HomeMy WebLinkAbout2004 Ordinance No. 052•
•
•
ORDINA NCE NO . ~
SERIES OF 2004
BY AUTHOR ITY
CONTRACT NO. ?o~ 1 I b i
,,._,. . 'f-
~, 11 b,;-.,\,,. ~ -.1.00 y.
COUNCIL BILL NO. 40
INTRODUCED BY COUNC IL
MEMBER BRADSHAW
AN ORDINANCE APPROVING THE DEN VE R SEMINARY PLANNED UNIT
DEVELOPMENT (PUD) LOCATED AT 340 1 SOUTH UNIVERSITY BOULEVARD ,
IN THE CITY OF ENGLEWOOD, COLORADO .
WHEREAS , JVF , LL C owners of the property at 340 I South University Boulevanl.
Englewood , Colorado , submitted ao application ta rezone the prop erty from MU-R-3-B
Mixed-Use Residential/Limited Office-Retail Di strict to Planned Unit Dev elopment
(PUD); and
WHEREAS , the Denver Seminary property is ao 11.41 acre si te with the proposed
mixed-use development of re sidential and commercial uses ; and
WHEREAS , the Planning and Zonin g Commission held Publi c Hearings on June 22.
2004 and June 29, 2004 and took testimon y on the subject property which is currently
zoned MU-R-3-B Mixed-U se Residential/Limi ted Office -Retail District ; and
WHEREAS , the Planning & Zoning Commission recommended approval of the
PUD with the following conditions:
I. Dedication of the South University Blvd . continu ous right rum lane .
2. Construction of the public improvements as propos ed and as a condition of th e
PUD approval.
3. Pri or to rec ording :i ny Dcvclopmc ',lt Restriction s and Cov enant documc1~:s1 tl tt:
Ci ty shall re view such doc ument s to ass ure that the documents arc ..::onsis tcn l
wi th the PUD.
4 . Applican t shall provide two re co rded co pies of a!I Development Rcs~rict1cns
and Covenant documents tc the City .
WHEREAS, all of the requ,rements have been addr,,ss ed ; and
WHEREAS. the Commis sion recommends ap pro val of th is Plann ed Unit
Development ;
-1-
NOW, THEREFOKE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE C IT Y COUNC IL OF THE
C IT Y OF ENGLEWOOD , COLORADO , AS FOLLOWS :
~-1. Th e Planned Uni I De velopmenl, for properly localed al 340 I Soulh
Uni ve rsily Boulevard, in lhe Cily of Englewo od, Colorado, is hereby approved wil h lh e
condilions no1ed above .
~-Pursuanl 10 Arlicle V, Seclion 40 , oflhc Englewood Home Rule Chaner,
the Ci ty Council has delennined thal lhis Ordinance shall be published by til le because
of ils size. A copy is available in lhe Office of 1he Englewood Ci1y Clerk .
lnlroduced , read in full , and passed on first read in g on lhe 19'' day of July , 2004 .
Published by Title as a Bill for an Ordinance on the 23'' day of July , 2004.
A Public Hearing was held on the 16'' day of August, 2004 .
Amended, read in full, and passed as amended on lhe 7" day of Seplember, 2004.
Read by title and passed as amended on final re ading on the 20th day of
Seplember, 2004 .
Published by litle as Ordinance No .£?;-series of 2l'•: l , on 1he 24 1h day of,
Seplember, 2004.
I. Loucrishia A. Ellis, Ci1 y Clerk of lhc Cily of Englewoorl. •:olorado, hereb y
cenify 1ha1 lhe abo v and foregoing is a 1ruc co py of 1he amended Ordinance passed
on final reading and published by 1i1le as Ordinanc e No-2-, Serie o 2004 .
-2-
•
•
•
•
COUNCIL COMMUNICATION
Dat e Agenda It em Subject Case 200 4-05 Denver
Se min ary Pl ann ed Un it
Jul y 19, ~004 11 a iii Deve lopmen t -1" Reading
INITIATED BY STAFF SOURCE )VF, LLC
Jo hn Fors tm ann , Manage r Tri cia Lan go n, Senior Pl ann er
PO Box 7890
292 H olden Road
Avon Colorado 8 162 0
COUNCIL GOAL AND PREVIO US COUNCIL ACTION
Th ere has bee n no previous Coun cil acti on concern in g this matter, hm, ever th e app lica nt presented
a concep tual proposa l to Counci l during th e January 5, 2004 stu dy ses sion. '
PREVIOUS PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION
Th e Planning and Zoning Commissio n considered th e D enve r Sem inary Pl an ned Uni t D eve lopment
at Pu b li c H ear in gs on Jun e 22 and 29, 20 04. (Tra nsc ripts of th e public heari ngs fro m th ese mee tin gs
are included wi th Pl anning and Zoning Commissi on minutes as pa rt of th e Cou nci l News letter). Th e
Co mmiss ion considered public testimony fro m approximately 25 interes ted parties and voted to
forwa rd th e PUD to City Council with a recommendation for approval with th e fo ll owin g
condi ti ons:
1. D edi ca ti on of the South University Boulevard continu ous ri ght turn lane shall be by Major
Subdivision.
2. Cons tru ction of th e publ ic improvemen ts as proposed.
3. Prior to record ing any Deve lopment Res tri ctions and Covenant documen ts, the City shall
rev iew such docum ents to assu re th at th e docum ents are consist ent w ith th e PUD.
4 . Applica nt sha ll provide two reco rded copies of all D eve lopmen t Res tric tions and Covenant
document s to th e Ci ty.
5. Clarifi ca ti on of Not es 4 and 7 o n Shee t PUD -4 rega rding enclosure of priva te ba lconies and
terraces to provide definition of "e nclosure". {NOTE : th e applican t has addresseo this issue
and the requ ested definition ha s been included on Sheet PUD-4 /.
RECOMMENDED ACTION
Staff reco mm ends th at Council se t Au gust 16, 2004 as th e da:e fo r Public H ear ing to conside r
testim ony o n the proposed Denver Semina ry Planned Unit D e'. elopment.
BACKGROUND
The sub j ec t proper!; , . an 11 .4 1 ac re site at th e nor th wes t co rn er of So uth University Bou leva rd
and Eas t Ham pden A enue (US 285). Th e si te has bee n occupied by the D enve r Se minary si nce
1961. The Seminary ha s outgrown th e site an d plans to reloc ate to Litt leton. Seminary officials have
placed th e sit e under cont ract w ith th e PUD appli ca nt, )VF, LLC.
As required by PUD reg ulations, the app li ca nt presen ted a preliminary plan at a ne ighborhood
mee tin g on Jan uary 13, 2004. The appli ca nt submitt ed th e for mal PUD application on February 20,
2004, und er provisions of Title 16 ( 16-4 -15 : Plann ed Uni t Developme nt (PUD) Zone District) in effect
o n that date. City departm ents and di visions conducted an ini tial review and provided preliminary
comm ents to th e appli ca nt. The applica nt subm illed revised plans on April 2 1, 200 4 based on City
comm ent s. Th e City and o ut side rev iew agen t i! rev iewed th e revise d plans. TI1 e fina l documents
we re su bmitt ed 0 11 June 2, 2004, and are th e res ul t of ity, o th er ag ency and neighb orhood
comments.
PUD OVERV IEW
The Pl ann ed Uni t LJ eve loprn ent is a rezonin g proc ess th at establish es specific zo ning and sit e
plannin g cri te, ia to meet th e ne eds of a part icula r d eve lopment pro pos al th at ma y no t be
accommodat ed w ith in exis tin g zo nin g o r devel opm ent reg ul ati ons . Under current MU-R-3-B
reg ul ati o ns , th e sit e may be de \ eloped at a densi ty of 4 56 re identi al units and se rvice uni ts or
fa ciliti es (i.e. co mm ercial uses) for th~ co nve ni ence of tenan ts are "!l owed.
Th e propos ed D enver Seminary Plann ed Unit Develop ment is d mi xe d-u se deve lopm ent of
resid r ilial and commercia l us es. Up to 350 for-sa le res idential units are p ro posed and includ e 45
two and three-s to ry, att ac hed townh nrn e style units around th e west, north and north east perim eter
o f th e sit e. Th e minimum setba ck from propertv lin e is propose d at 20 fee t and maximum height of
th ese units is propos erl at 46 fee l. Sl oped ro oflin es and bulk plan e provisi o ns are provid ed to
minimi ze th e effe c t of 1he build ings on adja ce nt properti es. Up to 305 condominium sty le units are
also proposed in six mid-to high-ris e bu ildin gs loca ted at th e in teri or of th e sit e. Height of these
bui ldin gs ran ges from 98 fee t to 179 fee t. Th e tall est building is prop 0se d at th e si te 's h•vest roint
to mitigat e effec ts of its heigh t. Surfac e and und ergr o und parking i•; provided for res id ents and
gues ts.
•
Up to 65,0 00 square fe et of retail/office spa ce is propos ed fo r th e south east corn er of th e si te.
Surfa ce and unde rground parking is provided . Th e proposed retail element consis ts of a gourmet
foo d store, small er specialty shops and servi ces , and restaurant fa ciliti es. •
FINANC IAL IMPACT
It is an ticipated th at th e PU D will ge nerate approximately $3 mill ion in us e tax and permit fe es over
th e fo ur year co nstru cti on ph ase . At completion of th e p rojec t (2009) it is anticipated th at the PUD
will generate a net $70 0,000 annu all y in add iti onal property and sa les lax reve nu es fo r th e City's
ge neral fund . Th e appli ca nt is not requ es tin g finan cial as si lance fro m th e City.
LIST OF ATTACHMENTS
Bill for Ordinan ce
Staff Rep ort s: Jun e 22 and Jun e 29, 2004
Pl ann in g and Zor,;qg Co mm iss ion Findings of Fac t
Wri tt e1. iubi ic co mm ents rece ived sin ce Jun e 28 , 200 4
Ex hib it A: D enve r Sem inary Planne d Un it Deve lopm ent
•
• {~
C T y 0 F ENGLEWOOD
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
TO:
THRU :
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
APPLICANT:
JVF, LL C
P1anniwl and Zoning Commission /
Robert Simpson, Director, Community Developm ent (Z'1,/"
,·ri cia Lang on, Senior Planner
June 22, 2004
Case 2004-05 -Publi c Hearing
Denver Semi nary Pla nne d Unit Development
Joh n Forstmann, Manager
PO Box 7890
292 Holden Road
• Avo n, Colorado 81620
PROPERTY OWNER:
Denver Sem i nary
34 01 South University Boulevard
En glewood, Colorado 80113
PROPERTY ADDRESS:
3401 South Unive rsity Bouleva rd
REO.UEST:
The app li cant has submitted a Pl anned Unit Deve lopm ent (PUD) applicatio n to rezone :he
property fr om MU-R-3 -B Mixed-Use Residential /Limited Office-Retail District to Plann~d
Unit De ve lopment.
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
See Pl anned Unit Deve lop ment appli catio n and District Pl an.
ZONE DISTRICT:
On th e date th e Planned Un it D eve lopmenrs app li catio n, Feb r~J ry 20, 2004, t~e site was
zoned R-3 High Density Residen ce District. Wi th the adoption o f th e Unified Development
Code on February 23, 2004, the site i~ currently zoned MU-R -3-B Mixed-Use
• Resid en ti al/Limit ed O ffice-Retai l Di st ri ct.
t 000 Englewood Parkway FAX 303 -783-6 895
RECOMMENDATION :
Th e Depa rtm ent of Community D eve lop ment recommends th at the Plannin g and Zonin g
Co mm ission approve th e propos ed Denv er Se mi na ry Plann ed U nit Deve lop ment wi th th e
fo ll owi ng condi ti ons :
1. D ed ica ti on of the Sou th Uni ve rsity llo ul ev ard co ntinu ous ri ght turn lane shall be by
Major Subdi visio n.
2. Co nstru cti on o f th e publi c im provements as proposed.
3. Prior to City C0unci l Publi c H ea rin g, th e app li can t sha ll provide an updated Tr affi c
Study co ntainin g all changes and modifi ca ti ons.
4. Prior to reco rdin g any D eve lo pm ent Res tri cti ons and Cove nant docum ent s, th e Ci ty
shall rev iew such document s to ass ure th at th e documents are co nsistent w ith the
PUD .
5. Ap pli ca nt sha ll provide two reco rde d cop ies of all D eve lopme nt Res tri cti o ns and
Cove nan t docum ents to th e City .
6. Clarification of Notes 4 and 7 on Sheet PU D-4 rega rding enclosur e o f pri va te
b alc o ni es and terraces to ensure futu re definition of "enclosure".
Though no t a co nditi o n of app rova l, Comm unity D eve lop ment further sugges ts th at th e
ap pli can t wo rk in co llab o rati o n w ith ad jace nt neighb o rs, bo th wi thi n and o ut of th e Ci ty, to
co ntin ue to addr ess any neighborhood concerns.
PROPERTY LOCATION AND SURROUNDING LAND USE:
The subject property of this PUD ap pli ca ti o n is an 11.41 ac re par ce l l:Jcated at th e
no rth wes t co rn er of So uth Unive rsity Boul eva rd and Eas t Har~pden Ave nue . Land to th e
north an d wes t of th e subj ec t proper ty is w ithin th e City of Englewoo d . Adj o111in g land to
th e no rth is zoned R-1-A Res id enti al Sin gle Dwellin g U nit D istri ct and con tai ns detached
sin gle-unit dwe llin gs. Adj o inin g land to the we st is zo ned MU-R-3-B M ixed -Use
Resid enti al/Lim ited Office-Retail District and co nt ain s an attac hed sing le-unit dwe llin g
deve lopme nt known as Kent Vill age. Land to th e eas t of th e sit e, across So uth U ni vers ity
Boul eva rd , is w ith in unin co rp orated Ara pah o e Co unty and is zo ned R-2 (Cou nty zo nin g
designation ). Land so uth of the sit e is with in Cherry Hill s Vi ll age and i~ zoned R-1 and R-3A
(C herry Hills v illa ge zo nin g des igna ti on). Land wi thin these areas co nt ain s res iden tial
de tac hed si ngle-uni t dwellin gs.
BACKGROUND:
•
•
The subject proper ty is an 11 .41 ac re sit e that was an nexed into th e City of Englewood in
1969 and init ia ll y zo ned R-3-B Multi -Famil y Res ide nce Di stri ct. 111 1 q75 th e Ci ty·~ ~ 3-A and
R-3-B D istri cts we re co nso li dated to R-3 Hi gh D ensity Reside nce [')',tri ct. Wi th th e
adop ti o n of th e Unifi ed D eve lop men t Code th e sit e is curren tl y zoned MU-R-3-B M ixe d-
Use Reside nti al/Lim ited Office-Re tail Distri ct. The site was purck,sed in 1958 and occupi ed
in 196 1 by th e D enve r Sz min ary In add iti on tu admini stra ti ve offices, booksto re,
class ro oms and cha rel, th e D enve r ~~minary provides eig hty (80) two-bed roo m res id enti al
units. Approx imat e r .:cupancy is o ne hun dred eighty-five people, in cl udin g chil dren. The •
Seminar y has out L ,.,1· n the site and plans to reloca te to Littl eton. Se min ary officia ls have
place d th e site und er co ntrac t wit h the PUD app li ca nt , )VF , LLC (See Ex hi bit 1 ).
•
•
•
The app li cant prese nted a prelimin ary plan at a neighb orhood mee ting o n January 13,
2004, as req uired by th e PUD O rdin ance . The fo rm al PUD app licati o n was submitted on
Febru ary 20, 2004. City depa rtm ents and di visions co ndu cted an initi al review and
pro vided prelimin ary co mm ent s to th e app li ca nt. Th e appl ica nt submitted rev ise d plans on
Ap ril 21 , 2004 based on Ci ty comment s. Th e City and outside revi ew age ncies rev iewed
th e rev ised p lans. The app li ca nt received seco ndary rev iew co mm ents fr om all agencies
that provid ed co mments. Th e Publi c H ea ri ng do cume nts we re submitted on Jun e 2, 2004,
and are th e res ult of City, oth er age ncy and neig hborh ood co mments.
