want to briefly rev iew a few po ints in the ,,istory . On December 5, 2006 , Kevin Foltz from Cont inuum Partners . summarized to the Eng lewood City Council that a r•~idents meeling was pos itive , with more quest ions concerning traffi c issues lhan how res ident s to the north would be affected . On January B, 2007 , Sen ior Planner Tric ia Langon said that the ne ighborhood meetings were generally lavorable . On February 6, 200 7, Counc il Member Woodward asked Mr. Foltz about th e ne ig;iborhood meet ings with "the peop le affected and what ki nd of response·. Mr . Foltz repl ied ·we've met with all our ne ighbors , most of the immed iate adjacent neighbors ... but our neighborhood meetings went very , very well and I think everybody was excited .· Council Member Mccaslin also asked about the shadows . It sounds as if Continuum Partners has done a good job of getti ng input from the ne ighborhood , doesn 't it 7 And better yet , the ne ighborhood was variously described as pos itive , lavorable , even exc ited . Council members have specifically asked about shadowing and both Tricia Langon and Mr. Foltz have Indicated that meetings with homeowners are generally favorable . There is a lot to be excited about , even this even ing , seeing that the shadows will bn minin1ized from the worst case scenarios . Here is a quote from the PUD Amendment No . 2: "it is the intent of th is development to attract sophist icated , discrim inating homeowners to an urban , yet intimately scaled , mixed -use village of various sized bu ildings , creating a pedeslrian oriented European atmosphere·. A little bit later: ·a street rem iniscent of a Euro~e an village ." If th is description of the project was at the co re of ne ighborhood meetings . who wouldn 't be exc ited . It prom ises to be the jewel of our ne ighborhood . But I still hava some questions . One of my questions is about these neighborhood meetings and I apologize to myself and to my fellow ne ighbors , • that I did not att end any of those meetings . But most importantly , I would like to know how much ti me was sp en t in those meetings ta lking about the shadow ing path and did we have thes e visua l shadow stud ies? In the past month , my wife and I have personally visited with one or more reside nts of 25 homes on Floyd Place and Floyd Avenue . The se homes are the ones most affected by projected shadows . 24 of the 25 homes ... where we personally talked to the people who live in those homes ... those people expressed various levels of concern and dismay about the negative impact of shadow on !heir properties . They all willingly signed an ed ilorial that appeared in the June 13'" Englewood Herald . I can assure you tha t their reaction to the project is not generally favorable . Th is is what I be li eve to be true . First of all , I think Mr. Foltz misrepresented the meetings when he stal ed that he had met with all the ne ighbors . Almost none of the people we talked to had attended these meetings . I am not sure if Continuum showe d the shadow stud ies at these neighborhood meetings . I th ink Cont inuum speakers have misrepresented or perhap s misunderstood the neighborhood enthus iasm and exc itement for lh is proje ct on ce peop le actuall y had vi ewed th e sh adows stud ies . And I am not sure the City Coun cil ... let me change that ... I th ink the City Co unc il ha s bee n hear ing a fairly cons ist ence testimony that Hampden Hills res idents are generally happy with the project. It is my testimony that almost all of the Hampden Hills peopl e that we talked to , affe cted by the project shadows . are very dis couraged and res igned . Only one person in 25 did not sign tha t ed itoria l. Given the worst case scenario , some of the homes on Floyd Place will be in deep shadow fo r several hour s a da y in wint er, at the winier solst ic e ... early morn ing and late afterno on shado ws will exte nd fart her no rt h ac ros s Fl oyd Avenue , mu ch farth er west and ea sl lhan indicated . I haven't seen a shad ow stud y of say 8 in the morn ing or 4 o'clo ck in th e afternoon or 5 or later in the afternoon , but shadows will grow fa rthe r no rth and in th e morning much farther west and in the even ing mu ch farther eas t. Continu um Partn ers is a lo cal firm wi th an excellent reputation . We should all be proud that they are the bu ild ers of th is proje ct. They hav e a hi story of sens itivity to ne ighborhoods where they have built projects . How .;ould we have gotte n so far in th is development th ink ing that neighbors are generally pos itive ? The fact is I don 't th ink Co nt in•Jum has given the imp acted homeowners a cle ar understand ing of the shadow on the ir homes until recently . Th e C,ty Coun ci l and p~rhaps the princ ipals of Continuum have advanced th is project thinking lhal th e affected citiz ens are gene ral ly fav orable lo the developm ent. Al the elevenlh hour , what can be done ? • Well we have already see n some th in gs . We ha ve seen footp ri nts shrun k lo 50 % of the ir size , for ex ampl e. In my opi nion . the only solut ion is for Co ntiii uu m dec1 sio n ma kers to mak e choices to miti gat e the impa ct of shad ow on Englewood prop ert ies . With in th e current pend ing Amendment 2, there are at lea st four strat egies Iha! I can thi nk of. Ori en t th e lowe rs fa rth er so ut h .. each foo l that you move a lower south , sav es a foo t of • Englewood City Council June 16, 2008 Page 9 shadow . Reduce the eosVwest footpr int and we have alread y seen tha t... wh ich creates a narrower shadow Or ie nt the towers so that the longest leg Is oriented north and south ... aga ln, cre at ing a narrowe r shadow . And fi nally and most importantly to me ~nd my neighbors, red uce the ult imate heig r t of the towers . I thank you for th is time . Can I answer any questions ? Th an k yo u. Mayor Woodward said thank you . Ron Pickens , an Englewood res ident , sa id thank yo u Mayor and City Coun ci l riembers !0r the opportun ity to speak at this hearing . I would li ke to address the history and the beginn ing of the PUD and its pro ces s. In December of 2003, we were not ified that the sem inary property had been sold to Forstmann De velopment. In January of 2004, a meeting was held at the Denve r Se minary with the City of Englewood , the Dev eloper and the neighbors . I spo ke al this meel,ng and expressed some ma jor concerns the north neighbors had in 4 area c. And those areas were : (1) traffic , (2) util ities , (3) D•velopment Process/Implementation Plan , and (4) the n,ost important, quality of life . After the mee ting , 1 wa s preached by the developer and Trici a Langon , Senior Planner for Englewood , to share a cop y of our con .... drns in these four areas . These concerns were comprised by two other neighbors and myself. The developer , John Forstmann , afte• rece iv:ng a copy that night , stated he did not have all the answers , but would respond lo me and our Committr,e after he had time to review our concerns . In late February 2004 , John Forstmann , after working with hi; architect , David Tryba , met with th ~ Arch itect •iral Control Comm ittee and discussed solutions, for example : Jrainage , Increased traffic , infrastruclure , environr,ental and safety issues . The Architectural Control Committee for Hampden Hills Blocks 8, 9, and 10 proceed 1d to have several meetings over the next 6 months with t,1e di veloper, ~roperty owners and neighbors . The outcome of these meetings resulted in many concerns be ing added to the PUD . In add ition , after a majority vote of the attend ing neighbors , at a ne ighborhood meeting , it was agree: that Hampden Hills , Blocks 8, 9 and 10 was in favor of this development and this was expressed at the publ ic hea, :~gs held by the City of Englewood Plann ing and Zoning and City Council meetings in August and Septe Tiber of 2004 . The Englewood • City Council approved the PUD in September of that year . I want to say that John Forstmann and his corporatio n worked with us in a profess ional manner and with integrity during these six months . His miss io n statement , as he sa id lo me many limes , was that "they would leave a community better than they found it." In late 2005 , John Forstmann informed me that the development was sold 10 Continuum Partners and that the commun ity could expect the same profess ion; lism and integrity from them as he had shown during the PUD process . In 2006 , Continuum Partners met with the north adjacent property owners , staling that they like to continue the open communicat ions that had occurred prior. Continuum Partners , in 2006 and 2007 , demonstrated the same integrity and cooperation as the prev io us developer had expressed . As an example , during the construction of the north boundary wa ll , in good faith , Continuum Partners worked with property owners to ensure that the arch itectural north wall would meet the neighborhood 's expectations at Continuum Partners ' expense . Continuum Partners explained why they needed the basic wall firs t... in case there was ever a 100 year fi ood ... and th en the Nova Sound wall would be completed . Continuum Partners allowed the property owntrs to se lect the color and aesthetics of the north wall . Continuum Partners also expressed that if questions arose , they would be available to address them , as :hey wanted everyone to be informed about this development as it proceeded . Cont inuum Partners filed an Amendment No . 