PUD OVERVIEW:
Th e pro pose d D enve r Se min ary Plann ed U nit D evelopme nt is a mi xed -u se deve lopm en t of
reside ntial and co mm ercial uses . Up to 6 5,000 square feet of retail/offi ce space is proposed
for th e southeast co rne r of th e site . Su rface and und ergro und pa rking is provid ed . Th e
proposed retail element cons ists of a go ur me t food sto re, sma ll er specia lty shops and
services , and res taurant faci lq,es.
Th e PU D proposes up to .1 50 fo r-sa le res id enti al units . The res idences include fort y-fi ve
(45 ) two and thr ee-s tory, att ac hed townhome style units aro un d th e wes t, north and
northeast perimeter of th e site. Th e mini mum setba ck fr o m prope rt y line is proposed at 20
feet and ma xi mum height of th es e units is proposed at 46 fee t. Sloped roo flin es and bulk
plane provisions are provid ed to minimize th e effec t of th e buildings on ad jacen t
prop erti es. Up to thr ee hundred five (3 05) condominium sty le unit s are also propos ed in
six mid to hi gh-ri se buildin gs loca ted at th e interi o r of the si te . H eigh t of the se buildings
ranges from 98 fee t to 1 79 fe et. The tall es t building is proposn d at th e site's lowest poin t to
miti ga te effec ts of its height. Surfa ce and un derground parking is p rovided fo r resid ents
and guests.
NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING SUMMARY :
Pursua nt lo PU D O rdin an ce regulati o ns th e app li ca nt is req uired to condu ct a
neighborh ood meeting regardi ng th e pr opo sa l befo re a form dl PUD app li ca ti o n may b e
submitted lo the City. Noti ce of th e pre-a ppli cat ion mee ting was mailed to owne rs of
p ro perty w ithin 500 fe el of the si'e. Th e no tifi ca ti on area in cl ud ed pro pe rti es w ithin
En glewood, as we ll as Ch erry Hi ll s Vill age, D enve r, and unin co rporated A«paho e Co un ty.
The mee tin g was held o n Tu es day Jan uary 13 , 2004. M r. Kir k D o uglas, r•.?presen ting th e
Denve r Semina ry, int roduced th e app li cant, John For stmann of )VF, LL C, a,1d David Tryba
of D av id Owen Tryba Ar chitec ts. M r. Tryba co nducted a Powe r-Poi nt pr,,se nt ati on of th ~
p reli r i,7a ry develop rn ent propo sa l to app rox im ately 150 att end ees. A q •Je sti o n and answer
ses skrn fo ll owed w ith qu es tion s focus in g 0 11 zo ning, t,am c, density, des ign, pa rkin g, and
drain age. Th e Hampden Hills (Bl ocks 8, 9 & 10) Ar chit ec tural Co ntro l Co mmittee
pres en ted a w ritten list of 42 qu est ions and requ es ted a w ritten respo nse by th e deve loper.
(Note: Th e applican t pos ted respo nses to th e ques tio ns on the fo ll owin g websi te:
www.ds redev .co m) .
PUBLIC AND NEIGHBORHOOD OUTREACH :
In additi on to th e req uired pre-applica tio n neighbor hood meeti ng, the app lica nt held
mee tin gs wi th neighbo rh ood groups to furt he r disc uss the redevelopme nt proj ec t. These
mee tings are noted below:
2-2 4-0 4
2-24-04
4-14-04
5-4-04
5-4-04
5-11 -0 4
5-11 -04
5-12-04
5-12-04
5-27 -04
5-27 -04
6-4-0 4
Ke nt Vill age
H am pden H ill s Archit ec tural Co ntr ol Co mmittee
Ke nt Village
Che rry H ill s H eig ht s
H ampden Hills A rch it ec tur al Contr ol Co mmittee (Pi ckens)
Bu ell M ansi on
Cherr y Hill s Vistas
Che rry Hill s Heights
Kent Vill age
Ke nt Vi ll age
H ampde n Hill s (Pickens )
H ampden Hill s (Ne ighbo rh oo d Mee tin g)
PUBLIC AND NEIGHBORHOOD INPUT:
•
Pl ans of th e proposed D enve r Seminary Pl ann ed Unit D eve lop ment we re avai labl e fo r
publi c review thr ougho ut th e PU D review process . Co mmunity D eve lopme nt recei ved 27
letters and e-ma il s co mm entin g o n the pro pose d rezo nin g. Cop ies o f w ritten publi c •
com ments are att ac hed to thi s repo rt begin nin g w ith th e mos t rece nt co rr espo nde nce (See
Exhibit 2). Approxi mat ely 70% of th P. w ritten co rr es pon de nce ca me from o ut sid e th e City
o f En glewoo d. A so u rce loca ti o n map is att ac hed as Ex hibit 3. As wi th th e p re-appli ca ti on
neig hbo rh oo d mee tin g, w ritten public co mm ent s rece ive d b etwee n Jan uary and Ju ne 2004
focused on zo nin g, traffi c, de nsity, buil din g height, proj ec t d es ign, par ki ng, and drain age. In
add itio n staff rece ive d num erous telep ho ne and e-ma il req ues ts for mfo rm atio n and
upda tes. Th e ap pli can t has worked w ith surroundin g neighbo rs over th e pas t five mo nth s to
reso lve iss ues and co nce rn s iden tifi ed in th e co rr espondence.
CITY DEPARTMENT AND DIVISION REVIEW :
City staff rev iewed th e in itia l PU D plans tha t were sub mitted on Feb ru ary 20, 2004. City
staff co nducted seve ral mee tin gs wi th the app li ca nt to disc uss deve lopment iss ues and th e
app lica nt was receptive to Ci ty sugges ti on s and co nce rn s. Based on th ose di sc uss io ns
revised phi s we re submi tted on Ap ril 2 1, 200 4. Those plans we re aga in reviewed by City
staff and we re re ferr ed to outside agencies (see below ) fo r co mmen ts. The Pub li c H ea rin g
documen t was submi tted o n Ju ne 1 1, 2004.
A tab le of mo re than eighty (80) City issue s/concerns over the pas t four months and th eir
fina l statu s is att ached l o thi s repo rt as Exh ibit 4. Staff bel ieves th at deve lop ment iss ues
have bee n sa ti sfacto ril y add resse d by th e app li ca nt. •
•
•
•
OUTSIDE AGENCY COMMENTS:
Plans of th e propo se d Denve r Seminary Planned Unit D eve lopment were refe rr ed to th e
fo ll owing age ncies fo r rev iew and com men t:
Arap ahoe Co unty -Eng i nee rin g
Arapa hoe County -Plannin g
Cherry Hills Heights Water and Sa nitat ion District
City of Cherry Hills Vi llage
City of Den ve r
Co lora do Departm en t of Tran spo rtat ion (COOT)
W ritten com ments we re provided by all re view in g agencies excep t the Co lorado
Depa rtm ent of Tr ansportati on. Comm ents focused on traffic, den sity, and height. Many of
the issues and co nc erns rai se d by outsi de rev iewers are th e same as th ose ide ntified by
interna l City re viewe rs. Outside agency comments are attached as Ex hib it 5.
As a follow-up to the w ritten co mm ents co nce rnin g traffic is sues, City staff, the appli ca nt
and applicant's traffic consultant met on Jun e 2, 2004, w ith repres en tati ves from Arap ahoe
County (engineering), COOT, and an independent traffic consultant rep res enting Arapahoe
County neighb ors. Disc us sions focused on the University/Hampden intersection and the
le ve l of traffic that would be generated by the proposa l. Th e ap pli ca nt has ad dressed many
of th e concerns id entifi ed by outside agency rev iewe rs in th e Public H ea rin docum ents .
ANALYSIS:
The Planned Unit Deve lopment is a rezoning proces s that establishes sp ecific zoning and
site planning criteria to me et the needs of a specific de ve lopment proposal that ma y not be
accommodated within existing zoning deve lop ment reg ulati ons . A PUD rezonin g provides
the opportunity for unified deve lopm ent co ntr nl for multiple properties or multiple uses. A
PUD rezo nin g provides an opportunity fo r flexibility and dive rsity in land planning and
deve lopme nt. A PU D is composed of a D istri ct Pl an, w hi ch is the set of zon in g reg ul ati ons
th at w ill ap pl y to the proposed development project. Th e Di stri ct Pl an is co upl ed w ith a
Site .Plan th at spec ifies th e ge neral site design and req ui rements of th e proposed
development. Th e Denver Seminary PUD Di st ri ct Pl an and Sit e Pl an have bee n co mbined
and submitt ed a!, one document for concurr en t review, as provid ed for in the PUD
Ordinance .
Th e Denver Se minary PUD was submitted und er Title 16 Zoning Reg ul ati ons, the City's
fo rm er zo nin g reg ul ati ons, and sha ll be pr oced urall y rev iewed under th e standa rds of 16-4-
15 : Pl anned Unit Deve lop ment (PUD ) Zone Distri ct. Thou gh submitted un de r th ~ form er
zo nin g code, the Denv er Seminary PUD utili ze s many co ncepts and standard s o the City 's
current zoning co de, the Unifi ed Deve lopm en t Code. Th erefo re th e Denve r Se min ary PUD
re zo ning ma y p ropose co ncep ts and stan dards th at me et th e development 's req uiremen ts,
w het her th ey are fr om th e old code, new co de, or other so urces .
In the fo ll owing zoning analysis th e PU D's propose d land use and design elemen ts have
been co mpared, w here app li ca bl e, to MU-R-3-8 zon in g standa rds. The compa ri so ns
illustrate wha t is being proposed in th e PUD and what is allowed "by ri ght" in th e MU-R-3 -B
zone district. ''Use by righ t" p ermit s p rope rty to de ve lop to zone district standa rd s w ithout
pub li c review or comm ent.
PUD land Uses and Design Standards
The PU D District Plan es tab lishes the zoning reg ul ations for the proposed zone district.
Zoning regulates density, land uses, and de velopmen t standa rds in clud ing setbacks, height,
landscaping, parking, signage and fenc in g. Th e District Plan also add resses genera l project
notes and PUD modifica ti on procedures.
•> Permitted Uses: Propos ed principa l, accessory and tempo rary uses permitted within
th e PU D are shown in the Tab le of All owed Uses . The table replicates the Table of
All owed Uses contained in the Unified Development Code. The Unified Deve lopmen t
Code use definiti ons also apply. A "P" in the ce ll following the use type indicates that
the use is permitted in th e Planned Unit D eve lopment whi le a blank cell indicates that
th e us e is prohibited. Showing both permitted and prohibited uses clea rly disti nguishes
permitted land use act ivities from those th at may not occur in the PUD zone di strict.
•
Residentia l us e is limited to for-sa le multi-unit dwellings (condom inium s in mid and high-
rise buildings) and si ngle -unit attac hed townhome-sty le units. A maximum of 65 ,000
squa re feet of reta il/office space is p roposed at th e southeast corne r of the si te. The
retai l ele men t consists of a go urm et food store, small er specia lty shops and services, •
and restaurant facilities.
MU-R-3-B Use by Right:
In addi tion to sing le and multi-unit res identia l for-sale or rental use, the fo ll owin g
uses are permitted: sma ll group li ving fa cili ties, hosp itals, cl ini cs, profess ional
offices, dependen t care ce nters , educational institutions, re li gious institutions,
government and city facilities and buildings. Also allowed are commercia l
service uses including, but are no t lim ited to, barber o r bea uty shops, gift shops,
coffee shops, and dining facilities for the convenience of the tenants . Un der this
provision retail and commercial uses would also be permitted . Th e Un ified
De ve lopment Code does not limit the number o r size of these us es .
Fur ther, the fo ll owing uses may be co nditionally app roved in th e dist rict: large
group li vin g faciliti es, sma ll group li ving tr eatm ent ce nters, parki ng st ru ctur es,
surface parking lots , ce llular towers , minor utility faci lities (i.e. elect ri c
tran sfo rm ers, gas, and sewe r pumping stati ons), athl eti c fie lds, communi ty
gardens, museum /cultural facilities.
-> Den sity: Th e PUD propos es a maximum of 3 50 for-s ale res idential units est ab lishing a
residMtia l density of 30 .7 uni ts per ac re. Up to twelve ( 12) gues t accommodati on
units are also proposed . A guest accommodation unit ma y not ex ceed 900 sq uare feet •
in area and may only be conve rt ed to a for-sa le unit pursuant to District Plan
mod ification regulations re gar din g density.
6
•
•
•
The p roposed dens ity is not out of co nt ex t w ith eith er the pe rmitt ed MU-R-3-B density
of 40 un its pe r ac re or oth er ex istin g multi-u nit deve lopm ents along th e Hampden
co rri do r. Within a ha lf mi le radi us of th e si te are the Marks, Kimberly Woods and
Kim be rl y Vi ll age de ve lop ments w ith residen tia l densities of 25, 26 and 26 units per ac re
respec ti ve ly. The sin gle Wa terfo rd b uilding, also w ithin thi s range, has a dens ity of 12
units per acre. This density is so mewha t skewed beca use only one building was
co nstru cted. Had all of th e pr oposed Wa terford b uildin gs been built, th e densi ty would
have approac hed th e district max imum .
M U-R-J-B Use by Right:
Sites large r th an 1 acre in area ma y be deve loped at a res idential density of 40
units per ac re. This sit e wou ld permit 456 unit s (11.41 acr es x 40 units per ac re).
Th e units may b e for -sa le or rental units.
,:. Setbacks : A se tb ack is the minimum distance a structure mu st be loca ted from a
property line. Minimum setbacks are show n on the pro posed site plan (P UO-4 ). In th e
PL'D setbacks are pr oposed at 20 fee t to th e adjacent res idential propert ies to the north
and west. Th south and ea st se:bac ks adjacent to publi c ri ght-o f-way vary in depth but
average approximate ly 20 feet. The perim eter setbacks to th e north and west are
proposed as pl ant ed buffer areas. Fir st floor terr aces ar e pe rm itted wi thin setb acks;
ho weve r terrac es may not be enclosed .
MU-R -3 -B Use by Right:
Minimum building setb acks are 1 5 feet to the north and south, and 25 feet to th e
east and wes t. Porch~s, de cks, patios, and architectural fea tur es may project
into setbacks. Gar · , and storage sheds may be wi thin 3 feet of north, west
and so uth pr operty line s.
,:. Building Envelope: Building enve lope establishes th e limits to the ar ea in which
str uctura l deve lop ment ma y occ ur. Est?.olishment of th e enve lope do es not me an th at
all buildin gs w ill fi ll th e enve lope, onl y tha t th e stru ctur e must be con tain ed w ith in th e
enve lope area. Allowed projecti ons beyo nd int eri or si te buildin gs A -F's building
enve lope includ e fir st fl oo r terr aces; upper fl oo r balconies may not ex ten d more th an
seven (7) fee t beyo nd th e enve lope; and mis ce ll aneous fea tur es identifi ed in No te 4
Sh ee t PUO-4 . Enclosure of upper fl oo r balconies is not permitted.
MU-R-3 -B Use by Right :
No stan dard s app ly.
,:. Building Height: Bu ildin g heights are meas ur ed from th e top of th e ga rage plane,
w hi ch ma y va ry 1 -2 fee t depending up on fini shed grade. Building height is in cl usive
and all portions of th e structu re and projection s must be co nt ain ed w ithin th e stat ed
height limit. Buildin g heigh, repr ese nts th e maxim um height all owed, howeve r it does
not ne cessa ril y mean th at eac h st ru cture w ill be built to th e height lim it. For exa mpl e,
Building 5 is proposed to co ntain up to eight res id ential units th at are eith er 2 or 3-story
co nstru cti on. The pea k of a 3-story unit may reac h th e 46 fee t heig ht limit , whi le it is
anti cipa ted th at th e roof pe ,( i f th e ~-s tory unit nex t doo r would he lower.
Buildin g height is summ ariz ed on PUD-4. Th e max imum height of th e p erim eter
townh ome buildings, th ose closes t to ad jace nt re si dential area , is 46 fee t. Bulk plane
requirements shift th e mass and he ight of the se stru ctur es away fr om neighbo rin g
prop erti es . Th e townh ome stru ctur es also se rve as transition al stru ctu res to the tall er
multi -unit stru ctur es, loca ted at th e si te's int eri or. Th e mid and hi gh-ri se buildings ra nge
in heigh t fr om 98 to 1 i 9 fee t. In co mp ari so n, th e 14-story Waterfo rd Condominium
buil din g wes t of th e si te is also loca ted in th e hi gh -density multi -unit zo ne di strict and is
approxim ately 168 feet in height, w ith mec hani ca l and telecommu ni cati on equipment
ex tending above that height.
MU-R-3-B Use bv Right:
Maximum height in th e di stri ct is 60 fe et. H eight excep ti ons
belfri es, ste ep les, and eleva tor penthou ses to exte nd up to 18
max imum height.
c;pires 1
the
•
,;, Landscaping : A concep tu al landsc ape pl an is incl uded as part of th e submi tlu1 . Fi nal
landsca pe plans w ill be based on fina l architectural p lans and w ill be submitted as part
of th e permit p rocess ity of Englewood co mmerci al lands ca p e standa rds req uire th at
15 % of the total site be land scape d w hile th e multi-unit residential standard is 25 % of •
th e tota l site. Th e PU D rroposes that both th e ·e side nti al and co mm ercia l elem ents sit e
be lands ca ped at the hi gher re side nti al rate of 25%. Further, the PUD proposes that the
numb er of plantings (tree s and shrubs) exceed th e usual city stand ard b1• 20%. The
PU D utilizes a co mpac t urban desig n tha t meet s and exceeds minimum City standards
fo r landsc ape area and materi als.
Add iti o nall y, th e PUD inclu des a City-app roved public art/e nt ry fe atur e to be located at
th e so utheas t co rn er of th e site. Thi s fea tur e wi ll be design ed in con jun cti on wi th the
City's entry po rt monum ent pro jec t, wh ich is an obj ec ti ve of Roa dmap En glewood :
2003 Englewood Comp rehensive Plan .
M U-R -3-B Use bv Right:
M inimum landscap in g fo r both res ident ia l use and non-res identia l uses in th e
Dist rict is 25 % of th e total sit e.
-:-Fencing : Th e PU D propos es a I O fee t maso nr y wa ll alo ng the wes t and north p rope rty
lin es. Th e app li ca nt has work ed e,tensive ly w ith adjace nt neighbors to th e wes t and
no rth to pro vide a wa ll co nce pt th at offers pr ivacy and sc reen in g during co nstru cti on
an d aft er proj ec t co mpl eti on. As propose d, the nor th and w es t wa ll s w il l be
co ns ru cted prio r to deve lop ment of th e remaind er of th e site. The entry wa ll heig hts
w ill va ry depe nding on proposed signage and landscaping. •
•
•
•
MU -R-3-B Use by Right:
Maximum fe nce he ight in th e distri ct is 6 feet; howeve r a fe nce o r wa ll is no t a
req ui reme nt be tween prop e rt ies .
-:-Signage : The PUD proposes that re tail signs comp ly w ith City co mme rcia l zone distri ct
sign code standards permitti ng se para te retail uses up to 3 sig ns and 80 sq uar e fee t of
si gn a rea. It is reasonab le to fo ll ow these multipl e use stand ard s. Pr ohibit e d sign types
are cons iste nt with City standa rds.
MU-R -3-B Use by Right:
The number of permitted signs and sig n area are based o n the pr operty's use.
Add it iond l signs such as joint ide nti fic ation and multi -s to ry buildin g signs are also
perm itted.
-:-Parking : 'A total of 1,294 parking spaces a re proposed in th e PUD . Th e res id en ti al
park ing compone nt propo ses 54 guest surfa ce spa ces o n the privat e loop dri ve a nd 778
und e rground garage spac e s for residen ts and gues ts . The 832 parking spoc es , including
handi capped spaces per Americans with Di sability Act guide lin es, e quate to 2.3 spaces
per unit. The City 's minimum park ing re quirement for th e reside nti al compon e nt of this
develop me nt is i6 1 spaces, dete rmin ed as fo ll ows :
Resi de nt ia l Use City Stand ard City PUD
Rea uir eme nt Prooosed
45 Sins.de unit dwellings 2 soaces/unit 90 143
305 Mult i-un it dwelling 2 soaces' /unit 610 635
305 Mu lti -unit gues t .2 soaces/unit 6 1 54
TOTAL 761 832
• In thi s calc ulati o n th e City standa rd of 2 spaces fo r 3-bedroom unit s was
used fo r all 305 units in th e mu lti -s tory bui ldin gs rath e r th an th e 1.5 spa ces
standard all owed fo r uni ts with fewe r than 3 bedrooms ).
Th e re tail co m po ne nt proposes 462 spac e s; 57 surfa ce spaces and 40 5 undeq_;round
spa ces. The City's mi nimum pa rking stand ard fo r re tail and offi ce use is 3.3 spac es per
1,000 sq uare feet of gross lea sab le are a. Thi s standard would re qui re 2b spaces (65 x
3.3). Th e Urba n Land In stitute and Nati onal Parking Ass ocia ti o n recommend from 4 to
4.5 spaces pe r 1,000 sq uare feet fo r reta il shoppi ng use (29 :; spaces). Th e propo sed
464 re tail space s equa tes to 7.1 spa ces pe r 1,000 square feet.
Staff be li eves that an ade q uate number of res id en ti al and re tai l parking spaces are
pro vi de d in the PUu . The PUD also prov id es bicycle park in g pe r Cit y stand ards for th e
mid and hi gh-rise build in gs .
Sno w stor age is pro vid e d o n si te. Publi c Wo rks De par tment staff ha s co nce rns th at th e
storage areas prov ided ma y not be adeq uat e fo r ac c umulat e d snow fr om a large o r
9
multipl e storm s. Th e app li ca nt is awa re th at snow may no t be stored wi thin the publi c
ri gh t-of-wa y and th at th e City wi ll not pl ow or mai nta in the private roadway w ithin th e
PUD .
M U-R-3-B Use bv Right:
Unifi ed Deve lopm ent Code parkin g req uiremen ts are based on land use rath er
than zo ne dist ri ct.
,:. Bulk Plane : The bulk planes iden tifi ed in th e PUD refer to th e townh ome st ru cture s on
th e north and wes t perimete rs (Bui ldin gs 2 • 7) of the site and req uires that bulk or mass
of th e to w nh omes be setback fr om the prope rty li'le. These sam e bulk pla ne regulations
also app ly to the eas tern perimeter of Buildings 1 and 2. The bulk plane provid es
adeq uat e light and privacy to smaller sca le neighboring pro~erti es. Note #5 o n PUD-4
limits building proj ec tion s into the bu lk p lane. Bulk plane requirem ents do not app ly to
th e retail bui ldin gs, clubhou se, residentia l r uildings 1, or A -F.
M U-R-3-B Use by Right:
Unified Deve lopme nt Code bulk plane regu latio ns are not int end ed to app ly to
multi-unit or non-residential deve lopme nt.
•
,:. PUD Modification Procedure : Modifications to the PUD are allowed pursu ant to the
modificati on proced ur es of Title 16: Zon in g Regulation under which the PUD was •
submitted. Major modificat ions to ei th er th e Di strict Plan or Si te Pl an may only be
made throug h the same public process under which th e PUD was approved. Limited
minor modifi cations to the Di strict Plan may be app ro ve d by th e City M anager or
designee for technical rea sons . Limited minor modifications to th e Si te Plan may be
app roved by th e Ci ty's Deve lopment Re view Team .
MU-R -3-B Use bv Right:
Do es not apply.
,:. Shadow : A shadow stud y was pr epa red and subm itted in a video animat io n format as
part of th e PUD application. Th e video anim ations were sho w n l'J surrounding
neighborh ood rep resen tati ves. Th e stud y was produced by Compan\' ·i 9 and uses
co mput er ge nera ted im ages based on PUD ultimate building height£ appli ed to an
aerial photograph of th e su rr oundi ng area. Thr ee shadow animations w,•·~ p rodu ced:
summ er so lstice, w inter so lsti ce, and equinox. St art and en d tim es use d in the studi es
were adj usted to th e seasons. The summ er so lstice (Jun e) is th e "best case" whe reby the
proposed bui ldings ge nerate th e le as t shadows and remain on th e site fo r the majority
of th e day . Th e w int er so lstice (Dece mbe.; is th e "wo rst case" w hereb y th e lon ges t
shadows are created over the project si te and beyond . The equinox (s pring and fall)
an im ati ons are rep rese ntative of more th an one-half of th e year wh en early mo rning and
late aftern oo n shadows are gene rated off site to th e west and eas t res pe ctively, and
minimally to the north . Buildin gs proposed at thi s height wi ll crea te shadows th at •
im pac t ad ja ce nt prop erti es and stre ets es p ecia ll y durin g wi nt er months .
10
•
•
•
MU-R-3-8 Use by Right:
No so lar access or shad ow re gu lat ions ha ve been impl emen ted by th e City.
❖ Traffic: (Prepa red in coopera ti on w ith Publi c W o rk s Departm ent )
Pr ese nt conditio n
Cu rr ently the D enver Seminary site has three access points : a sing le F.ast Hampden
Av enue driveway allowing on ly ri ght in /right out move ments, and two driveways on
5 1th Univers ity Boulevard that all ow fu ll turn movemen ts excep t during weekday ru sh
hours when pos ted for no left turns .
Traffic vo lumes in fron t of the site in both directions are 30,880 veh icl es per day on
So uth Univers ity Boulevard and 64,500 vehicles per day on East Hampden Ave nu e.
PUD Proposal
Th e pr ima r / site ac'cess is proposed via a new sig nali zed, full movem ent inte rsect io n
lo cated appro ximately 480 fee t north o f th e Hampden/U ni ve rsity interse ction. Beca use
th e Hampd en Aven ue access is restri cted to right turns on ly, it is estim ated that nearly
70 pe rcent of the trips w ill be to and from this University access point.
Th e seco nriary East Hampden Ave nu e access point is propose d to be move d
approximately 20 fee t to the west and w ill re main a right in/rig ht ou t movement. An
acce lerat ion/deceleration lan e is proposed from th e Hamp den/University intersection
to th e Hampden access.
Hampden/U ni versity Intersectio n Pro posa l
Dual left turn lanes from southbound University Boule va rd to eas tb ound Hampd en
Avenue as well as a conti nu ous right turn lane to we stb ound Hamp den Aven ue are
propos ed. The area r.ecessary to create th e contin uous right turn lan e and th e dual lefts
wi ll b e dedicated by the developer by means of a Subdi vi sion Pl at.
Th e concep t of dual left turn lanes from eastbo und Hampden to northbound l lniversity
Boulevard w as cor,si dered . Additio nal land wou ld be required eith er fr om the east or
west side of U ni ve rsity Bou levard to p rovide the necessary lane wi dth s. Th e northbound
lanes are within Arapa hoe County and are not currently w id e eno ugh to support dual
left turn s fr om Hampden Avenue . COOT typ ically req uires an ad diti onal eig ht feet of
pa ve ment width to provide sufficient "land ing zon e" for two left turni ng la11es of traffic.
Ther e is insufficient ex isti ng right-of-way on the Arapahoe County si d.-, of University
Bouleva rd anci the County has not shewn an interest in providing add iti onal right-of•
way. If the land we re to be provided fr om the wes t side of th e roadway by the
app licant, th e intersec tion woul d b e off-set by app ro ximately 13 feet and thr ough lanes
would be mi sa ligne d •. ith U niversi ty Boule va rd so uth of th e interse ction. Th e traffic
stud y prepar ed for th is deve lopment esti mates that onl y abo ut 16 percent of the trips to
th is site w ill be oriented to and from the wes t, so it is di ffic ult to argue ,hat this
development is creating th e need and ther efo re sho ul d bear th e full brunt o' th e cost fo r
thi s additional w id ening. Th erefo re thi s co ncept is not be in g consider ed at this tim e.
II
T raffle Impacts
1. Any growth or redeve lopm ent on thi s site w ill gene rate In creased tr affic vo lu me.
Th e propose d mi xe d-use {residential and retai l) element of th e p roposed
deve lopm en t ac t~all y red uces th e peak traffic volum es co mpared to an all
res id enti al use co ncep t.
2. Th e left turn lane into the site at th e new signa li ze d intersecti on pr ovi de s fo r a safer
left turn than und er th e current non-signalized co ndition w her e left turning ve hicles
are turning from the northbound through lane on University.
3. The new signalized intersec tion wi th crosswalk provides safer p ede str ia n trav el
across University Bo ul evard.
4. Traffic queuing at both th e new and Hampden/Unive rsity signals will actua ll y be
Improved during th e morning rush hour. There w ill be little or no chang e during the
off peak periods, but ther e will be periods of longer backups in the evening rush
hour.
5. Du al left turn lanes from so uthbound University to eastb b und Hampden, reduc es
southb ound qu euin g on Uni ve rsity at A.M. peak and Improves leve l of serv ice at
Hampden/Unive rsity interse ction .
6. The continuous right turn lan e improve s tr affi c efficie ncy on southbound t l ni ve rsity
by rem ovi ng right turnin g veh icl es from the through lane .
7. Th e acc el eration/deceleration lane on Hampden improves traffi c . .1e ncy on
westbound Hampden oy removing right turning vehicles from the thr ough lan e.
8. Hampden/University sign al improve ments will result in more efficient inters ec tion
performance .
Traffic Conclusions
Any growth or redevel o pment at the si te w ill impact traffic and volume. Englewood
Public Works staff beli eves th at impacts will be mitigated by the co nstruction of the
fo ll owing public improvemen ts proposed in th e PU D:
o Du al left turn lane s from so uthbound University to ea stb ound Hampden,
o Signal improvements at Hampd en/University intersection,
o Continuous right turn lan e on Un iversity, and
o Acceleration/decel era tion lan e on : !ampden.
Pu blic Works Reco mm end ati oq
Thou gh staff is not in ag reeme nt with so me of th e Traffic Study's numbers and
ass umptions, th e outcome do es not change and th e Department reco mm endation is
based on all reaso nable efforts ha vi ng bee n mad e to miti ga te th e tr affic im;·ac ts from
this deve lop ment. The Publi c Work s Departm ent recomm end s th at:
1. Prior to City Council Pu bli c H ea rin g, the appli ca nt pr ovide an upd ated Traffi c Stud y
co ntainin g all chang es and modifications.
2. The Pl annin g and Zoning Commi ss ion req uire th at co nstru cti on of the propos ed
publi c improv emen!s be a conditi on of PUD ap proval.
12
•
•
•
•
•
•
❖ Utilities : Ade quat e Ci ty of Englewood wa ter and sa nitary sewe r services are ava il abl e
l o th e site. Sit e co nstru cti on detai ls wi ll be rev iew ed by th e Utility En gin ee r as pa rt o f
th e permi lling pro ces s. Ele ctri ca l se rvice is avai labl e to th e sit e fr o m Xce l Ener gy and
w ill b e underground ed. Const ru ction details and sys tem requirement s wi ll be des igned
ba sed o n Xce l Ene rgy standards and reg ul ati ons .