1 to the PUD with the same he ight and setba cks, on the northern footprint. that were prev iously approved in the first PUD . Amendment No . 1 was a redu r.lio n of fami ly dwellings and towers in the development , with addit ional items . This was passed by the Englewood '.:ity Council in late February of 2007. I am here to express my views about the envelope concept which gives ,he developer the opportun ity to bu ild in that footprint as the ma rk et demands diclate . During these recent discuss ions concern ing Amendment No. 2, Continuum Partners have made concessions to hel p all evi ate the shadow concept by allowing only 50% of construction in Envelope 3 on the north location of the project. Continuum Partners has showr, the wo rst case scenario shadows , with the existing approved concept of the north tower In Amendment No . 1. With th e ne w Amendment No . 2 purposed envelope concept , th is would be a 50% reduct ion in the north tower constru c:i on , thus a 50% reduction in shadows . Also , 1 would li ke to add that Cont inuum Partn ers has agreed not lo have an y "hotell ing · in the north tower . In conclusion , I would like to express our support of the envelope co ncept and ask that the City Council approve th is proposed Amendment • No . 2 to the 1',JD . I am speak ing for the followin g north property owners who are adjacent to the property being devel oped and affe cted the most . The property owners are as follows : Michae l and Mary Sares , on East Floyd Pla ce, Lot 1; Kay Johnson on East Floy d Plac e, Lot 4; Pat Montgomery on East Floyd Place , Lot 7; and my wife and mysel f. .. Ron and Carol Pickens on East Floyd Place , Lot 5. Now I would be happy to enterto in any questions you may have for me . Again I want to than k you for your time. Englewo ud City Council June 16, 2008 Page 10 Mayor Woodward said lhank you . John Polhemus , an Englewood residen t, sa id thank you for the opportun ity to speak . I have lived in Hampden HIiis for appro ximately 50 years . Some time ago , in fact quite a while ago , there was a rad io towe r on the site known as the KLZ Site . I am curious as to how many 01 the Cour :11 members remem her tha ! site . Two . Well I suppose you do kn•,w some thi ng about th e history of tloot site , that it was proposed to be Cinderella City and we did not th ink that that was a props, usa ge of that site , that that was very commerc ial and would be a huge degradation in the value of the ne ighborhood and the livability of the neighborhood and so we fought that... the residents fought that. And we hired a junkyard-dog lawyer , the best constitutional lawyer in Colorado ... Kramer ... and we defeated It. So , it turns out that finally , you in Englewood , gave your City Park down here for the KLZ site and I th ink you all know wh at happened to KLZ , I mean for the Cinderella City site . You know , we were correct. It didn 't belong there and it did n't last, because it is now gone , caved in , dynamited . It would not have been a proper usage for that. Now I hear that th is site ... the old Kent School site ... was supp .s•1 to be condos . And can yo u tell me that ... what I am hearing now Is that it Is not going to be condos , there is going to be a hotel in there . Is that correct? May I ask? Would somebody tell me on lhe Council? City Attorney Bro tzma n said this is your opportunity to present to Council. Council doesn't discuss it with you , it is ynur opportun,ry . Mr. Polhemus said okay , if there is go in g to be a hotel in that site , that is not what we were led to believe that that site would be. It is supposed to be condos ... high-end condos ... with a limited amount of high-end reta il. Now the reta 11 has been expanded and we understand that there is go ing to be a hotel in that site . And we don 't believe that that is really in keeping with our neig i,borhood . So , I would like to recommend that it be changed . High-end condo is one th ing , hotel is another. Thank you very much . Mayor Woodward said thank you . • Linda Olson said want I wanted to s~y is a thank you to Council Member Moore for opening up another • possibil ity for dialogue in the commun ity and we have heard some of that tonight. I have a couple of concerns with th is. I appr~clate what Ms . Langon told us tonight about the process going on to create this site and to redevelop it over time . A couple of th ings ... first of all I vioutd like to make sure what I heard wi th that... is though it has taken four years , I don't think it has been the result of citi zens block ing th is for four years , that has brought us to today . It has been actually a process of economic down -turn , a number of concerns within the City and just the normal processes that we have set up , so I hope that none of us would think that for four years , the citizens of Hampden Hills have somehow held this up . In fact , perhaps it has just been a two week holdup , because of an e,tra hearing that Coun cil Member Moore gave us . My intent with speak ing a couple of weeks ago was simply to do that to allow so m , ex tra time for reople to talk . Ton ight , I am very concerned about the fact that there are not very many citizen s he re and that we do have one citizen •vho spoke in favor and representing Hampden Hills . I am glad ,at you qualified it as three blocks , because I live in Hampden Hills for nearly 20 years and did not ;•now that we had an Architectural Committee of any sort. I am concerned about the way in which citizens are presented in settings lik e this and I would like to make some recommendations : (1) that we create forums that are tside of this formal style , so that folks who do need to find out some things will hear a little bit more readily ... an;· I know that there were a number of meet ings posted and so forth , but I am a fairly active member in my communay , I think many of you know that , and I had no idea that there had been an Amendm,Jnt 1 made. I am not in direct im pact from the shadowing , so I didn 't know that. I didn 't receive certified rnail about that. I also asked some of yo u on Council , hey what is happening at the Denver Seminary property and it was always , well , they are hav ing a hard time sell ing it. That was usually the answer I got and to be ho ne st , I think Continuum ought to pay me for help ing , because I have sent many people over . I am very positive about th is development in general , I really am . Continuum , and I th ink the developer before them , are pos itive images In th e community . So , it is not that I have been aga inst that , it is the process that we are going through and the citizen involvement. Having a self-appointed group as an Archite ctural Committee that represents only 4 or 5 homes in the ne ighborhood Is appall ing to me and that is not to speak agains t you In any way , you have done everything you could as a citizen to represent , but there has to be more engagement in our com mun ities in order to dev elop the kind of decision mak ing processes that benefit all. I th ink the last time I