❖ Drainage: (Prepar ed in coope rati o n wi th Publi c Work s Depa rtm ent )
A Pr eliminary Draina ge Stu dy was subm itted and re viewed by the Publi c Works
D epa rtm ent. At the p rese nt time the Seminary camp us generates close lo 15 cfs durin g
minor sto rm s and would ge nera te around 47 cfs in a major sto rm eve nt. The
Pr eli minary Dra inage Stud y indi ca tes th at runoff from thi s site w ill be de tai ned in an
un dergrou nd detention faci li ty and th e flows from this site wi ll be released slowly into
th e sto rm sewer in U nive rsity Bo ul eva rd. The proposed rele ase rates from th e detention
facility are 2.3 cfs for minor stb rm s, and 11 .4 cfs in the major storm. Thi s deve lopme nt
wi ll grea tl y reduce th e exis ting rate of runoff from thi s site and w ill also change the
ex istin g flow pallern from th e si te that sho uld red uce dra in age impacts to downstr eam
properties. A t th e present tim e most of the run off from th e exis tin g camp us is di rected
over th e surface through Kent Vi ll age and from th ere it goes north on Rac e Str ee t where
the flo ws are co nveyed by street s and st orm sewers through Englewood and eve ntually
out/a ilin g into f-'~rvard Gulch in D enve r .
En gin ee rin g staff has co nditi o nall y ap pro ve d the Prelimin ary Drain age Report. Th ~
engin ee r for th e appli cant is awa re of staff's co nce rns and questions and fee ls
co mfortab le th at he ca n address th em in th e Final Drainage Report.
., Fiscal Impacts : Commu ni ty D eve lopment D epartm ent eco nomi c deve lopme nt staff
reviewed an economic analys is by BBC Resea rch and Consu ltin g summarizing fi sca l
im pac ts of th e proposed PU D (See Exh ibit 6). As a religious ins tituti on the Seminary sit e
is currently tax ex empt and gene rates no prop erty l ax reve nue, howeve r the booksto re
do es ge nerate a nomin al am o unt of sal e tax reve nu e.
It is anticipat ed tha t th e PUD w,11 generate approxim ately $3 milli on in use tax and
permit fees ove r th e four year co nstru cti on phase. At bui ld out it is anti cipa ted th at the
PU D w ill gen erate a ne t $700,000 ann uall y in additiona l prope rty and sa les tax
reve nu es fo r th e City's gene ral fund. Th e app li ca nt is no t requesting an y fin ancial
ass istance fr o m th e City .
., Other Items of Note
Pr ivate str ee ts w ill be th e respons ibility of th e p,o perty owner.
As part of this PUD th e deve loper w ill pr ov id e a City approved en tr y port fea tur e/publi c
art work.
As th e Den ve r Sem in ary trans iti ons to it s new campus a po rti o n its ope , .,ti on wi ll
remai n on the si te thr ough Phase 1.
Included in the PUD fo r illu st rative purposes are conc eptu al eleva ti o n render ings
in dicatin g th e general archit ec ture and materia ls to be used in th e deve lopme nt. Fina l
13
architec tu ral design eleva tions, mat eri al and co lor boards ",II be submitt ed as part o f
th e permi t process.
Th ough copies of th e D eve lopment Res tri ct ions and Cove nants docum ent s are req uired
to be sub mitted to th e City, such docu men ts are pri va te agr eements and are not
enfo rcea bl e by the City.
SUMMARY :
Eng lewood is a first-ring subu rb th at trans it ions from urban Den ver to suburban A rapahoe
Co un ty. En glewood has chall enges tha t must be add ressed: pocke ts of underutilize d lan d;
relati ve lac k of socio-eco no mic div ersity; physi ca l limitati ons to growth ; need for mo re
dive rse housing stock; need fo r a mo re eco nom ica ll y dive rse business envi ro nment to
cre ate a mo re balanced mix of goods and se rvices; and a need to maintain and develop
communi ty vitali ty. The Eng lewood Co mprehensive Pl an speaks to rev itali za ti o n,
redevelop ment and rein ves tm ent to add re ss th ese cha ll enges. Th e City mu st th ink more
co mpac tl y by provid in g opportuniti es fo r deve lopment o f high quality mi xed-use projects
that wi ll hold va lu e and fo r th e Ci ty ove r tim e.
U rb an are as ar e typica ll y characte ri zed by mo de rate to highe r density res id en ti al
developme nt of 4 or mo re dwellin g units per ac re. Suburban deve lop ment is typica ll y
charac teri ze d by low re sid ential density, larger lot, singl e-fa mily detached homes. The
difference b etween urban an d su burban ca n be illustrated by co mpa rin g the City of
•
Eng lewood R-1 -A (large lot) density of 4.8 dwelling units per acre (urban) to th e adjacent •
ci ty of Che rry Hills V illages R-1 den sity o f 1 dwe llin g unit pe r 2.5 acres (s uburban). Both
U ni ve rsity Bo uleva rd and Hampden Avenues are significant ph ysica l boundari es between
Eng lewood and neig hbo rh oo ds to th e eas t and so uth . The Hampd en Ave nu e co rr idor in
En glewood is a high d ens ity di strict . It is ur ban in natur e w ilh a mi x of multi -unit (K ent
Village and The M ark s) to high -ri se (Waterford Co ndomin ium) deve lo pm ent.
Th e D enver Semina ry sit e is an area of change bec ause a lo ng tim e neighbo r and property
use r is leav in g an d the site w ill be red<;!veloped ; thi s is in evi tab le. There is no doub t that
any de ve lopment, and ce rt ai nly a proj ec t of thi s magnitud e, w ill have µosi ti ve and nega ti ve
impa cts o n the surro un di ng area res ulting fr om th e changes that occur.
H ow does the City guide that chan ge/ Th e City guides char ge th ro u gh land use pro ce dures
such as th e Plann ed Un it Develop ment process. All deve lop ment withi n th e City is
gove rn ed by City of Englewood reg ul at ions , no t by o th er juri sdic ti ons' regulati o ns.
Compari so n to regu latio ns im posed by o ther juri sdi ctions o r eve n City standards in
adjac ent zone di str icts is on ly an illustra tion of wha t is si mil ar or diffe rent. This µub li c PUD
rezo nin g process addresses w hat is permitt ed o n thi s si te wi thin the City of Engl ewood .
The PU D imp lem ents fle xib le sit e developmen t opportuniti es thr ough crea ti ve an d
in nova ti ve design and deve lopme nt w ith ou t sac rificing tr adi ti o nal zo nin g objec ti ves of
hea lth, safety and w elfa re of the co mmun ity. Successful change mitigates th e im racts in
th e b es t mann er pos sibl e. In this process, tou gh cho ices and decis io ns mu st b e co nsidered •
and tradeoffs ca n occur. The goa l shou ld be to ens ur e a deve lop men t th at mitigates iss ues,
integ rates effecti ve ly, and es tab lishes a new stand ard fo r futur e deve lopmen t in th e City.
14
•
•
•
Commun ity Deve lop ment staff be li eves th e Denver Se minary Plann ed U nit Deve lopmen t
achieves these goa ls.
PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT CONSIDERATIONS :
The Denver Semina ry Pl anne d Unit Deve lopmen t app li ca tion was submitted un de r
provisions 16-4-15 Plann ed Unit Development /PU D) Zo ne District of th e Englewood
Municipal Code. W hen cons id erin g th e Pl anned Un it De ve lopm ent app li ca ti on, the
Commission must determine if th e proposal mee ts Distri ct Pl an and Si te Pl an crite ri a as
es tab li shed in the PUD Ordinance.
PUD Distri ct Pl an
Denve r Seminary PU D Distri ct Plan se ts forth th e zoning reg ul ations w ithin w hich th e
proposed deve lop men t wi ll oc cur. The Planning and Zoni ng Commi ssio n is req uired to
review th e Denver Semin ary Di stri ct Pl an ahd make findings ba sed on the fo ll owi ng criteria:
1. The PUD District Plan is, or is no~ in conform ance with th e District Pla n requirements and
the Compr ehensive Plan .
Th e propos ed Denver Seminary PU D is in confo rm ance with the appli ca bl e
requirements set forth in Section 16-4-15: E 3 e. PUD Di stri ct Plan . These
requirements focus on th e general loca ti on, arr angemen t, extent and characteo of
th e deve lop ment proposed in th e new zone district.
The Comprehensive Pl an is th e found ation for all muni cipa l pl ann ing efforts.
Adopt ed by City Co u nci l in 2003, it is the policy guide fo r decisio n-m aking regarding
development w ith in th e co mmuni ty. It enco mpa sses all aspec ts of de ve lopment in
th e City : physical, so cia l and econo mi c. The PU D District Plan is in co nformance
wi th th e fo ll owing objecti ves iden tifi ed in Roadmap Engle wood: 2003 Eng lewo od
Compre hensive Plan :
H ousing:
Obj. 1-2 "Encourag e housing th at serves different life-cycle stages."
Obj . 1-3 "En co urage housi ng investm ents that improve the hou sing mi x,
incl udi ng both sma ll er an d larger unit sizes, and a wide r ran ge of housing types,
including singl e-fa mily, dupl ex, town horn ,? and co nd om inium units ."
Obj. 3-1 "Encour age mi xe d-use developm ent s that include both hou sing and
busi ness and emp loyment oppo rtuniti es."
Cu ltural Art s:
Obj . 3-3 "Develop and implem ent art displays alon g major comme rcia l co rridors
and ci ty entry po rt s."
Bu siness and Em ploym ent:
Obj . 1-2 "Actively engage in attracting new bu si nesses to th e City."
Obj . 5-1 "Encourage the developm ent of mi xed -u se proj ec ts in orde r to ac hi eve
a vib ran t co mmu nity."
I S
Z. All req uired do cum ents, drawing s, referrals, recomm endations, and approvals have bee n
receive d.
All a p pro pri ate do cum ent s co nce rnin g the pr o po se d De nve r Se min ary PUD have
bee n receive d and ap proved.
3. The PUD Di str ict Plan is consistent with adopt ed and generall y acc epted standards of
deve lo pm ent in th e Ciry o f Engl ewood.
Th e propose d PUD District Pl an is consis te nt wi th accep ted development standards
establish ed by th e City of Eng le wo od.
4. Th e PUD District Plan is sub sta nt ia l y cons istent wit h th e goa ls, objective s, d es ig n
guid eli nes, po li cies and any oth er ordir ance, law or req uirem ent of th e Ci ty.
Th e proposed Denve r Sem in ary PL D Di <' · :t Plan is in conformance wit h all o th er
ord in ances, laws and requir ement.~ of the dty.
5. When the PUD District Plan is within th e Englewo od Downto wn Developm ent Au,:hority
(EDDA ) area, th e Pla n is co nsistent with the EDD A approved des igns, po licies and plans.
No t a ppli cable .
PUD Site Pl~
uenver Sem inary PUD Site Pl an se '.s forth th e site pla nning and des ign pa ram eters within
which th e propos ed d evelo pm e nt wi ll occur. Th e Planning and Zo nin g Commission is
req uir ed to review the Denve r Seminary PUD Si te Pl an and mak e find in gs o n th e follo win g
crit eri a:
I . Th e PUD Site Plan is, or is not, in co n fo rm ance with th e District Plan req uirements.
Th e propo se d Denve r Seminary PUD Sit e Plan is in co nforman ce with the De nve r
Semin ary PUD Di stri ct Pl an. The PUD Sit e Pl an es tab li shes the lot arran ge me nt,
o ri e nt ation, and location, and the building enve lopes o n the lo ts. Th e PUD Sit e Pl an
also incl ud es a land scape, sign age, fencing, and pa rkin g pl ans. Th e Plan also
iden ti fi es co mm on and pub li c areas.
2. All requ ir ed do cum ents, drawings, re ferrals, recomm endations, and approva ls have been
receive d.
All requ ir ed sit e plan mater ials hav e bee n rece ive d a,·. j a pp ro ved .
3. Th e PUD Si te Plan is co nsistent with ado r,ed and generall y accep ted standards of
•
•
development of th e City o f Eng lewoo d. •
16
•
•
•
The pro posed PUD Si te Pl an is con sistent with th e deve lo pm e nt standard s se , io rth
in th e PUD Di str ic t Pl an. Th e Deve lopm ent Review Team rev iewed th e plan and
de te rmin e d th at the pro po sal meets st andards es tablishe d or admini ste re d ei th e r
thr o ugh Ordin ance or by De partm e nt policies . Standards for sit e access, utilities,
publi c rig ht ,f-way, and zo ning have been meet.
4. Th e PUD Sit e Plan is subs tantia ll y co nsistent with th e go als, obiectives and po licies and/or
any oth er ord inance, law or requ irement of th e City.
Th e propos e d PUD Sit e Pl an is in con fo rm ance with all other ordinan ces, law s and
require me nt s of th e City .
ATTACHMENTS :
Exhibit 1: Letter from Denver Seminary President G. Craig Williford
Exhibit 2: Written Public Co mment
Exhibit 3: Source Lo ca tions of Written Public Comments
Exhibit 4: Table of City Issues and Status
Exhib it S: Outside Agency Comments
Exhibit 6: BB C Research and Consulting Fis cal Imp act
17
Dcwcl op mt nl Nam e
1.UMi\11.,,,11 l Ut.\ tLU l'MtN I Utt'AI< IMt.N t
1000 Eni:lt...,ood Parkway
Eng le wood, CO 80110
16?-2H?IFAX71J.6195
...,...,...., dcn1trw9pdcpu1
LA NO DEVELOPMENT APPLIC ATION FOR~J
DENVE R SEMI NA RY RED EVELOPMENT
Propeit) r\ddms H01 So u1h U1m m11} Blvd. Englewood. CO
Pn 1tn1 Zon1,g R•J cru·_ll_•_1 _E.\111 1111 Usc ,=cSE,cMc:,INc;:A::,;Rc.cY ___ _
~-~~,1
~h
01:;:;::~0
,"~t ~: ifne ·,":':,1;;':~''-c,c~ll~EO~----------------
Apptica uon ")pc· Ruoni n1 · from R-) 10PUO 6'.~1/i~t;:~:n ;::~~nnc:d Un11 DtHlopmen1 : 1_·',JA,-;d;-m,-,.-,,.-.,-,.~, 1~17,,-,.-,~1 -
Subd iv isio nj I Prcl lmin11ry Map { I Final Plat
Vacat ion olj-j E:u c:mcnc [ I Righ1 -of-w1y
Conditio 111I Us e Permit for
Othrr --------------
APPLICANT INFORMATION
Name: John Fontm&nn , Man 11cr
Fi rm: JVF LLC. a Colondo lfmitcd liabi lity co ml?nr
Addrus : f'O 801 1890, 292 Holden Rd. Avon. CO 816 !0
Phone/h.,IE•M11I. 970.7411 .1100: ru: 910 .748 06J6: em;11I : john.'al fors1 manndev.com
Arcll lltcl I P111111 ln1 Co nsulll:tl ln(ornutlon
Con tact Pe rson Name 01v1d Tr.ba; Dean Fortman
Fi1m:~:..i o w·cnr1yb1,\rch11ec 1s
Addrm: l ol0 Logan S1, Dtn vcr. CO 8020}
Ph one,rn Nurnbu/E-mail JOJ 8J 1.4010: ru JOJ.194.51 6}: email. fomnanfwd1M.uom
Ci11 i11nrin 1 Co11 1ult1n1 lnrorm•li0 11 ;j~:.·c~~~~ ~:,:~c.;_s:=~:"-.'"'"""=m""'""''---------------
Addrm IU Sou 1h Unton Bl~·d. Sui1c IS 6, L;1k cwood. CO 150221
Ph11nt/Fu/E•m11t JOJ .910 0200 : fa.,: JOJ.•no 0917: em all : shammond/iilc :arroll -langc .com
PR OPERTY OWNE R INFORMATION: L,11 l.c1 •I nam-c and :Mid~nur ,11 p,mms ,nd comp.1n,n ,oho hold.,., intcrot
,n 1hc huc1n duu1bcd prnpul), '"h"hcl u o,onn . mnr111101. lt11u. opl inu , holikn ofdctdell ofuuu. etc fut ca ,pora Lc
0"nu1 a, p11111tnh1p1. 11uchul irp111" 1hn11f ncc n11ry .
lndi•id111lll1I
Name Knk E. Douglou PhoM ~JO~J~l7~7_,,02"°Sl'--------
fllm : Colo rado Ruley ConsultJn ls 1nc orpo r11cd
Addim. 1$20 We:s1 Canal Cou n. Su11c 110. L1t1lcton , CO 80 120
Corpor1 1lon /P'1r1ncr 1hl p
Name of Co1porario nlP111nc 11h1p Dcnvcr Scmin ;uy, i1 Colorado nonprofi1 ccwpora1ion
Add rns/C u)ISriwZip· J401 SOU TII UNI VERS ITY BL VD. ENGL EWOO D. CO
S111c 11fRc 11111 11,on Co lorado
N1mn of Offkm/P1 11nen Cn i1 Willifo1d, f'rts !dcnt an d/or Jack He1m b1cfuicr, VP, Sec y
i Plcnc 1ndiu1c who Tille Title
CE RTIFICA fl ON: I hcrc b) ccn1ry th.II, 10 the hc11 or'") kno 1,lcc!1c Mid bchrr. Mt rnformahlNI 11,1r,plicd \O,l th 1h1 1 applocatmn
h 11ut and ,ccunlc ind 1h11 con1 c111 of 11\olt pr,ion, li1 1rd 1i>o•c . ,u1hou1 .. tiou ron 1e11t 11M: 1rqun1 cd U hOII u nnut 11,.full) be
1cromplnlmi, 1111 bccll IIIRltd Add1uon1I pc1m,111r,n 11 hnri,y 111nttd IO lht C'ity of En 1lc•ood 1111( 10 ph)11ull y ,n\pt'CI Che
1u bJ<CIPf0pc11y 1nd!l~c pllo101uph1"nccr1u1) fo1p1cp111hon oflht cuc.
FOR FICE USE ONLY Case Number ___ PrOfecl Manager __ _
Project Eng ineer ___ ._ Da le Subm1ned ___ Accepled By· __ _
Planning Commission Hearing · _____ CifY Counci l Hearing · ____ _
C0MM\J NIIV m•,no~·nNr 0EPAHIME NT
~
r•,•~ • · "'") (jt"'.ll\l)Q
•
•
•
• SURVEYED LEGAL DESCRIPTION
A PARCEL OF LAND LOCATED IN THE SOUTHEAS T QUARTER OF THE
SOUTHEAST QUAR TE R OF SECT ION 35, TOWNSHIP 4 SOUTH , RANGE 68
WEST OF THE SIXTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN , CITY OF ENGLEWOOD ,
COUN I Y OF ARAPAHO E, STATE OF COLORADO , MORE PARTICULARLY
DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS :
COMMENCING AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID SECTION 35 ;
THENCE N00°05 '42'W ALONG THE WEST LINE OF THE SOUTHEAST
QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 35 A DISTANCE OF 90 .01 FEET ; THENCE
S89°57'43'W A DISTANCE OF 40.00 FEET TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER
OF THE EAST HAMPDEN AVENUE (STATE HIGHWAY 285) RIGHT OF WAY
AS DESCRIBED IN BOOK 1159 , PAGE 590 AND THE POINT OF BEGINNING ;
THENCE ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF THE EAST HAMPDEN AVENUE
RIGHT OF WAY AS DESCRIBED AT SAID BOOK 1159 , PAGE 590 THE
FOLLOWING THREE (3) COURSES :
1) THENCE S89°57'43'W A DISTANCE OF 380 .53 FEET ;
• 2) THENCE N87°10 '47'W A DISTANCE OF 100 .10 FEET ;
•
3) THENCE S89°5 7'43'W A DISTANCE OF 141 .10 FEET TO A POINT ON THE
WEST LINE OF THE EAST HALF OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF THE
SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF S.t,ID SECTION 35 ;
THENCE N00'04 '39'W ALONG THE WEST LIN E OF THE EAST HALF OF THE
SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAS T QUARTER OF SAID SECTION
35 A DISTANCE OF 797 .64 FEET TO A POINT ON ·,HE SOUTH LINE OF
BLOCK 9, HAMPDEN HILLS SECOND FILING AS FILED IN THE ARAPAHOE
COUNTY CLERK AND RECORDER 'S OFFICE AT RECEPTION NO. 516657 ;
THENCE S89°48 '02 "E ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID BLOCK 9 A
DISTANCE 621 .30 FEET TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID BLOCK 9;
SAID POINT ALSO BEING ON THE WEST RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF SOUTH
UNIVERSITY BOULEV ARD ; THENCE S00°05 '42'E ALONG THE WEST RIGHT
OF WAY LINE OF SOUTH UNIVERSITY BOULEVARD A DISTANCE OF 800 .05
FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING ;
SAID PARCEL CONTAINS 49 7,011 SQUARE FEET , 11.41 ACRES . MORE OR
LESS .
~
DENVER SEMINARY COMMUNITY OEVELO rMENT DEPARTMENT
EQ UIPPI NG LEADE RS
April I, 2004
Mr. Robe,1 Simpson , AJCP
Communi1y De ve lop ment Direc lor
Cit y of Englewood
1000 Englewood Parkwa y
Englew ood, Co lorad o 80 I l 0
RE : Application for Rezoning -3401 South_ University Blvd.
Dea r Mr. Simpson :
B
ENGL EWOOD, CO LORADO
At you r department 's requ est, pl ease be advised that the Denver Se min ary. fo rm all y
kn ow n as the Conserva ti ve Bapt ist Th eo logi cal Semin ary, has entered into a Purchase
and Sale Agreement which all ows th e Bu ye r, or its represent atives , to se ek the rezo ning
of the above re fere nced property, substantially in conformance with the reque st which is
cu rr ent ly before the Ci ty of Englewoo d. The Bu ye rs repr ese ntati ve is John F. Forslm ann .
ofForstmann Deve lop ment Group . with Da vid Tryba serv ing as th e projec t architect.
If yo u have any qu est ions of the Seminary during th e proceedin gs. the Seminary ha s
retai ned Kirk Douglas of Co lorado Rea lty Co nsultant s, In c. to rep res enl i1s int erests . Mr.
Dou gla s may be reache d at 303-377-0281.
Jack Hei mbi ch ner
Vice -Presid ent
CC: John Fo rs1ma nn
P.O. Box 7890
Avon.CO 81620
Kirk Dougla s
Co lora do Rea lt y Consult ant s, In c.
l 520 West (an al C1 . #21 0
Littlelon , CO 80120
.. ,:
•
•
•
•
•
•
M:
DENVER SEMINARY
June 21, 2004
Englewood Planning Commission
1000 Englewood Parkway
Englewood, Colorado 80110
EQ.UJPPJNG LEADERS
Re: Proposed Development/Redevelopment or 3401 South University Blvd.
Dear Mr. Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission,
G. Craig Williford, Ph.D.
Presi den l
Denver Seminary has been a pan oflhe City of Englewood since the 1960's, when , .e
school purchased its current propeny from the Kent Girl's School (a/Jc/a Denver Country
Day School). The school has long enjoyed a great and supportive relationship within the
Community . Unfortunately, with the Seminary's growth over the last sev••~I years, it has
become necessary for the school to find a locati on which will accommudate its future
needs , and grow beyond the properties capacity to stay in Englewood .
Over the last 4 years, the Seminary has met with approximately IO potential bu yers
int erested in the Northwest Comer of Hampden and University . About half of those
prospective buyers have been interested in the propeny 's current zo ning for multi-family
housing a,, a use by right. These prospective buyers have considered apanment
complexes in excess of 450 units, without the need to seek a rezoning, land dedications or
communi ty amenities to mitigate neighborhood impacts . In evaluating these
{)pportunilies, the Seminary has attempted to ask what type of development and
developer would best address the concerns and impacts to the ne ig hborhood .
In choosing the team headed by John Forstmann, David Tryba and Don McKenzie, the
Seminary attempted to select a developer and a project which "added value" lo the
community . This group presented ideas which predominantly included higher-end
condominium units for ownership, as opposed to rentals . The gro up presented retail
concepts which were boutique in nature, and of limited impact . And while the project did
have multiple story buildings , these were buildings of comparable he ig ht to the
Waterford project, with a much smaller flo or plate and higher architectural desi gn
con sideration .
While the Sem inary has not attempted to 'second guess' what may be bt • 'br the
neighborhood, we have attempted to sympathetically evaluate prospective b~yers and
projects . The Sem inary was actually offered a high er sale price to sell to an apanment
r?ftvtt Sffll ln.11ry Po~ OH,ct eo-100,000 Dtn\'!I, Col0t i11•'o l\0250-0 10() ()Oll l bl-2-482 !XI. 122 ◄
Fu: 0011161·&060 emi111I : P,'11den10denve1stm11Ury.edu -.dtnVflsetnin.11,y.edu
builder who wanted to build under the properties existing zoning entitlements . While •
such a sale may save the headaches of the collaborative planning process which has and
continues to transpire, it would do Vef"Y little to add property value or tax ba se to th e
community .
Thank you for your consideTatioos. 'Thank you for your yrars of support in our efforts to
SeTVe the community.
I~
ver Seminary
•
•
•
•
•
June 7, 2004
Englewood City Council Members
Douglas Garrett
Olga Wolosyn
Laurette Barrentine
l'everly J. Bradshaw
,ohn H. Moore
Ray Tomasss o
Michael Yurchic k
Trisha Lan go n
City of Englewood
Community Development Department
I 000 Englewood Parkway
Englewood, CO 80110
Re: Denver Seminary Rezoning
Dear Ms. Langon:
Arapahoe County Commissioners
Susan Beckman
Berni e Zimmer
City of Englewood City Planner
Bob Simpson
Trisha Langon
COMMUNITY DE VELO PMENT OEPAATMENT
B
ENGL :WOOO , CO LOAAO O
We arc indi vidual homeowners in Hampden Hills , who after reviewing the current
available information regarding the propo se d Seminary project feel we must respond .
We do not fully suppon this proposed rezoning , for the following concerns that this
re zo ning project raises for our immediate Englewood neighborhood .
This propose d development seems out of con text ; in our existing one sto ry suburbM
de ve lopme nt. The propo sed development see ms incompatible ; the scale . mas s, and
~e nsity arc ou t of proponion with the our neighborhood. This proposed development is
ou t of con te xt ; it is an nrbaa development in our very suburban setting . Th e buildin g
h~ights do have th e perception that th e high rise towers are out of scale with the size of
our neighborhood home s, and will definitely eaUSt: 115 unn ecessary snow and shadows.
Thi s project creates a significant solar shad ow on our propenics to the nonh . The new
shadow anal ysi s on record, which accounts for so me, but not all of the daylight hours
demonstrates the enormous affe ct of the propose d multi -story buildings on cur
prop erties . Th e shadow impacts us during most of the winter to the degree that so me of
us will be cast into darkness for a good part of our day . Why should we g;ve up our
sunshine and light after 10-3 0 years in our homes? When and h,w did we loose our
right to sunshine?
Where is the open space for such a dense development? What has happened to Arapahoe
County 's Land Development Code whi ch requires that R-PH (high density)
de velopments pro vi de 35% un obs tru cte d ope n space. Where is there an y unobstructed
open space in thi s proj ec t° Certai n:_ not on our perimeters or from our yards and front
wind ows.
According to lhc revised analy sis of lhc traffic survey the impacts of the traffic study •
indicates that traffic for the proposed rezoning will be much more significant than what
had bt:en exP<,-cted for the existing zoning. Any increased traffic proposed for this already
difficult traffic situation will greatly impact our EnsiC'Wood neighborhood. Access to our
neighborhood, customer, construction and visitor parlting to the comer property are stiU
of great concern to us . The shadow survey indicalCI additional ice and snow paaems we
will need to endure tc access our street as well as additional snow and ice buildup and
remova: consideratim:s on University
Please nndenund what we are l>~ing ukec! lo eadure:
L<>·.s of our privacy; loss of parking loss of our air uality during asbestos remo-,:il;
considerable coostrw.-tion dust and demolition; loss of sumhine; loss of views; (1Y..s of
traffic access; loss of our peace and quiet; loss of our quality of life, loss of our ..
neighborhood Englewood community. For aa estimated 7 to 20 yean of constn.ction?
This can result in an increase in our property values exactly HOW 0 .
Sincerely ,
231s £ Y0« t%v,
~ ~'It &
~ 7q,1&a
ol.M.L-v/1/'3/.t 2i
•
•
•
As per the Arapahoe County rr.view letter dated May 18" 2004 .We believe
their comment., on our behalf are worth repc-•tiog and considering.
► "The County has reviewed Secti o n 16-2-7(H )3.a of the Englewood Unified
Development Code (effective February 23, 2004), which •-ecifies that "the
resulting rezoned property will not have a significant oq:ative impact on
those properties surrounding :be rezoned area and that the general public
health, safety, and welfare of the community are protected.~ Arapahoe
County believes that the general welfare of the surrounding community has not
been taken into consideration with this proposed rezoning and that this proposal
will have a significan r. negative impact on the surrounding properties in terms of
solar shadow and increased traffic volumes."
► "The Englewood Unified Development C0<1< also states that rezonings "shall be
consistent with the Comprehensive Plan :• The Englewood Comprehensive Plan
discusses Residential Areas: Areas of Change and the importance of "new
residential investments and housing rehabs" be designed to "be compatible and
consistent with surrounding residential neighborhoods. Residential des igns
should reflect the exi~ting character of the neighborhood'" (pg 65, Residential
Areas: Areas of Change). Asswning that the intersection of University and
Hampden is designated as a residential "Area of Change,'' the County believes
that this proposed rezoning is inconsistent and incompatible with the surrounding
residential neighborhoods in terms of building heigh~ massing of structures and
the ratio of height 10 setback. and that this proposed development does not reflect
the existing character of the neighborhood.·•
► Upon rev iew of the revised Englewood Unified Development Co de, the existing
zoning o fR-3 is not a current zone district in this revised code. From the table
provided on page 142, it appears that a zoning designation of MU-R-3-A would
be a similar zoning classification. As such, MU-R-3 allows a maximum height of
32-fett and that a zoning designation ofl\llU-R-3-B would allow a maximum
height of 60-feet. This proposed rezoning more than doubles the heigh I that
would be allowed in the MU-R-3-A or MU-R-3-B zoning. Arapahoe County
firmly believes that this proposed rezoning is grntly in excess of what wo11ld
be considered reasonable and aUowable with the existing zoning.
► Toe County feels that this proposed development does 001 meet or exceed rhe
levels of public amenities otherwise applicable under the Englewood U nified
Developm,-nt Code nor does the existing zoning of R-3 create a siruation in which
th\, propeny cannot be developed or that no reasonable economic use of the
propeny can be achieved (Section 16-2-7(H)(2). A rezoning, according 10 the
Englewood Code, must med one of the following cri1cria :
a) That the proposed development will exceed the development quality
standards, levels of public arn"'1ities, or levels of design innovation
otherwise applicable under this Title, and would not be possible or
prac1icable under a standard zone district with Condi1ional Uses or with a
reasoMble number of Zoning Variances or Administrative Adjustments ;
or
b) Tilat the property cannot be developed, or that no reasonable economic
use of the property can be achieved under the exi sting zoning, even
thro ugh the use of Co nditional Uses or a n::ISOoable number of Zoning
Variances or Administrative Adjustments .