was • here , Council Member Oakley stated that we have to make decisions based on the 35 ,000 members of the commun ity and the econom ic development of our commu nity and I totally agree with that. I don't think any of you should shy away from feeling lik e we should benefit off of th is development , we ought to . As a matter of fact , I am go ing to hold you respons ible that we do , because it is an awfu l lot to go through for a neighborhood • Englewood City Council June 16 , 2008 Page 11 lo shadow a number of propert ies and nol make soMe money off of it. But in the process I th ink the citizens need to feel as though the y kno,., how to come before you . Perhaps , you know , I am speak irig very lheoret ically ... the citizen issue , civic engagement and that is what I teach so that is one of my issues . I am concerned at.cut how we invite peop le in to the process . Mayor, I was very pleased to hear that you drove up and down the street and have several tir,1es I am assum ing with that , that you actually not on ly cou nted •he trees and looked at how much shadowing was going on , but that you di~ get out of the car , knock on the doors and talk to the citize ns with those lots . I'm hoping the same is true with Counc il Member Moore , that you know all 24 or 25 of those houses along there , so that the 4 or 5 that are be ing presented tonigh t, you know whose those are and you know who the others are that haven 't spoken . A number of people that I have spoken to from that area of my neighborhood are very frightened to come up here , so I'm just encouraging us as a community to think about how do yo u invite people to come here , to be in neighborhood meetings , to be Invo lved in a way and that Is not Continuum 's fault. Anyway they have done what they can , It is not the ir responsibility to make us come out. but we need to find other ways to do this . To qu ick en it up , One way to do it , would be to actually have you ... each of the Council members, develop a constituency website I am on several for the City of Denver . I get e-mails from Doug Linkhart , I get them from Charlie Brown , I get th em from Andy Romanoff and I know what is going on in the ir City. But I don't know if any of you have someth ing like that where yc •J could tell us that in your ne ighbo rhood right now there is go ing to be a hearing on Hampden Hi ll s and the development of that property, you might want to come Those kinds of uses of technology today might be a next step up for a City , that you know , has sort of been k,.,d of small-townish . We all love that , but we are in another world where we don 't have the time to figure this OL'I. .. to slop along Hampdea or Un ive rsity and lo look for those little signs and I don't read the Englewood Herald, I'm sorry, but I just don't l•ave time . I hardly read the things I need to read , so I would encourage that. The second thing that I wou!d encourage is that Continuum keep up with this idea to limit the northern part of the build in g. I am glad to see the shadow studies were presented a little bit more clearly tonight or maybe I am more awake , I don 't know , but ii seemed much clearer ton ight , as lo what the comparisons were . Thal is the kind of information th e citizens need to be getting . It would be great If we • knew how many homes were shadowed , for how many hours a day , Thal is the last piece that would be really , really useful . I don 't know if we are shying away from that or not. Then the final piece is the hotel , I am very conce rned about a hotel going in the re . I am concerned about the economics of ii... whether or not it is feasible fo 1 you all , but that is your deal . But it also changes the face of the neighborhood when you do not have people that are invested in the neighborhood to live there and want to contribute and to have people renting rooms in the ne ig hborhood , Is not my idea of an ideal ne ighborhood . So , thank you for your lime . Mayo r Woodward said thank you . Claro ld Morgan sa id I am past presid ent of Kent Village Homeowners Ass ociation , I can 't add a lot to what Ron and Tricia outlined, in terms of process , except to a limited experien ce in Kent Village , As you know Kent Village is a townhome commun ity of 66 condomin ium townhomes lay ing immediately west of the Kent Place property . We have been concerned about the development of what we then called the Seminary property , for quite some time . In fact , 7 years ago I met with Craig Will ifo rd , who was then Presiaent of the Den ver Sem inary , when we got wind of the fact that that property was going to be sold for aevelopment. And since that time , we have done a number of things lo become Involved In the process and unders ta nd what was going on . We were concerned then about the Semina ry Project and we are st ill concerned . We formed internal study groups in the Village Association , we met with outside ne ighbors ... I th ink, with Ron and his group and many others and I re ceiv ed numerous calls from folks on Fl oy d Place as well , To the po int that there was more ... Tricia counted the number of meetings .. and I would say they were countless or four score and seven . don 't know , but during the period of lime since the first publ ic meeting was In 2004 , I believe , we have been engaged and deeply involved in this process . We have bee n up to ii for a long time .. ,includin g work ing with our consulting architect , because we have concerns about shadows , we have concerns about traffic , we had concerns throughout the process . I am here to say that number one , we heartily endorse this project and numb er two , we also commend John Forstmann and then alter John , Continuum Partners, for the ir openness and the ir profess io nalism In working with us . We made the point , early on , that we were going to be very • un comfortable with construction sound and noise intrus ion , unless there was some kind of a barrier established along tne west boundary of Kent Village , And rather than fighting about it, alter discuss ions , we specified what we were hoping woul d be bu ilt there and that is a sound barrier wall equ iv alent to that on Hampden Avenue , which was a partnership with the City of Englewood . And that wall was built exactly as spec ified and ii was buill as required by the P' ID before any construction began . We appreciate tha t. We ap pre ciate th e coo perati on, Englewood City Council June 16, 2008 Pag• 12 because we also know tha t it was an expens ive process and that same wall now eatends along the north boundary . When the second Amendment was proposed , we geared up again , because we were concerned and wanted to know what was going on and so I called Kevin and we had another meeting . That is the 81 " meeting . And we explored with him and our con sultant , some of the things that were on our mind about Amendment No . 2. We worked through ii... within a week or len days ... and maaers were resolved amiably on both sides . So , we have no concerns or complaints about the openness of the developer's behav ior. We believe that th is Amendment No . 