Overall, Arapahoe County believes City of Englewood and the Developer should !alee into
considentioa die welfare of die e:ustiag, adjacent aeigllborlaoods, especially with
reprd to compatibility, solar shadows, laeigbt, aad tnfflc and that a detailed analysis
should be provided that addresses the allowable w,es, densities, setbacks, building
heights, 311d open space requirements for the existing R-3 mning and the proposed PUD
zoning. Tu lide-by-side a,mpariloll ii eae11tial for CH pablic lo make aa informed
decisioa reprdlag die proposed rrm■illg raiaat.
However, it is unclear from the proposed plans how the building design and massing work
with the surrounding oeighbomoods in terms of inlcgralion and transition. More dmils
are aeeded lo evalaate the propoaL It appears that the developer is attempting to
~stair-step" the project up from the perimc:ter of the site to accomplish the transition .
However, such a transition 5i"m a majority of single-fum.ily homes adjacent lo the
property line to 52-foot town homes on the perimeter of the site i.s not a logical trao.sition
nor does it reflect the "character of the neighborhoods" genernlly surrounding the
•
property. The County is concerned that the site daip does nol integrate or provide •
• lepea.l tnuuitioa aad ii incompatible and iacouilteat with tbe geaenl character
of die area.
•
•
•
•
JWIC I, 2004
Ms . Trisha Langoo
Englewood Communily Development
1000 Englewood Parkway
Englewood. CO 80110
Dear Trisha.
COMMUNITY OEVELOPME NT DE PA RTM EN T
EJ
EllGL:WOO O. COLORAOO
When Mr. Bob Simpson l!,JVe his speech a! lhc public hearing regarding the re-development of the
seminary ground, he Slated the "council" and I think be said the "seminary" b3d rcilly considered the
ncigbbomoods 311d lhc people living so near.
After seeing the sketches of the developmcn~ I personally was in shock! This is the most dense use of
growuls I have ever seen. I have been in rcil estate for 32 years and the ·new wbanizatioo" is 1101 for one
of the most prestigious comers in our ci ty .
3 story townhomcs towering over our back yards , 6 bi-rise condo buildings blanking out our sun and
65 ,000 feet of rctli! space which of course leads to zillions of cars. Hampden and University have one of
the highest accident ralings in the city .
If you would rcilly consider our neighborhood and environment , ask lhc builder to scale down the I01IDbcr
of bi-rises, the heigbls and the J story townhomcs going entirely around the perimeter.
I believ e every trust deed assures "private enjoyment" lo a borne . The construction alone wiU ccnainly go
ag:tinsl the priv31e enjoyment won't it!
PIC35C consider the people who elected you in good faith to improve our ta., problems but NOT at the
expense of our lovely area . ·
Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerel y,
(~L~it~ €»/)l K/'-
2208 E. Flayd Ave .
Englewood. CO 801 13
Trlcl!'. Langon
From :
Sent :
To :
Subject :
Ging er Hecht [vmhecht @comcasl.net]
Tu esday, May 25 , 2004 2:57 PM
Tricia Langon
mealing Mon 24th
Importance : High
Pa ge I o f I
Just caug ht wind of the meeti ng last night. Sorry I didn't know in advance I would have loved to have been there .
How did things go?? I'm curious about turn out an d general atmosphere from the ne ighbors . We have another
mealing ton ight that I'd like to update .
Any word on the lime table final proc ess?? Is the rev iew complete? And , how about the public hearing ? Has it
been scheduled?
John Forstmann and David Tryba did a presentation for my home owners association on the 11th. We had 50 +
people there and after discussion of traffic miligation and neighborhood im pacts, they voted unanimously to
support the development. We represent over 500 homes between Franklin and Un iversity and Dartmouth and
Yale . The density was a concern, but the quality of the project along with the retail amenit ies were actually very
positive attributes to those at the meeting . We had one vocal individual who voted It down, but the rest of the
group thought it looks like a nice prcl ect. We do hope that the developer continues to work with the surrounding
neighborhood to lessen the constructinn and traffic impacts .
Do you need me to submit a formal lette r?
Hope all is well with you. Thanks again for keeping me posted .
Ginger Hecht
•
•
•
Tricia Langon
From : Ernie Otto [epo500@netscape .net ]
Sent: Wednesday , April 28 , 2004 1 :34 PM
To: vmhecht@comcast.ne t
Cc : Mcintee, Kathlee n; Ronnie Pickens ; peggy .leh mann @cl.denver .co .us ;
hechts@facman .colorado .edu; Tr icia Langon
Subject : Re: meeti ng
Ginger,
Based on the meetings I have auend ed my impression is that the majority of the neig hborhood
association s and individuals are co ncerned about the increase in traffic on University and Hampton , and
especially the cut through traffic that affects all the · eig hborhqods . As you mention ed in your email ,
however, people th at live close tr the proposed redo velopment will be impacted by more that an increase
in traffic. I think mo st people (myself included) want to work with this developer in a po sitive way to
mitigate the traffic impac t and other reasonable neighborhood concerns.
It so unds like you had a very informati ve conve rsa tion wi th Mr . Tryba. I am person ally very glad to
hear that they are reworki ng the traffi c st ud y. As you are aware I had numerou s issues with the initial
study which I detail ed in a leuer to Ms. Langon back in March . It is comforting to know that some of
my co ncern s may be addressed in the revised stud y. Is the most re ce nt traffic analysis avai lable ?
Be st Regard s,
Ernie
vmhecht @co mcas t.net wrote :
Erni e and Kathleen -
Than ks for the upda te on the meeting . I'll look forward to hea ring how things are progress ing.
I actually have had a long conversation with Dav id Tryba . They are on their third traffic study and
have incorporated it, as well as their traffic mitigation plan into another submittal to the City of
Englewood . They are talking about a double left turn lane and a continuious right turn lane initiating
at their property . They are accommodating the reduction of speed limit on Univers ity . They will be
tak ing the land from their project, not from the East side of the street. They feel very confident (with
the support and stat istics from a very reputable traffic engineering firm) that the proposed
reconfigurat ion will greatly enhance the current, as well as the projected flow of traffic . Hopefully
these changes to the traffic flow on University will be mitigate the volume so as to move traffic
efficiently enoug h to reduce the necessity of cut through traffic in the surrounding neighborhoods .
Plea se note (and feel free to forward to any and all of our co mmittee participants) that even with the
proposed 65,000 square feet of retail and the 350 hig h-e nd residential units, this project is a luxury
development and will have more pos itive impact ultimately on the character of our neighborhood
and the market value of our homes then the allowable allernat ive wh ich is 450, 60' apartments
(that's 5 stories) with surface park ing . The apartments are fu lly allowed un de r current zoni ng and
can be built witho ut any restrictions or any traffic mitigation . We need to realize that this is not a
question of "if something will be built ". It is a quest ion of whether the PUD wilt be approved and the
developer allowed to build this high-end project des ig ned by a reputable arch itect and deeply funded
developer, or if any apartment builder can go in there without any restrictions and build 450 slocky
apartments and give the surrounding neighborhoods NOTHINGIII The apartm ent alternative Is not
acceptable as fa r as I am co ncerned.
•
•
•
•
•
•
Pa ge 2 of 3
I ha ve expre ssed my con ce rns about traffic, he ight and density to Mr. Tryba . I have also expressed
to th em my imm ediat e conc erns for the ne ighbors to th e Immediate north as they are most greatly
effect ed. Mr. Tryb a expressed that they are working diligently to address the concerns of the
neighb ors and to mitigate the traffic issues . Although they don 1 seem willing to compromise on the
bu ilding he igh ts , they ha ve deve lop ed a vis ual present ation to Illustrate scale and shadowing and
have done sun stuai es that they are willing to share with the City and interested parties . Along
those lin es, I have Invit ed Mr . Tryba and Mr . Forstmann to present their pre act , along with these
visuals , at my ne xt ne ighborhood meeting . I have promised them a neutra, anvironmenl and a
controlled audience . Please note that although I have expressvd my personal concerns , my
neighborhood has yet to cast their vote as to support or opposition to this project.
To summ arize , Tryb a 1 •0 ,s tmann are working closely with Englewood and are considering the
requests of the surro u:,ai, ighbors . Englewood wants this PUD project and these guys are
willing and able to spenc' r ons to build a high quality , attractive development. I'm still hoping that
we can Influenc e th is PUD . We all have some very real concern s, but we need to be reasonable .
There are apartment builders ready to buy this parcel from Forstmann (yes, he can sell his option
and make a cool , fast couple of million) and we will have absolutely no control , nor influence . That
would really be a nightmare! The apartment alternative Is very real and very scary as far as I am
concerned.
Just some thoughts ............. I'd be interested in hearing yours .
Ging er
-----Original Message -----
From : Mcintee, Kathleen
To : 'Ernie Otto'; vmhecht@comcast.net
Cc: Mcintee, Kathleen
Sent : Monday , April 26, 200410 :18 PM
SubJect : RE: meeting
Th is is our understanding also
Hopefully we can get the developer to listen so all moves forward pos itively.
Thanks for your support as we get through the next cr itical step
Kath lee n
-----O[Mclntee, Kathleen] rlginal Mes sage-----
From: Ernie Otto [mai1to :epo 500@ netscape .net]
Sent: Monday, April 26, 2004 5:55 PM
To: vmhecht@comcast.net
Cc : Mcintee, Kathleen
Subject: Re : meeting
Ginger,
The nex t mee ting date w ill be announced after Jonah Staller , M att/Ron ? Picke~s .
and K athl ee n Mcintee mee t with Kathleen Kreger (traffic engineer).
Th e "one force " probably did not "falter", however I believe it needs to be
understood by all the neighborh ood assoc iati ons/indi viduals participating and
funding Kathleen Kreger th at the increas e in cut through traffic affects ALL of the
surrounding neighborhoods along, Y ale , Dartmouth , Bates , Cornell, Joseph ine ,
Floy d. and numerous other street s. One ass ociation's perceived traffic problem
alon~ n particular street cann ot take on more importance than another
neighborhood's perceived traffic problem. We all all in this together!
Be st Regard s,
Ernie
vmhecht @comcast.net wrote:
Hey guys -Sorry I had to scoot out early on Tuesday. Prom ised I'd be home
to kiss my kiddo goodn ight.
What happened after I left? I got the feeling that the sense of "one force" was
falterin11. Whal was your take?
When are we meeting again?
Ginger
Page 3 of 3
•
•
•
•
•
•
Page I of 3
Tricia Langon
From: Mcintee , Kathie•· ntee@Destinat ionHotels .com]
Sent: Tue sday, Ap ril; . _,04 9:40 PM
To: '',inger Hecht '; 'Ernie Otto'; Ronn ie Picke ns
Cc: peggy.lehmann @ci.denver.co .us ; hechts@facman .colorado .edu ; Tricia La ngo n
Sub]ect: RE: meeting
Ginger,
I support, as do many of the home owners in my area , working with the developer. As staled before , the traffic is
the main concern . Specifically during as well as post construction . We are also concerned regard ing the cut
through traff ic on the si de streets which are already ove r loaded with fast traffic .
I am sure working with the developer and his team, we can mi)l gate the traffic impact and wo rk to support an
appropr iate project for all concerned.
Kathleen Mcinte e
-----Original Message -----
From: GlngP.r Hecht [mailto:vmhecht@comcast.net]
Sent: Tue.;day, April 27, 2004 11 :37 AM
To : Mcintee, Kathleen; 'Ernie Otto'; Ronnie Pickens
Cc: peggy .lehmann@cl.denver .co .us ; hechts@facman .colorado .edu ; Tricia Langon
Subject: Re: meeting
Ernie and Kathleen -
Than ks for the update on the meet ing . I'll look forward to hearing how things are progressing.
I actually have had a long conversa ti on v,i th David Tryba . They are on their th ird traffic study and have
incorporated ii, as well as their traffic mitigation plan into another subm ittal to the City of Englewood . They
are talking about a double lett turn lane and a continuious right tum lane initiating at their property . They
are accommodating the reduction of speed li mit on University. They will be taking the land from their
project , not from the East side of the street. They feel very confident (with the support and statistics from a
ve'ry reputable traffic engineering firm) that the proposed reconfiguration will greatly enhance the current ,
as well as the projected flow of traffic . Hopefully th ese changes to the traffic flow on Uni versity will be
mit igate the volume so as to move traff ic efficiently en ough to redu ce tho necessity :,l cut through traffic in
the surround ing ne ighborhoods .
Ple ase note (and fe el free to forward to any and all of our committee participants) that even with the
proposed 65,000 square feet of retail and the 350 high -end res idential units , this project is a luxury
development and will have more positive impact ultimately on the character of our neighborhood and !he
ma rket value of our homes then the allowable alternative which is 450 , 60' apartmonts (that's 5 stories)
wi:~ 1 surfa ce parking. The ap artments are fully allowed und er currant zon ing and can be bu ilt without any
restr ictions or any traffic mitigation . We need to realize that th is ir, not a question of "if something will be
bu ilt ". It is a question of whether the PUD will be approved and cha developer allowed to build this high-
end project designed by a re putable arch itect and deeply fund•,d developer, or if any apartment builder can
go in there without any res trictions and bl•ild 450 stocky apartments and give the surrounaing
ne ighborhoods NOTHING!!! The apa rt ment altern ative is not acceptable as far as I am conce rned .
I have expressed my concern s abou l traHic, height and density to Mr. Tryba . I have also expressed lo
them my immediate concems lor th• ne ighbors to the immediate north as they are most greatly effec ted .
Mr. Tryb a ex pressed that they are working diligently lo address the concerns of the neighbors and to
mit igate th e traffic issues. Although they don 't seem willing lo compromise on the building heights, they
Pa ge 2 of 3
have developed a visual presentation to illustrate scale and shadowing and have done sur studies that
they are willing to sh are with the City and interested parties . Along those lines, I have invited Mr . Tryba •
and Mr . Forst mann to present thei r pro ject , along with these visuals , at my next neigh borhood mee ti ng. I
have p:omised them a neutral env ironm en t an d a controlled audience. Please not ~ th at although I have
expressed my pe rs onal concerns, my neighborhood has yet to cast the ir vote as to su ppo rt or opposition to
this pro ject.
To summa rize, Tryba and Forstmann are working closely with Englewood and are considering the requests
of the surrounding ne ighbors . Englewood wants th is PUD project and these guys are willing and able to
spend millions to bu ild a high quality , attractive devel opment . I'm still hop ing that we c•n influence this
PUD . We all have some very real concerns, but we need to be reasonable . There are apartment builders
ready to buy th is parcel from Forstmann (yes, he can sell his option and make a cool , fast couple of million)
and we will have absolutely no control , nor influence . That would really be a nightmare! The apartment
alternat ive is very real and very scary as far as f am concerned .
Just some thoughts ............. I'd be interested in hearing yours .
Ginger
•···· Orig inal Message •····
From : Mcintee, Kathleen
To: 'Ern ie Otto'; vmhecht@comcast.net
Cc : Mcint ee, Kathleen
Sent: Monday , April 26 , 200410:1 B PM
Subject: RE : meeting
This is our understanding also
Hopefully we can get the deve lope r to listen so all moves forward pos iti vely .
Thank s lor your support as we get lhrough the next critical step
Kath le en
·····O(Mclntee , Kathleen) riginal Message·•-·
From: Ernie Otto (mailto:epo500@netscape.net]
Sent: Monday , April 26 , 2004 5:55 PM
To : vmhechtroi comcast.net
Cc: Mcintee, \;athleen
Subject: Re : meeting
Gin ge r,
The ne xt me eting date will be announced after Jonah Staller, Matt/Ron ? Picken s, and
Kathleen Mcintee meet with Kathleen Kreger (traffic engineer).