2 is consis te nt with the origina l plan and with the first Amendment. It just seems log ical that we have a development in the City that is des igned to succeed , not to fa il, and it will not succeed unless the de ve loper has the flex ibility that we see built into Amendment 2, as Kevin described to the Cou nci l at the fi rst read ing of Amendment 2. We would prefer a tennis court or a park or other process next door, but that isn 't in the cards , because that property is far too valuable and we are grateful , in fact , that it is go ing to be a first class development for the City of Englewood and , from a selfish perspective , for Kent Village , which is the adjacent neighbor. So , we believe that this thing has been discussed , reviewed , revised and then discussed again and we believe ii is time to go forward with the project. I tha nk you . Mayor Woodward said thank you . • Katty Staller, a Cherry Hills He ights resident. sa id good evening . I, tonight. as muc i, as a comment have some questions and wo ndered if it would be possible to put some of the images bac k on the screen to look at? I don 't know if that is dis rupting everyth ing , but I'm trying better understand some of these enve,opes and the ir flex ibility. Would that be a poss ibili ty , to ask the architect to do that? Mayor Woodward said I th ink that if you want to share those questions with us , as Council st,,rts discussing and asking questions , we could start looking at those . Ms . Staller sa id sounds perfect. I think that I completely understand the benefits of hav ing a building envelope , allowing flexibil ity for the developer to respond to phasing options , economic development . and things . Can I borrow your pointer too? I love the technol ogy here . I don 't mean to be delay ing th is . I do have a question as the studies have been shown and ·worse case sce nario " or wbest case scenario M, the • developments ... but as the envelope , esper.ially the north and east new block envelope . The image I would love is the one tha t showed the actual footpr inl... it was a brown ish plan ... the act ual footpr int of the original PUD and then the envelopes overlaid on top of that. Yes. that's perfect. So, my quest ion and perhaps this can be clarified ... but , in the original plan ... lhe very , very original ... these brown buildings here were townhomes . That was their actual loca tion and the actual locations here or all these brown bu ildings were shown . Then as we/they developed more or a building envelope expanded to say perhaps this would grow into this area , with some obv ious limitatio ns and over here ... and the set backs shown . Now on this amendment , this blue-gray area . has shift•d as an envelope over to this larger area and th ere is a, I'm guessing , this is a step up setback in that area . My concern is when the studies are done , be they shadows or landscaping or traffic pattern s or image , they are looking at a conceptual plan , which looks rea lly nice , within this envelope . However , it is leaving it open to potentially put . in this area , that tall bu ilding height , which would totally change the shadow impact , would chan ge the impact on the street visually , snow bulldup ... character of that roadway . My question is, is th is ... I'm going to call it a stepback , I th ink that Is what the ir calling it...of he ight limits from Univers ity ... sufficient to allow , to hedg e the bets or the future chang es in the bu ilding envelope ? We 've done th is over here along Kent Place say ing okay this is prelty mu ch go ing to be fine , because we know th is Is more or a townhome . lim ited he ight. Th is build ing envelope could bring th is max im um he ight , if I understand it correctly, and Kev in can correct me , over to this location wh ich I th ink would change the character of th is area . So , that's my main question , it would be good if that could be answered . And as that fl exi bil ity is exercised , ii It needs to be exercis ed and the building moved ove r, how does that change the street character , be it the la ndscap ing , th e acc ess . th e interior circulation? Alt those things , which are details , and I know they 'll work those out well , but I th ink it's worth looking at. And to another po int , which is really outs ide or your venue , but I'd just like to mention it. because it's a compliment to Continuum and as a follow up to Forstmann , we , too , in ou r little community , over here on the east side of Un iversity , over in th is area , had worked numerous meetmgs with Forstmann , untold numbers , unprecede nted in this sort of communication ... healed , pleasant and back and forth and aga in with Continuum , aga in. An agre emen t was made say ing , os a buffer , both for their benefit , because the fence along Un ivers ity isn 't on our ne ighborhoo1 , is not all th at beaut iful for them to dr ive out facing from th ei r • co,nmun ity , but they were goi ng to bu ild the wait along there . And I'd like to thank Cont inuum , because as wr itten in the contractual agreement , they 're also honor ing that , as a successor to Forstmann , that agreement to build that wa ll with co nstruct io n of the ir deve lopment. So . those are my ma in ... that 's my ma in quest io n. Just • • • Englewood Clfy Council June 16 , 2008 Page 13 understanding , if IMI bu il ding isn 't built where lhe concept plan shows , how does lhal impact lhe shadows as they go past 3 o'clock In lhe afte rn oon and so on and so forth ? I'll end with lhal , if lhal's nol loo confus ing . Mayor Woodward asked Kevin , would you like !o respond or answer those quest ions on shadowing? Kevin Foltz said nol a p•oblem . There actually is a sl ide and I'm sorry if I went through ii loo qui ckly . Bui we did do a number of different scenarios , nol just lhe conceptual plan . These are the two . Th is is the one where ... if you built out the entire eastern half of the site , what It would look like in comparison to the existing envelope . You can see , as th e sun in the wintertime , moves from east to west , that shadow ... wh ether lhe bu il di ngs are in the middle of the site or pre .;sed alittle bil farther lo lhe side , lhe impact to this area is very negligible , and espec ially whe11 you look at a tower configu ration , this one is slightly pushed back as a larger tower. But th is configuration is more logical given th at the ex isting conceptual plan ... this tower is pushed all the way into that corner. And you can see lhe shadow lhal is taken from lhe existing enlilled U-sh aped envelope versus lhe farthest east portion is very similar , and certainly along Un iversity and along any of these houses , lhal slight shift lo lhe east does not affect the shadow as the sun moves from east lo west Mayor Woodward said , does that answer your question? Ms . Staller sa id that does address the shadowing . I think it needs to be kept In mind how thal would look along Universily ... havlng that tall a bu ilding so clo se to Univers ity . Aga in, the shadows are showing until 3 o'clock In the afternoon in the winier. II looks tremendous ly different and th ey 've done shadow studies of lhis before and we've seen them throughout lhe days in lhe summer or even in the winter when ii goes past 3 o'cloc k. Summer when il's 7, B. That shadow extends way in. Bui nol jusl lhe shadow , but the look of lhe he ight of tr.al building and if there would ... nol be logical lo do a deeper, more specific slepback in heigh t from the edge in University . And that was really my point , to kind of ma inta in that corridor . Thank you Kevin. Mayor Woodward sa id thank you . Council Member Jefferson sa id do you want Kev in to respond to the question ... have an opportunity to speak on the aesthetics or possible shadows in the early or late day ? Would you li ke lo? Kevin Foltz sa id I would be happy to . Kevin Foltz said as the :s un moves in lhe winter , I th ink everybody understands that the sun move s further and further down into the 4 o'clock hour , into darkness al 5 o'clock in the wi nter so lstice . These build ings over here are go ing to actually cast a shadow. II doesn 't matter whelher ... as thal lowers down , any building greater than three to four stories is going to start casting a shadow ... lnfinite shadow across the horizon . So , that's why , at 9 o'clock , we can do these shadows f•om twelve to twelve and it really sho ws that all of lhis is in darkne ss until ... because of trees , because of low ly ing bu ildings , anything ... and r•ally starts to show whal the actual impact of lhe shadow Is from a 9 o'clock lo a 3 o'clock hour during the winier and summer months . The aesthetics ... we take great pride in creating communities , walkable communities , long lasting value in our communities . Th is bu ild ing has lo respond to each and every street , .. :,ether ii is an interio r street , whether il's lo an adjacent build ing and also inlo the adjacency of the stree t... no ise, so forth , that we study throughout the design process . So, if aesthetically , this is nol a pleasing locat io n for lhe bu il ding , and a park , with a larger lower or as il's shown here in this plan , is go ing to be more aesthetically pleasing , thal comes th rough is lhe salability of th ese un its as well . So, we certa inly have lo keep all aesthetic value in mind as we are design ing th is, not only for our neighbors . If ii is nol aesthetically pleas ing over here , il's probably nol going lo b e aesthetically pleas ing on our si de as we ll . So , there 's certainly a balance as we're des ig ning these build ings and making sure that there 's value lo lhe overall commun ity , lo the entire neighborhood as whole ... how we react and we inl 1ract within lhe ne ig hborhood , and then the obv ious aesthe tic va lue with in lhe ne ighbo rhood . Mayor Woodward said thank you . Ron Pickens sa id I appreci ate you allowing me to speak aga in. I wanted to clarify someth ing on the Architectural Control Committee . The Archite ctural Control Comm ittee for Hampden Hills , blocks B, 9, and 10. has been in existence since the early 1960's. The main purpose of that comm ittee was lo help and try to ma inta in lhe Integrity of the nei ghborhood . In Hampd en Hills , blocks 8, 9 and 10, lhe boundaries are : to the east Univers ity ; lo lhe north Floyd Av enue ; lo lhe west Ra ce Street, in other wo rd s the road lhal goes into Kent Englewood City Council June 16, 2008 Page 14 Village . In that 8, 9 and 10, there are 46 property owners . Those 46 property owners dec ided , when they heard about the new l'UD and the Denver Sem inary be ing sold , all gathered together at Kells Waggoner's house . had a meeting and dec ided to bring the Architect Jral Control Committee back lo date and needed to vote and to haven, N members , as most members had either moved away or passed away . At that meeting al Kells Waggone r's house , the follow ing people were nom inated and voted for by the property owners who were at that meetin g. All 46 property owners were asked and invited lo attend . And to verify that , this was one of the memos that wa s put on everybody 's door, either by rubber band or tape . I will not read the whole memo , but I'll read the first paragraph and then I will express to you who the Architectural Control Committee is . • January 11 , 2004 , Architectural Control Comm ittee , Hampden Hills , blocks 8, 9 and 10 ... Ne ighbors : Several of our neighbors atten ded a City Council Study Session on January 5, 2004 . A development plan for the Denver Seminary property was presented . On January 8, 2004 seve ral of those who attended this meeting , including members of the Architectural Control Committee , met to discuss concerns and questions about the plan . These will be brought up at a neighborhood meet ing on January 13 , 2004, sponsored by the City of Englewood , at 6:30 p.m. The meeting will be held at the Chapel on the sem inary campus . Please attend ." And then there Is some other verb iage here that we bas ically want to express our views . 'Respectfully , The Arch itectural Control Committe e." And these are all members that were voted upon by the property owners in the 46 private prcperties . Ron Pickens , Karin Esche , Tom Sanders , Chuck Redpath , Sandi Kettelhut , and Kells Waggoner . I just wanted to bring that up to the Mayor and to the Council's attention that the Architectural Control Comm ittee for Hampd en Hills , bl ock s 8, 9, and 10 , has been in existence for a long time . The reason that it was reena cted and broug ht up with new members was the reason I stated . Did the Mayor or Council have any questions for me? Mayo· Woodward asked if there was anyone else who wanted to speak during the Public Hearing . There was no one . • Mayor Woodward asked if Council had any more questions or anything we would li ke clarification from either the • developer or staff. There were none . COUNCIL MEMBER MOORE MOVEO, AND COUNCIL MEMBER WILSON SECONDED, TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER TESTIMONY ON COUNCIL BILL NO. 23, AS AMENDED, AUTHORIZING THE DENVER SEMINARY/KENT PLACE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD), AMENDMENT NO. 2, SITE PLAN ADJUSTMENTS. Ayes : Council Members Penn , Mccaslin, Moore , Woodward , Jefferson , Wilson Na ys: None Absent : Council Member Oakley Motion carried and the pub lic hearing closed . The meeting recessed at 9· 19 p.m. The meeting reco nvened at 9:26 p.m. Present: Absent: Council Members Jefferson , Moore , Penn , Mccaslin, Wilson , Wood wa rd Co un cil Member Oakley 11 . Ord ina nces , Resolution and Motions (a) Approval of Ord inan ces on First Reading (i) Police Chief Vandermee presented a recomr •·,ndation from the Police Department to adopt an Emergency Bill for an Ordinance authoriz ing an Intergovernmental Agreement with the City and County of Denver for the provision of services and aid in preparation for and dur ing the 2008 Demo cratic • Nat ional Conventio n. He sa id the Englewood Po lic e Department has agreed lo prov ide ass istance to the Denv er Pol ice Department, by co ntributing personnel to be used in patrol assignments with in establ is he d poli ce • • • Englewood City Council June 16 , 2008 Page 15 districts m Denver , thus relieving Den ver officers to be used in security a::.s1~ nen ts di rectly related to the Democral ic Nalional Co nve nlion, which runs from Sa lurday, Augu st 23 " thro ugh Friday August 29"'. Ma yo r Woodward asked if there we re any quest io ns for Chief Vande rmee , There were none . COUNCIL MEMBER WILSON MOVED , AND COi ICIL MEMBER McCASLIN SECONDED , TO APPROV E AGENDA ITEM 11 (a) (i) • COUNCIL BILL NO . 34. COUNCIL BILL NO . 34 . IN TRODUCED B'/ COUNCIL MEMBER WILSON A BILL FOR AN EMERGENCY ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING AN INTERGOVERNME NTAL AGREEMENT ENTITLED "INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMEtlT FOR THE PROVISION OF SERVICES AND AID IN PREPARATION FOR AND DURING THE DEMOCRATIC N\TIONAL CONVENTION ", BETWEEN THE CITY OF ENGLEWOOD , COLORADO AND THE CITY AND COUNTY OF DENVER , COLORADO . Mayor Woodward asked if there were any quest ions . Th ere were none . Vote results : Motion carried . Ayes : Nays : Absent: Council Members Penn , Mc c asl in, Moore , Woodward , Jefferson , Wilson None Counc il Member Oakl ey (ii) Pol ice Ch ie f Vander mee presented a recommendation from the Po lice Department to adopt an Emergency Bill for an Ordinance amend ing the Englewood Mun icipal Code to proh ibi t the possession of or carrying of certa in objects at picket lines and other public assembl ies . He said staff is also seeking support in amending an ordina nce of the Mun icipal Code tha t already exisls by adding lan guage that proh ibits people from carry ing certa in items into an organ ized or civil protest or disturbance . Su ch ite ms have been known to be used as weapons aga inst either the pol ice , other protestors or innocent citizens . So , we are j ust ask ing for that amendment to the ord inance to ensure safety , whi le we investigate those ev en ts. Mayor Woodward asked if there we re any quest io ns . Coun cil Membe r Jeffers on said for transparen cy purposes , what are some of thos e il em s? Po lice Chief Vandermee sa id specifically stated in the recommended amen dmenls : any bar, sha ft , rod, cab le , wire . or other hard maIerial , hard plas tic or any length of lu mber , wood , wood lathe , or wood product , un les s the dimens ions of su ch objec t do not exceed a thi ckn ess of one •quarter inch and a width of two inches or if not generally rectangular in shape , such objecls shall not exce ed lhre e-quar1ers of an inch in its th ickest dimensio n. Counc il Member Jefferson sa id !h an k you Tom . Coun cil Member Moore said Chief, I lhink there are ... a couple of que stions , I'll as k. Where did th is la nguage come from, is one qu es tio n? Po lice Chief Vandermee sa id !he languag e was originally shared wilh a gr oup of So uth Melropohlan area Chiefs and Sheriffs , in ou r preparalions for !he Democralic Nal ion al Conve nl io n, and in prepara tio n for deal ing with th e poss ibility of organ ize d prolesls . Most are civil in natu re, bu! certainly have the polen lial to become less than civi l, le t's say . So !h e languag e is language thal as been recomme nd ed for adopl ion by law enfo rce ment agenc ies throu gho ut the Den ver Metropolitan area . I want to slress !hat !h is is not just in regards 10 the Democratic National Convention . Th e City of Englewood , thus far th is year , has experienced five organ ized civil protests at one location ... although to th is po int , th is