The "one force" probably did not "falter ", however I believe it needs to be unde rs tood by
all the neighborhood assoc iations/individuals participating and funding Kathleen Kreger
that the in crea se in cut through traffic affects ALL of the surrounding neighborhood s
along , Yale, Dartm outh , Bates, Cornell , Jose phine , Floyd , and numerou s other streets.
One assoc iation's perceived traffic prob lem along a parti cular street cannot take on more
importan ce than anoth er nei ghborhood's perceiv ed traffic problem. We all all in thi s
together!
Be st Regards,
Ernie
vmhe cht @co mcast.net wro te:
Hey guys • Sorry I had to scoot out early 011 Tu es da y. Prom ise d I'd be home to kiss
my kiddo goodni ght.
•
•
•
•
•
What happened after I left? I got the feeling that the sense of "one lo ;ce" was
faltering . What was your take ?
When are we meet ing again?
Gin ger
Page 3 of 3
Page I of I
Tricia Langon
From: Ronnie Pickens [prr1@qwest.ne1J
Sent: Monday , April 26 , 2004 10 :32 AM
To : Tricia Langon
Cc: lommdebb7@aol.com ; skettelhut @earthlink .ne1 ; gregge sche @aol.com ; karebu1@netzero .com ;
wkells@msn.com ; prr1@qwest.ne1 ; sbeckman@co .araoa~oe .co .us ; cfm@morganlaw .net
Sub]ect : Denver Seminary Redevelopment 2004
Tricia, this email and attachment is being sent to you on behalf of the members of the Archite ctural
Control Committee , representing Hampden Hills Blocks 8, 9, & 10 . Our nei ghborhood is loca:ed in
Engl ewood directly north of the Denver Seminary propo sed redevelopment.
As you are awa re , re sidents in our area have been notifi ed and attended meetings re garding the proposal
to re develop the Denver Seminary property . The project plan indicates a lovely urban en viro r -
which ha" be en pre se nted by the Architect David Tryba and Developer John Forstmann to v
groups within the Cit y or En glewood and adjacent neighborhoods next to the Den ver Semi n
Hampden Hills has ~e l<l meetings to addre ss concerns and requirements that we reque st to be
incorporated into th e PUD for this rede velopment.
•
After you have reviewed the attachment or concerns and requirements for Hampden Hills Blocks 8, 9, •
& 10, I would appreciate your response directly to me. IF you should have questions , please contact me .
Also , please advise when a meeti ng could be held with you to address these concerns and
requirements .
Again thank you for your time and I look forward to your re sponse . IF you cannot open the attachment
or ha ve que stion s , I can be reached at 303-761-7972 or by email at prrl @qwest.net.
Ron Picken s
President , Archite ctural Control Committee
Hampden Hills Blocks 8, 9, & 10
Engl ewo od, Colorado 80113
•
•
•
•
April 26. 1004
Hampden Hills Bl oc ks 8. 9, & 10
Engl ewood, Co lora do 80 I 13
Neig hborh ood Archi tc ciural Co ntrol Com minee
Neighborhood Meeting
Appro ;(imatcl y VJ of 1hc .W homes in our subdi visio n vo1cd in :i paper ball o1. and in a pub licized mec1ing on
Ap ri l 7, 2004 and dec ided 10 ha ve the Architectura l Co ntrol Committee repre sent them in fu1urc acti vi tics
pertai nin g 10 the develo pm en t of the Denver Semi nary propert y. Furthermore the co mmittee was charged
10 go forth wit h 1hc po int of vie w of being supportive of 1he project bu t wit h so me concern s that need to be
addressed by the de ve lope r and the Ci ty of Eng lewood, and some :ic co mmodati ons by the de veloper a nd
the Cit y of Englewood . '
There are aspec ts of the project tha t cause us concern. Howe ver th ere is not enough info rm a1i on to judge
th ese char:icteri stics :md determine our opin io n, Once we are able to evalu.ite what is provided we will
w:rn1 10 be 3ble to interJct with the Ci ty of Englew ood and perh:ip s ha ve so me additional item s
inco rporated in the PUD. At 1hi s lim e we ask fo r further de sign devel opment and 1.ingibl e doc umentatio n
on the foll owing :
Provi de Inror mati on Pertaining to Concer ns
I. The imp:ict of wimcr sh:id ing on Fl oyd Pl:ice reside nces is :i prima ry interest. Existi ng R-3 Zo nin g
statcs elev:itions not to exceed 60 fee t in hl!ig ht. Th e new PUD Zoni ng :i ll ows :in c:mcme 300%
inc rea se or more in bu ilding eleva ti ons , he ig ht , whic h wi ll reduce su n :1.nd so lar expo sure s on the
adjacent properties . Thi s will decrease the quali ty of habi tat and lifes tyle in 1he back yJids of the se
property owners. We ask that thorough and accu r:i te sun / shade diagrams fo r 1he equ inoxe s and
solsti ces be provi ded to show effects on the adjacent propertie s to 1he north and we st.
2. The bu ilding s seem quite high fo r the surro unding neighborhoods. There are no exhibi ts that he lp us
underst:ind th ese heights , We ask for study model s to show the building masse s :ind the area cont o urs.
The mode ling co uld be done elec tronically.
3. There is no information that thoroug hl y describes the building m:ue ri als and the appearance of all of
the buildings. Thi s is also 1he case for the bui lding mJ ss cs one to the other . We :i sk fo r drawings of ;i ll
bui ld ing c:leva 1ions of all st ru ctu res in all ph:i scs. Sh ow JU clcv:iti ons of eac h building; use :is :iccu ratc
as poss ib le fin:il grade J nd site impro vemcnl profil es . Additi ona ll y. we ask fo r materia l sample: boa rds
fo r all e:uerior building prod uc1 s and 1heir co lors and relati on ships -w:ill venee rs, gl:izing and frJ mes.
roo f:.. trim s. etc.
4. We cannot di scern the relati onship of th e proposed building s 10 the cx is1ing Hampden Hi ll s
neighborhood . We a'i k fo r drawi ngs of bui lding profile s along the north and we sr bound:1.ries . Sh ow
balconies. roo fs. projection s. and the building ma sse s. Provide: dimen sions fo r th e set backs of all
budding re:iturc s.
5. We foci that site li ght ing ca n impac1 our neig hbo rh ood but 1here is no informJtion :i vai l:1blc . Also the
signagc for !he project is of in1cres1. We ask fo r site lighting plans (s 1rce:t light s, building lights,
p3rking lot light s). Provide fi xture type :i nd illuminati on ch:ir:i cteri stics . Also pro vide drawings of
propo std retail building sign.age. and re sidential en tr y and identifyi ng signagc.
Pa ge: 2
6. We think the pre sence or the project :t lo ng Univers it y Boul cvn rd :ind Ham pde n A ve nu e should be
rcfle c1 iv e of the neighborhood charac ter. We ha ve not had renderin gs of 1hcsc co rrid ors. We ask fo r
pcrspcc 1ive drawi ngs show in g landscapi ng, fcinures a nd impro vemen ts now intend ed fo r th e
University Boule vard and Hampden Ave nu e right of wa ys .
7. The traffic impact is a maj or conce rn to the neigh bo rh ood. The study already do ne docs not appear to
adequately address o ur concerns. We ask that the traffi c study be red o ne a nd ame nded to encom pass
the Universi ty Boul evard corrid or to Dartmou th Aven ue . Identi fy 1,1c current traffi c and roadway
co nditions and ci rcumstances as a baseline to add the impa cts of the projec t.
Con si der : s1acking dis tan ces so uth bo und Universi ty Bl vd. nonh of the proposed sign al ligh 1: stac king
di stances north bo und Unive rsi ty Blvd. so uth of the proposed signal light ; so uthbo und University Bl vd.
left tum 10 Hampden slack ing; access to Unive rsity Boule vard from si de streets (Floyd Place, Floyd
Avenue , Flora Plac e, and Da nmou1h Place)(regardle ss of number of vehicles accessi ng); ac cess to side
stree ts from Un ive rsity Boulevard; vehi cle speed; speed enfo rcement ; bus stops: pedestrian traffic
alongs id e and cross in g University Bou le vard ; traffic noise; po ll uti on inc re.:i ses.
Id entify the jurisdictions ha vin g respo nsi bilit y fo r Unive rsi ty Boule vard -maintenance: traffi c
enfo rce ment : improve ments .
There are aspects of the project that we wa nt incorpo r,ned into 1he PUO.
Requirements Inco r porated in the P UO:
l. Pro vide requi re me nts and re strict ions in response and perloining to each of the 7 co ncern s s1;ucd
above. These canno t be acc uratel y defi ned at 1his time until funher inform:nio n is ava ilable . Ho wever
we be lieve that specific rcquircmen1s will beco me appare nt
2. Mak e 1he defi ned build ing heigh ts inclusive of par:ipets. sc reens, :rntenna. spire s, feature s. penthouses.
etc.
3. Provide sc re ening and / or e ncl os ure to :i.11 building and roo f 1op auachments and appendages.
4. Provide a ··Nov:i" type so und w~ll wit h app ropri ate landscape and trees along th e nort h propeny
boundary line . The fi nal height and finish material s to be determin ed by the north propert y ow ners and
th e Hampden Hill s AC Comm iuee .
s> Prov ide in th e PUD Ci ty of Eng lewood ass urances that overflow or non re side nt po.rkin g wi ll not be
allowe d on Fl oyd Place, Flo yd Ave nue , Fl ora Place. Eastmln Place . or Sout h Race Street.
6. Prov ide in the PUD Ci1y of En glewood as surances that ac cess to th e de velo pment will not be allowed
through any point or propert y on Fl oyd Place or Sout h Race Street.
7. Provide in the PUD City of En gle wood as sura nc e th.it the minimizati on of the ti me bc:twe,;:n phases
will be re que sted . Provide ass ura nces th at if the project does not proceed as scheduled future pha ses
will be subj ect m publi c re vi ew and cit y processes fo r re-;ipprov3 I.
8. Pro vid e in the PUD Cit y of Englewood ass urances th3t the rezoni ng re quireme nts Jte app li cab le to th is
proj ec t only .
9. Prov ide in the PUD Ci ty of En gle wood de fin iti on of all ow.ib le retail uses.
10. Provide in the PUD allowable ho urs of re1ail operations a nd numbe r of retai l empl oy ees.
•
•
•
•
•
•
Page 3
11. Provide me 3s ure s to m1tig arc . re s1rict. or eli minate co ns1ruction impac 1 -noise, du st, dirt . debri s . road
dirt. de1ours, exca vati o ns . cons u-u c ti o n ve hicle traffic, vib rati o ns, utili1 y disrupti o ns. dra ina ge pattern
ahernti ons, hours of operati ons -fo r the life or the project. In additi on. du rin g the li fe of th e project
ensure ::md inform all agencie s and the surroun din g neighbo rhoods if dangerous .:>r hazard ous materi als
or asbestos iss ue s J.JC fo und . Follow a nd adh ere to a ll EPA guide lines in th e removal. disposal . and
clea n up of such mate ria ls a1 the de velo pm e nt si lc.
12 . Provi de ;issuronces tha t all draina ge fr om this projec t, during all phases a nd upo n completion, will not
have access into or on :my adj ace nt properties, Fl oyd Place . Floyd Ave ., and So ulh Ra ce Street
13. Co nfirm deve lo per will provi de security at the devel op men t sit e and adjacent nei ghbo rh oods during all
ph ases of co nstructi on.
14. Provide ai,:i ur.inces lhat c urre nt util it y se rvi ces will not be lessen ed but rei nforced and ex pand ed fo r
neighborhood usage if needed .
Th e Architectur::il Con trol Com miu ec will rep resent the Hampde n Hill s Bl oc ks 8. 9, and IO neighbo rh ood
wi th !he vari ous city agencies and the develo per. The co mm ittee will meet and repo rt 10 the neig hbo rh ood
peri odic all y in publi cized ga1h eri ngs .
The Architec tural Control Commi 1tee
Ron Pi ckens
Karin Esc he
Sa ndy Keuelhut
Chuck Redpath
Kells Wa ggo ner
Tom Sanders
2298 EaSI Floyd Place
2209 EaSI Fl oyd Pla ce
2299 EaSI Fl oyd Place
2290 Ea.s 1 Flovd A venue
330 I Sou1h R;ce Stree t
2369 EaSI Fl oyd Pla ce
303-76 1-7972
303 -76 1-~609
303-78 1-8 08 I
303-76 1-0238
303-781 -0725
303-762-8070
• • •
ANALYS IS ,\NI> IIESl'ONSE
TO
II AM l'l>EN 1111.1.~ ,I C COMMrnEE
LETrEll OF Al'HI L 26, 2004
R,uucs l ror lnformnllon lttms:
t-'l="="~·----+-''=l •="~lll="~'"=l~li=II·~· C~•="="'="="~'-------------+-'l=k S[!il~lt.~~'----------------------; lmpnc l or I. The impact or winte r sh:it hng nn F1n ~d Pla ce rcrnl cnccs ,s 11 I Sh:i L111w stud y to he 1110tl11ccd :nu.I prc scn 1cd
Winter Shading pnmary intcrcsl. fa 1s1in g R-J Zo mn g c:1:11cc: clc v;111tms nm 10
exceed 60 reel ,n hc1gl11 . The ne w PUO Z11n111~ :i ll nws an
cxlremc }OO'J, 1m.:rcasc nr more ,n h111ld111 g clc va1 11111,;, hc1gl11.
which will reduce sun and solar c.,posurc s on lh c ar.J1accn1
proptnics. This wdl dt'cre:u;c 1hc qun lit y ur lrnh11a1 :md 11 rcs1 ylc
in the bm.:kyan.b o f 1hesc pro~ny o wner s. We a~k lhal lhornugh
and accur:ite sun/ shmlc di:igram s fo r 1hc c411in11,e s an<l
solstices be provided 10 show cffcc1s on the :idJtiCcn t pr opcmcs
lo the nonh und west
D,mcnstrntlon
or Building
Height and
MasJ
Ruildln,:
Mnterlul5 and
Look
2. The bui ldings seem qui te h1gh fo r th e surroundin g
neighhorhoods . There arc no c:chibus 1ha1 help us understand
these heights . We :1.sk for stud y model s 10 sho w the buddi ng
mosses and 1he :1.rc:1 contours. The mode ling could be done
cl cc1ronicall y.
). There is no infonnali on ,hat th oroughly t.lc s,nbc,;; the hmhling
materials and the appe arance of all or the buddings . This 1s also
the case for the building masses one to the ol hcr. We ask for
drawi ngs or all bui ldm g elevations of all stmcturcs in all phases .
Show 011 elevations of each bu ildin g: use us .i ccurnle as pornble
rinol grade ond rne improvement prol'iles . Ad1..htmna1ly . we ask
for mnlerio l som ple boa rd s fo r all "terior bu1hlin~ pro<lucts :i nti
their co lors nnd rela1lonships -wall \'Cneers, glazmg und fr ame s,
roofs,1rims.e1c .
Pr\+mina ry de sign mode l compleled :1.nd avail:1.ble for review at DOTA
PUD-4 ,dcntil'ies loca lion of Ouihhng envel ope s
PUD -4 Build ing Heig h! Su mmar y 1ndic:11cs hc1gh1s of Bui II.l ings
PUD -4 shows 1hc Ouilt.hng bulk plane along lhe North/Wes! property line
PUD D1 stnct Pl an del'ines Architec1ura l Character:
ARCH IT ECTURAL CHARACTER
It is the 1n1en t of 1h1s dc\'clopmcnt lo at tr ac t sophi st1ca1ed. di~crirnina1 1ng homenwnc,s
to an urban yc:1 inlimntcly scale d mixed-use village of various sized bu,h.hngs creating
a pcdcstn:m oncntcd European otmo sph ere. Dy strategically plannin g a m1 .,turc nf
v:mous sized condomi nium buildin gs in the ce nt er of th e eleven :1crc si te 10 g:ii n
dr:11nn1ic views 10 the su rroun ding mountai ns and ncnrhy downtown, then surroundin g
1hcm wil h a narrow gnl cd private access ro:id, :mt.I using lhe perimeter of lhc si te lo
position lower sca led lownhouscs, n vrui ct y of intimatel y scaled ped es trian
e nvironment s will be crea ted .