group has been very cooperative , very peaceful. Our miss ion is lo ens ure the safety , of no! only the people for whom the protest is dire cled , for the protestors , bu! also the pol ice that have to res pond lo those events . It doesn 't lake much , wh en you have a large crowd lik e that , for them to beco me ag italed , and if the y have In the ir possess ion pickel signs that are made up of 2-by-"'s, long pieces of metal , or whalever that the y have concealed , it do es n't ta ke much for those lo be used as weapons . The id ea is thal by pas sing !his ordinance ii gives the pol ice some proba bl e Englewood City Council June 16, 2008 Page 16 cause 10 al least make contact wilh somebody who is carrying such an ilem anc1 determine what their intentions are and identify whether or not there is intenl to commil a crime , as is recommended elsewhere is the statule . Council Member Moore said, so does an umbrella , us in g that as an example, Is it prohibited under this language? Police Chief Vandermee re~lied no , it would not be . I would find it very difficult for any police officer lo be able to establish inlent lo commit some kind of crime on the part of somebody, just because they havo an umbrella with them . It is also important 10 note that this describes these things as being prohibited during any demonstration , rally , picket line or olher such public assembly. So this would not be applicable , for example, lo concerts at the piazza . Those could hardly be defined as disturbances, rall ies, pickets and th is ord inance would not apply to public gatherings, picnics, and what not. Those are hardly the types of events that wou ld be defined in th is ordinance . Counci l Member Moore said then th is is not intended to impede the ab ility to assemble or infringe on freedom of speech . It merely addresses lhe objects in hand , essentially , during tt,ose demonstrations, Correct? Police Chief Vandermee answered correct . Council Member Moore said thank you . Mayor Woodward sa id I think as I read this also , the change under EMC§ 7-6B-3, unlawful assemblies , what has been added there is "unlawful acts in assemblies ." So we are not talking about any assemblies such as a concert in lhe piazza . We are talking about unlawful assemblies. Police Chief Vandermee said correct. Mayor Woodward asked if there were any other questions. The re were none, .:ouNCIL MEMBER McCASLIN MOVED , AND COUNCIL "''EMBER WILSON SECONDED, TO APPROVE AGENDA ITEM 11 (a) (II) -COUNCIL BILL NO . 35 . COUNCIL BILL NO. 35 INTRODUCED BY COUNCIL MEM3ER McCASLIN A BILL FOR AN EMERGENCY ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE 7, CHAPTER 68. SECTION 3, OF THE ENGLEWOOD MUNICIPAL CODE 2000, PROHIBITING THE POSSESSION OR CARRYING CERTAIN OBJECTS AT PICKET LINES AND OTHER PUBLIC ASSEM BLIES. tlayor Woodward asked if there was any further discussion . There was none. Vote results: Moti•Jn carried . Ayes : Nays: Absent: Council Members Penn , Mccaslin , Moore , Woodw~rd , Jefferson, Wilson None Council Member Oakley (i ii) Senior Planner Langon presenled a recommendation from the Communily D ,velopment Department to adopt a Bill for an Ord in ance authorizing an amendment to Title 16: Unified D,welopment Code Amendments Pertaining to Multi-Un it Development Standards. Staff also requests that Council set a Public Hearing on lhis issue for July 7, 2008 to consider public testimony on this amendment. She said the proposed amendments deal with minimum lot width requirements for multi-unit dwell ings, in multi-unit zone districts . They established Development Standards for such un its and updated definitions related to multi- un it dwell ings . There are also associa ted amendments, for clarification and consistency , l~•oughoul Title 16 basoJ upon those proposed amendments and amendmenls to Tables 16-5-1 .1 and 16-6-1 .1. F~, approxi mately 40 yea rs , multi-unit development in the C it·: required a minimum lot width of 25 feet per unit. W ith tha adoption of the UDC In 2004 , that minimum requ ire .. 1ent was increased to 30 feet per un it. The proposed amer,dments are ant icipated to remedy drawbacks and short comings thal were quickly idenlified wilh th is 30 fool pe e unit minimum lot wldlh requirement. Some of those drawbacks were thal lhough lhe 30 fool per unit requirement • • was orig inally intended to improve housing quality in lhe fa r northwest portion of Englewood , there was ,ittle • effecl actually in that area, because most of the lots were already 60 feet wide and therefore could meet toe new requirement of 30 feet per unit for lwo units. Bui what the unintended consequence 0 1 thal 30 foot per unit req uirement was is that the multi-unit zone districts throughout the C ity , for all intents and purposes, were down- zoned to si ngle fam ily zone districts , because the majority of :he C ity is platted on increments of 23 feet. Th e Englewood City Council June 16 , 2008 Page 17 \· .•) • vast majority of the lols were in the mulli-u nlts distric ts we re 50 or 75 feel wide,, Therefo re, lo have a 60 fool requ irement , there was no real place to get add itional land , exc ept from en adjacent ne ighbor , wh ich then made their property loo small . So, in re ality , there wasn 't ava ilable land to meet that 30 foot requ irement In realily what happened is lhat most res idential propert ies , in the mult i-un il distr icts , were really j ust li •Ti lted lo a ,;ing le dwelling un it As a resull , because rea dy land was not availab le to nIee t tha t extra 5 loot •equ irem ent , the City's older dete rio rat in g hous ing stock rema ined . New affordab le redevel opment option s we, e nol fina ncially viab le . And the res idential revitalizalion effo rt ;" the City was hampered . Th e proposed ame ndments apply to mult i-unit resident ial dwellings . No R-1-A zone dis tricts , R-1-8 or R-1-C zone districts are Invo lved in th is amendment proposal and the devel opmenl standards are created in two different areas . One for areas with alley access and areas without alley acces s and that is differenl in the proposed amendments . If you have an y questions, I'll be happy to answer lhem . Mayor Woodward aske d if the re were any questions th is lime for Tricia. Cou ncil Member Mccaslin said it's been a long time coming . Thank you . COUNCIL MEMBER MCCASLIN MOVED, AND COUNCIL MEMBER JEFFERSON SECONDED, TO APPROVE AGENDA ITEM 11 (a) (Ill) -COUNCIL BILL NO . 37 AND TO SET A PUBLIC HEARING ON THIS ISSUE FOR JULY 7, 2008 . COUNCIL BILL NO . 37 , INTRODUCED BY COUNCIL MEMBER McCA SLI N A BILL FOR AN ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE 16, CHAPTERS 2,3,5,6,8,9 AND 11 , OF THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE OF THE ENGLEWOOD MUNICIPAL CODE 2000 , PERTAINING TO THE MINIMUM LOT WIDTH FOR TWO OR MORE ATTACHED UNITS ON A SINGLE PROER TY AT lWENTY-FIVE FEET • (25') PER UNIT . Mayor Woodward asked if lhere was any disc uss ion . Counc il Member Jefferson sa id it's been a lon g lime coming . I'm glad to see ii finally came forward . Mayor Woodward said I'd lik e to agree with B~b and Joe , th at th is has been a lo ng ti me and I think this gives us the opportun ity to take a look at parts of Distnct 1, north of us , in th is area rig ht here , for redevelopment int o the fulure . Aga in, P & Z, I'd like t~ !~:.,,k them for all of the work that lhey did on th is . Mayor Woodwaro askec if lhere were any other comments or discuss ion. There were non e. Vote results : Ayes: Na ys : Absen :: Motion carried . Counci l Members Penn , Mccaslin, Moore , Wood ward , Jefferson , Wilson None Coun cil Member Oakley Senior Plan ner Lang on sai d thank you . (b) Ap prova l of Ordinances on Seco nd Readi ng (ii Council Bill No . 23 , as amended , authoriz ing th e Denver Seminary /Kent Place Planned Un it De ve lopment (PUD), Ame ndme nt No . 2, site plan adjustmenls wa s cons idered . COUNCIL MEMBER MOORE MOVED, AND COUNCIL MEMBER WILSON SECONDED , TO APPROVE AGENDA ITEM 11 (b) (I) -ORDINANCE NO , 26 , SERIES OF 2008 , • OR DINAN CE NO . 26, SE RI ES OF 2008 (CO UNCIL BIL L NO . 23 , INTR OD UCED BY CO UN CIL MEMBER MOORc:) EngleWLOd City Council June 16, 2008 Page 18 AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE DENVER SEMINARY PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMEN i (PUD) AMENDMENT NO . 2. Ma :1or Woodward sa id I'd lik e to open it up for discu ss ion . Ccuncil Member Moore said I would like lo make a few comments . I really appreciate Council agreeing to th is ad dit ional public hearing , bey,ind the normal process . Also I really value Continuum coming back out and talk with ,,s . as well as staff and then also hearing again from the various voices of both for and aga inst from the ne ighbors . At this point . I am comfortable proceeding going forward with l~e vote tonight. In particular . I value Linda Olson 's comments about ways of improving involvement with the ne ighoorhood . It is a difficult th ing . In my expe ri ence , the one thing that citizens really get involved with is leash laws . Other than that , for the most part , ii is 1eft largely to those of us who are up here lo do the best we can . Bui the const~uency website was a great idea acd I think that's something I will put in a Council request to learn more about. Bui as far as this process goes , given the lac k of technology we 've taken advantage of, I'm still amazed at the inv olvement that I've witnessed between the developer and the neighborhood . I believe that this has been a model process . It can get better, but it's been many years , there 's been a lot of opportunities and I have seen a lot of involvement and really value those neighbors that did get involved and have helped shape the development. We don't normally vote Immediately after public hearings , but we also don 't normally have these follow-up public hearings . So again , I appreciate having the opportunity that we had tonight and I agree that it's l ime to move forward . Council Member Mccaslin sa id I would like to thank everyone for speaking , whether ii was for or against. You know, it's always an educational process for any one of us to gather all of the information that we can to make decisions . I had som e co ncerns and doubts and after a public meeting , I confron ted Kevin , one on one. I was pretty blunt with him and he was very open and honest. He sa id we have a lot of time and money invested In this and we want to do the best for Englewood . He really kind of sold me on it. Listen ing lo all of the reason for and against . it's a tough decision . but I th ink for the economic development of Englewood , we must go forward . Thank you, Continuum , for all of your help and your staff support here , that if anybody had any questions and I know we 've had public meetings. I apologize for those people who haven 't heard about them , haven 't attended them . but hopefully as a citizen. you need to partake in our commun ity if you want to make these kinds of decis ions . Thank you everyone . Council Member Wilson said I would just like to say that I am very comfortable wi th us moving forward with Kent Pla ce . I do appreciate all of the people coming ou \ and I also want to tell staff how II uch I appreciate their hard work in Community Development , the Sen io r Planner and P & Z. I think a lot of work and thought has gone into th is project to make it the best it can be for Englewood . I look forward to that. Council Member Penn sa id com ing late In to th is process and only being involved in the second option, my whole worrie s were , did people hear? Kevin , I really believe that they 've heard and you 've done a good job getting out the infcr,11ation . I have no problem with this project moving on . Mayor Woodward said I would just like to ment ion , loo, that th is was one of the very fi rst lh ings when I came on Council in August of 2004 ... Kent Development. One of the th ings that I remember very clea rly and Mr. Morgan , I think , kind of address ed ii , was that what was use by right , was for rent apartments , wh ic h were really undes irable , they were not in accordance with our Compreh ensive Plan that we had done in 2003 , which wo uld have been much larger than th is partic ular development and truly could have lowe red property va lues . I've he.rd people du ring the public hearings talk about pro pe,ty values being lowered . I'm not clear on where that co IT :es from , in read ing the minutes and stuff, I see where it was a subjective type of comment ! don 't believe that'!, go ing to be the cas e. I beliP.ve th is fits into the Comp Plan . This is prov iding a new :ype of housing within our community ... a hig h end . I think it's good for the community and good for the econr.m ic developm ent for our community and I do support ii. The shadowing that I've seen ... yes there · sume shad,,wlng , and again living • • next to a two story house , 1 O feet away or whatever , there is shadowing ~;, my house during th e wint~r. all • winter long . I think that's part of urban living . I wanted lo comment or, some of Dr. Olson 's comments . Change s in the not ice ,;recess . Some of these th ings we have to ,~o• a Someth ing that reall y kin~ ,t concerned me was you r comment about citizens frigh ~e ned to co me here . Tha t's a co nce rn . Hopefull y cit1 z.tan s • Englewood City Council June 16 , 2008 Page 19 aren't fr ightened . Aga in, getting more citizen engagement should be important and your idea on some of the web site stuff is very good . Council Member Mccaslin said I'd like to make a comment on the hotel . I know that it was brought up. I'll be hcnest with you . I grew up in th is town and look around , we can talk about mo tels and hotels . There 's not a hotel or motel in Eng lewood that I would have a relative stay in , to be honest with you ... and that's just from my personal experience . So, if Continuum can bring in a higher end hotel , God bless you . I truly mean that. My wife is the principal of a school and she 's got kids that have lived in some of these motel s here in Englewood ard they have lice We're also address ing that is sue . I really truly believe that Continuum will go along with thi s, if they choose . So , thank you . Mayor Woodward asked if there was any other discuss ion . There was no :,e. Vote results: Motion carried . Ayes : Nays : Absent: Council Members Pen11 , Mccaslin, Moore , Woodward , Jefferson, Wilson None Council Member Oakley (ii) Council Bill No . 28, authorizi ng Contract An,andment No . 1 to the existing Int, rgovernmental Agreement with the Colorado Department of Tra ru;~ortatlon for the construction of a bridge ::,ver the Platte Riv er at Oxford Avenue . co.,;;-.ctL MEMBER WILSON MOVED, AND COUNCIL MEMBER MCCASLIN SECONDED, TO APPROVE AGENDA ITEM 11 (b) (II)· ORDINANCE NO, 27, SERIES OF 2~08 , • ORDINANCE NO . 27, SERIES OF 2008 (COUNCIL BILL NO . 28 , INTRODUCED BY COUNCIL MEMBER OAKLEY! AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING "CONTRA :T AMENDMENT #1" TO AN INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION (COOT) AND THE CITY OF ENGLEWOOD , COLORADO THAT PERTAINS TO CONSTRUCTION OF A BRIDGE OVER THE PLATTE RIVER AT OXFORD AVENUE AT THE ENGLEWOOD GOLF COURSE . Mayo, Woodward asked if there was any discussion . There was none . Vote reautts : Motion carried . Ayes : Nays : Absent: Council Members Pen n, Mccaslin , Moore , Wood w, •d, Jefferson, Wilson None Council Member Oakley (iii) Council Bill No . 29 , authorizing Contract Amendment No . 1 to the existing Intergovernmental Agreemer.t with lh e Colorado Department of Transportation for the con struct ion of a bridge over th e Platte River at Dartmouth Avenue . COUNCIL MEMBER McCASLIN MOVED, AND COUNCIL MEMBER PENN SECONDED , TO APPROVE AGENDA ITEM 11 (b) (Ill) • ORDINANCE NO , 28, SERIES OF 2008 , ORDINANCE NO . 28, SERIES OF 2008 (COUNCIL BILL NO . 29, INTRO DUCED BY COUNCIL MEMBER OAKLEY) • AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING "CONTRACT AMENDMENT#1 " TO AN INTE RGOVERN MENTAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION (CO OT) AND THE CITY OF ENG LEWOOD , COLORADO THAT PERTAINS TO CONS TRUCTION OF A BRIDGE OVER THE PLATTE RIVER AT DARTMOUTH AVENUE . Englewood City Council June 16 , 2008 Page 20 Mayor Woodward as ked if there were any comments . Mayor Woodward said I would just like lo mentio n that last Thursday , we were awarded , on this part icular Counc il Bill and Cc uncll Bill No . 28 , by Arapahoe County Open Space . $250 ,000 to be appl ied toward the gap funding for these pedest,ian bridges . This is a very , very highly leveraged ... both of these bridges are highly leveraged and of real value to th e City . DRCOG , the County and the South Platte Wo rki ng Group all have contributed to it. Vote results : Motion carri ed. Ayes : Nays : Absent: Council Members Penn , Mccaslin , Moore , Woodward , Jefferson , Wil son N,ne CoJncil Member Oakley (iv: Council Bill No . 30 , amending Title 7, Chapter 1A or the Englewood Municipal Code 2000, entitled "Dog s and Cats ." COUNCIL MEMBER WILSON MOVED, AIIID COUNCIL MEMBER McCASLIN !SECONDED , TO APPROVE AGENDA ITEM 11 (b) (Iv) • ORDINANCE [4 0. 23, SERIES OF 2008 . ORDIN ,~NCE NO . 29 , SERIES OF 2008 (COUNCIL BILL NO . 30 , INTRODUCED BY COUNCIL MEMBER JEFFERSON) AN ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE 7, CHAPTER 1A, OF THE ENC _EWOOD MUNICIPAL CO DE 2000 , ENTITLED "DOGS AND CATS". Mayor Woodward asked if there were any comments . Council Member Moore said your honor, as with the first reading , I will have to object tonigt~. I do , again , want to re iterate I really value the Task Force's effort , the staff's effort . I th ink this is a good ordinance , but it just has one fatal naw in it. It is my opinion that it im pedes excess ively on the rights of responsible pet owners on their own private property . Council Member Oakley is not here tonight , but taking credit for his analogy , it makes no sense that we would allow an owner to have his dog off leash , loose in an unfenced public park , like Jason , yet when that owner crosses the property line onto his own front yard ; he has to leash his dog up . It is an inconsistency that really , to me , highlights the one significant na N with this proposal . So , I will be voting against it, but I do really appreciate the long and amazing effort that went into getting it to th is point. Mayor Woodward asked if there were any other comments . Mayor Woodward said I think I would just like to comment on Council Member Oakley 's comments and Joh .i 's comments regarding , for example , Jason Park . I do believe that when you go into Jason Park or Duncan P,>rk , or any or our off leash parks , there is signage and you are on not ic e that there are off leash dogs at those pa rks . Wit h regard to rights issues , I do feel that , aga in, th is is a safety issue for me and mainly a safety issue . The only analogy that I can use , or the only analogy that co mes to mind , is that we are afforded by the Constitut ion , under the second amendment , the right to bear guns , and own guns . However , with in an urban area ar:,, with in a city , I don't th ink people would expect or would certa inly allow or be allowed to fire firearms on their p,1,,1erty . So that wou ld be my opinion . Aga in, safety be ing r.cajor issue here . I do apprec iate the work of the Tas,. l',,rce and the Code Enforcement Advisory Committee on this . Mayor Woodward asked if there was anything else . There were no other comments . Vote results: Ayes : Nays : Absent: Council Members r ,,n Mccasl in, Moore , Woodward , ~efferson , Wilson Counc il Member Moore Cou ncil Member Oa kley • • • • Englewood City Council June 16, 2008 Page 21 Motion carr ied . '-:) Resolut io ns and Motion:; (i) Diroctor Gryglewicz presen ted a recommendation from the Department of Finance and Adm inistrative Services to adopt a resolution approving a transfer of $220 ,000 .00 from the General Fund to the Pub lic Improvement Fund for Golf Course related improv emen ts, equ ipment , and contingenc ies . He said I included a list of what :t,at )220,000 .00 will be expended for with the Council Communication . l his is money that was origioaiiy transferred as apart of the bridge funds in the 2008 budget. COUNCIL MEMBER MOORE MOVED, AND COUNCIL MEMBER McCASLIN SECONDED, TO APPROVE AGENDA ITEM 11 (c) (I)· RESOLUTION NO . 41, SERIES OF 2008 . RESOLUTION NO . 41 , SERIES OF 2008 A RESOLUTION TRANSFERRING FUNDS FROM THE GENERAL FUND UNRESERVED /UN DESIGNATED FUND BALANCE TO THE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT FUND FOR GOLF COURSE EXPENDITURES. Mayor Woodward asked if there was any discuss io n. There was none . Vote results : Ayes : Nays : Absen t: Motion carriec' . Council Members Penn , Mccaslin , Moore , Woodward , Jeffeison , Wilson None Counc il Member Oak ley • 12. Ger ,dral Dlac w,P!on (a) Mayor's Choice (i) Mayor Woodward said I'd just like to mention that Council Member Oakley , myself, City Manager Gary Sears , and some other staff members and directors attended the Arapahoe County Open Space Shareback Grant celebration lunch . We received $700 ,000 .00 , which is the larg est number that we have received for Open Space funds and then , of course , in add ition to the $250 ,000 .00 for the two bike and pedestrian bridges . I feel very positive about that. (ii) Mayor Woodward sa id I'd like to ment ion th e Sounds of Summer starts this week with Chris Dan iels and the Kings . Next week , the Elvis Show , sponsored by Mega Wraps and Co ld Slone Creamery . There has been a change in timl' from the pre vio us years . The concerts will no w start at 6:30 p.m. as oppose d to 7:00 p.m. They are Thursdays , right down he re in the piazza at CityCenter . (b) Council Members ' Cho ice (i) Council Member Penn sa id I attended the Volunteer Recognit io n for the library on Saturday . It was very well done . Thank you Joan ; you are to be commended , and your staff. I think they recognized at least 80 volunteers on Saturday. It was a very good time . (ii) Counci l Member Mccaslin sa id I'd like to thank Monty Montgomery from Publ ic Works for helping with the free mulch . There is a free mulch pen down on South Platte River Drive . My wife made a community garden and she wrote a n:ce little letter, which I'm going to read qu ickly . She says "Dear City of Englewood , Wow . How do I beg in to ,hank you for providing tons of mulch for Bishop Elementary Gardens Site . I wis h you each one of you cculd have seen the look on the kindergartners faces when the big Englewood truc k • drove over the grass , pass the ir classrooms , to the garden . The ir mouths were gaping and their eyes were like saucers . The older students were amazed by the quantity of mulch , as they had the priv ilege of spreading it throughout the garden area . For the kindergartneis and first graders ... it was quite a day . Please drive by and see what beauty was created on the corner of Elati and Eastman due to your generosity . I look forward to more Englewood City Council June 16, 2008 Page 22 partnerships . Sincerely, Linda Mccaslin, Princ ipal of Bish op Elementary." These are some of the pictures and I'll pass them around . They did a great job. City Manager Sears sa id I'll pass it on to Monty and to Rick. Council Member Mccaslin sa id in the meanlime I met with the new superintendent and he told my wife afterwards .. he sa id man , th is is the best since I've been in Englewood ... this is the best thing that I've seen in an Englewood School. So , he was really impressed and thank you for you r generosity. (iii) Council Member Jefferson said I'd just thank Ms . Cox from ART and lhe rest of the folks that came down for the public hearing , expressing their opinions . 13. City Managefa Report (a) City Manager Sears said I j ust want to make note that in the packet we received a letter from Glendale, Arizona . This was to say thanks to Mike Flaherty, Deputy Manager and to Alan White. We received a letter. from their Econo,a :~ Development people and their Council members, saying lhat "Englewood's example of a transient oriented development, redevelopmenl and use of public art as a broader community theme will be of great assislance to us with respect to our pending discussion on Glendale Avenue. In short , you helped make our visit to the Metro area a success ." It's pretty exciting when Glendale , Ariz ona comes to Englewood , Colorado and says you guys have it right. So, I just wanted to mention that. (b) Cily Manager Sears said I w ill be gone to the CML conference this week and Mike will be in charge. 14 . City Attorney 's Report City Attorney Brotzman did nol have any matters to bring before Council. 15. Adjournment DWARD MOVED TO ADJOURN . The meeting adjourned at 10:03 p.m. -j~ • • •