• • •
ANAl,\'SIS AND ltESrONSE
TO
IIAMl'IJEN 1111.1 .S AC COM MITl'EE
Lf.'liER OF APRIL 26, 2004
A commnn 5 build ing. wa1cglc3lly loc aled :at the primary cnt r.incc on Un ivcrs11 y
Boulcvanl will wel co me homeow ners and 5crvc the ne w co mmunity with an up -to-d:11c
husinc,s center, (lOOI house , fitness center and int imotc meeting sp:iccs for the
hotnfflwncrs .
Pl aced prominently at the comer or University Bou le vard and Hampden Avcn ll':, :m
oppro prfalcl y scu lcd ret ai l componen t will crnlc a gounnct rood shopp ing upcricncc.
A rc sl auront • ..:.irl und meeting spaces for cooking classes will joi n wilh u vanc ly or
unified but sm11l1 shop rood purveyo rs or si,cciohy me :its , cheeses. wines and fl ower
~hops in 11 selling reminiscent or I E.uropeun village . A sm:ill orfi cc componen t will
house 1hc developers' orriccs and II scp1m11c building is planned fo r 3 small bunk for
the conven ience or the neighborhood .
Cri1ically impor111n1 to define the atmosphere or the development, onl y opproprble
high quolity m:iteri:il s will be used in :ill the buildings . The primorily m:isonry
building1 will be highli ghted wil h on:hitcctunal occ:ents . Anroctive light rill.turcs,
thoughtfull y shielded to minimize illumino1 ion impuct on sum>umling ne ighhorhoods
will heir creole lhc pcdes1ri.1n r«I :.long g:irdens ond open spaces accessed by pavctl
w:alkw.1ys to be e;(pcrienced by 1he homeowners . The ind ividua l units will be large and
ai ry and as open to views :is rossible wi1h e;(pnnsivc window5 10 co nlrast 1he m111onry
u1erior. Steeply sloping roors with project ing cornices will compl ement the Europc :m
reel to the an:hi1ccture tak ing clues from 1he University or Denver and nearby
resi dential communities .
The specific design, m111cri11ils , and colon to be lncorponated in the buildings will not
be determined until detailed 1rchi1ccturol dnawlngs have been prcp:ircd . The
prcpanit ion or such detailed an:hitcctural drawing& is Dn u.pcnsive and time-consuming
process 1h11t is not likely to be undertaken unlil the proposed PUO has been fin11l y
approved by the City . Applicant shall submit specific dc1ign elcv .1tions, list or prim:iry
m:11eri11ls :md 11 color board ror the utcrior or the buildings at least 30 d:iys prior to the
issuance or 1hc first bui ld in2 ne:rm it for the oroicct.
tocallon and 4.
Look or
Rulldlnp
Nearest
Hamndcn HIiis
l.lghllna and s.
Slgnagc
Hampden/Un Ive 6.
rslly
Slrtttsni()C!
Look
Traffic 7.
ANAi. VSIS ANII RESPONS E
TO
IIAMl'llEN IIILI.S AC COMMITTEE
LE1TER OF APRIL 26, 2004
We cnnnm discern lhc n:l:u io nsh1p or lhc proposed hmh.l ings 10 . As mtl ic :11cd in Di strict Pinn . cxnct designs wi ll nol be co mpleted unlil rina l
lhc c,-ist ing HumpJcn Hill s neighborhood . We as k for drawin gs nppmvn1. but speci fic desig n elevations. list or primnry m111crinls nnd .i col or
of building pro file s along the nonh und west boundaries. Sho w boa rd for the cxlcri or or lhc bui ld ings wi ll be submincd 111 lcas1 30 tlays prior to
balconies. roofs, projccti c ns. nnd the bmhJing mu sses. Provide the issuuncc or 1hc lirst building pennil for the project
dimensions for the se t back s oi all buildin2 feat ure s.
We feel that si te lightin g cnn i1np:1ct ou r ncighborhooll hul there . The Di strict Pl an co nlain5 a commilTMnl 10 u5c 1111rac1ivc li1?hl fi xtmc s,
i~ "" inrormat io n av ai lubl c. Al so the 5ig no gc for the r,rojcc t is or 1hough1rull y shich..lcd to minimize illuminut iu n impuct on surrounding
intc-c s1. We ask for si 1c li ghting r,l:1ns Utm:t lights . hui ldin g nei ghborhooc.b
ligt:ts , parking lot lig ht s). Pro vi de fixlurc type am.I illumina tt on . Signa ge is specificall y dcal1 wi th in PUD-11
charncteri!Uics . Al so prov ide dra wings or pmposcd reta il
buildin si nuac . am.I re si dential entry und iden1ir)::in~ si !nu c.
We think 1hc presence or lhc project along Un1 vcrsi 1y Boolcvard . Sec Landscape Plan in PUD -10
and Hampden Avenue shou ld be rcncc1ive or the nei ghborhood
char:!cler. We have not had renderings or lhe se co rridors . We
ask for perspective drawings showi ng landscaping, realures and
improvcmcn1s now intended for the University Ooulcvord :ind
Hnmoden Avenue riahl or wavs .
The lrorfic impacl is u major com.:c m 10 !he nei ghborhooc..l . The . The devel oper has retainell 1he pre-cminen1 Tr11ffic En~incers Fellshurg Holt &
study alrcDd y done docs not appcur to adequately address our Ullcv ig 10 11 nal yze the exi sling Oen Ye t Seminuy site . to st ud y the p~d pmjcc 1
concerns . We as k th:H 1he trDffi c st ud y be rel.lon e an d :amended elements and its componen ts . and to study the projects ' imp11c1s on the sunoundi ng
to cn co mp.tss lhe Univcrsily Boulevard corrid ur 1 , D:ir1mouth Sll'C(tS , tr:iffic 11nd neighborhoods. Th111 repor1 . (FHU rer no. 03-211) updated in April
Avenue . ldent ir y the cu rrent lt"Jrfic Dnd roadway condilions and to reOcct mocHficalions 10 the project following nc iGhbofhood mcciings .ind fccdb:11:k.
circumstances us D baseli ne to add the imp:icts or the r,rojccl. was submitted wi1h the revised PUD is 1v:i.il11ble rrom the Cily, and 11ccordin1 to 1hc
Con si de r: s1acking dis lan ccs sout hbound Unive rs it y Blvd . nor1h upcbted trdlic report :
Arter 1hc projcc1 is compkled and the streel im provtmcn1s m:ide . the Univtrsi1y & or 1he proposed signal ligh1 : slacki ng dis!o nccs northbound H111nrden lnter~lion will .ee a IJ'lt-15'lt improvtmcnt in 1he shoo term and llli-41li UniYe rs ity Blvd . south or lhc proposed signa l light ; soulhbound improvement in 1hc long lerm (20 )<ears) from the cumnt Seminuy use .
Un iv ersi ly Blvd . le rt 1um 10 Hampden stocking : access 10 lmpro..,cmen 1s 10 the Univeni ty-Hampdcn inler$CCtion fflOfe than m.ikc up for lhc
Universily Bou levard from side strcclS (Floyd Pla ce . Flo yd additional trarfic hnp11c1 caused by lhc development .
Avenue, Flora Place , 11nd D11rtmou1h Pl:ic c)(rcRDrtlles.s or
<M<MMllll!lfldnlllllhh1-,llldltnpo1Hc •I doc
• • •
• • •
ANALYSIS ANI> HESl'UNSE
TO
IIAMl'l>EN 1111.1 .~ AC COMMrrrEE
I.ETn m OF Al'RII . w. 2004
numbc, or vehicle s :icc cHi ngJ ; accc s5, In mk 51rccts from
Univcr!i l)' Doutc vn rd: veh icle sre:cd: s pcctl cnforccmcni: bus
stops : pcdcstn:m lraffic alongside and c,os\i ng Univcrs11 y
Boulevard : lraffic noise: po ll ulmn incrc:&!iCS.
ld cn tiry the juristlic 11ons h:n •lng rcsponJ1i1h1l11 y fo r Univc1 s11y
BoWnord -m:iintc n:mcc: 1raffic cnrorcrmc111 ; impro ,·crncn1s .
C1111cn1 w nm g 3llows v:m ous 11st hy right on 1hc p,op:rty. In the simple st usc h~
sccn:mn. :1 t.lc\·cl opcr cou ld build 45(1 rcsidcn 1ial untl\. A1t 1hc upcblcd lr.iffi c Mud y
mJ,n tcs . such a seen.mo would ~suh in greater ,~me im pacts in the AM Pc.i k I-lour
pwOO and :appro.-.i nutcly the umc impKIS in 1hc rM Pc :ik !lour pe riod
ruo RMulrcmcn.!!:,_ ___ --Issue H11rnDd t:n JJlfls Commcnl R tS IHJIISt -Address I. Pro\ide ;equircmcn11 :md re11ric1ion 1 in rc1po11sc and pcr1aming . See ahove under "Reque st for ln fonna11on It ems "
l nrormatlon 10 e3c:~ ;,r 1h • , conccm1 stmed :ibove . These ca11no1 he accur::i tcl y
llcms defined at ,.,i s 1imc unlil further infonn:ui on is av:iilohle. However
we believe lh:u snccific rcouircments will become :mo:ucnl. --Hci~hlii lo 2. ~·fake lhe defined building he ighlS inclusive or parapm, Covered in upd111c PUD lihng: Sec "Building Envelopes" no1c on PUD·-'
Include sc rttns, :1 n1enna , spires, re:11urcs, penthouses, c1c
Protrusions ---Scr ttnlnR and J . Provide sc reening and I or enclosure to all building :1n d roof top Covered in PUD Distnct Pl :i n: Sec Note 14 under "General No1es " w111 -!h state s : "All
EnclO!lure or a11achmcn1s and nppcndagcs. 1tmclures :i nd pmje1:1 ions shall he conslruc1cd wilhin the building envclopc1. bulk
Roorlnp planes . .inti bui ld ing height limi1s noled on the proposed silc pl.in"
Aooendaecs
Sound Wall on 4. Provide a "Nov:1" 1ypc sound wu ll wilh appropriate landscape . "Nu v:1 .. type sou nd wall ro be provided along lhc nor1h propert y line
North and trees along the north property boundary line . The final . Height o r w:1II between 6 · and 10' to be speci fied by Developer
Boundary he ight :md finish materials to be <le1cnn inetl by lh e north . Fi ni sh mnteri0ls on nonh side or w:ill to be dclcnnined by AC Commiuec horn
property owners :Jn<l the H:impdc n Hills AC Comm illee . a p:Jleue or ma1criols :ind colors pro\lidcd by Developer so long as AC
Committee decision mlKie not h11er 1h0n September I, 2004 and so long :is
finish mnterials arc same for entire north side of wall . Finis h on south 1h:..~ •·r wall :ind nature of wall c:ip to be determined by
developer . Ulndsca pina on <lcvel o pment si de to be dctt'nnincd by developer
Ass urances ror 5. Provide in the PUD Ci1 y of En!i lcwoo1! assurances th at uvc ,now . Developer will instruct emJ]loyees and ~sidcnts of project lo not parlc on
No Parking In
Nelghhorhood
No AccNs lo
Nelghhnrhood
to or rrom
IJnelo).'tent
l'lmse
Completion
PUil Appllcnble
In Denver
Semina ry Sile
Uni•
Ocnnlllnn or
All owa bl e Uses
i\ll nwa hl e
Re1all llours or
Operation and
Numherof
Em•1 lovttS
Mltl~•te
Construction
Impact
ANALYS IS ,\Nil llESl'UNS E
TU
IIMll'llF.N 1111 .1 .S AC COMMllTEE
1.ETl'Ell OF Al'llll. 26 ,200;
' 'lr non residen t p:i rk ing will not be all owcll nn Flnpl Pl ate, Fl oyiJ
Avenue. 1:1orn Place, Eastman Place , or Suuth Race S1rcc1.
6. Pnwidc m the PUD Ci ty of Eng lewoml :l'iS ur:1m.:cs th:11 ncc css to
the dcvcl opmcnl wall nol he all owed thruu i;h :my pn1nt or pmpct t}'
on Floyd t11acc or Sou th Race S1rcc1.
7. Provi de in lhc PUO Ci ty nf Eng lewood ass 11r :uu.:c 1h:11 th e
minim iz:111 00 of the lime between phases will he rct1ucs tcc..l .
Prov id e assurnnce s lhut ii the pro1cct t.10<::s not p1 occc d :i'i sche duled
future ph ases wil l be subJeCt lo publ ic rev,ew and d1y processes for
rc -a '>"rova l.
8. Provide in 1he PTJD Ci1 y o r EngJc wood amuanccs 1hat lh c
rez oning requ1rcr 1cnts are applicab le 10 1hu projec t onl y.
9. Provide in the PUD City of En glewood de fim 1iun or all owah le
rcl uil USC!i.
10 . Provide in the PUO allowable hours or retail operations nnd
number of retail employe es.
11 . Provi de mcasurt5 10 m111gate . restrict. nr chr.1 ma1e cons tru c1ion
impact -noise , dust . di11 . debn s. ro:lii Jin. dc lOurs , excavations,
cons1ruc1 io n vehicle 1r11ffic. vilm1tiO'"!. ·1ti li1y d:srupti ons,
drainage pnlle m nher:lli ons. hours o! o pcr.0.11011s -for the lire or
the project In addilion, durin g th e lire or the project en su re and
inform all agencies :ind the surToun ding neigh bo rh ood~ if
dannerous or hazard ous materinls or asbes tos iss ue s arc found .
n:unctl SlrCCIS
More lhan :u..l cc1u:11c on site parking, mm1 ly undergrou nd wi ll be prov ided : sec
PUD -7 & 8
Rc ~iden 1ial proJCCI nn s11e wi ll be (ln \'Dle. ga 1e-gu:ndcd t:ummuni1 y
Nu :i cccs, w,11 be 11rov 1ded ,n or hom ncigh""-nhnoc..ls nn nm1h or we ~I
Projccl wi ll he walled on nonh :ind wes l w , w:ill I.K'twcen (i' and lff
Ci1 y or Englewood UDC gov ern s timrng .f .,,,,lf ~menu am.I reqt memenl s for
runhcr re\•1ew
Pha~c com 11ict1on will be as rap,d as tl •e nrn rkct um.I fi mm c,n g rcqu ,rern enl s
pcnmt
PUD zoning 1s by definition app licable ,· ~d~~d propcny onl y: Sec
Englewood UDC
Covered in PUD Ois uict Plan
Re1:ul hou~ arc controlled by City of Englewood ordinances
Numhcr of retail elT ployees must be es 1ablished and controlled by rel.iii
01,erators
• Numerous Ci ty. state, and redera l laws govern such items
Covered in PUO : Sec Gene ral Note #I~ whi ch sirues : "Th e de vel oper sha ll
compl y with all :ipplic.iblc Ci ty codes, regulali ons and si:inda rds"
IWIW lfl lhmr,kftlh1h l1111C1•11dJlnPJ11lf¥ldt'c
• • •
•
Drainage
Improvements
Sec:urHy Durtn1
Conalructlon
Cu,.,.nt Utlllty s, ... 1 ... No1
Neptlvely
lmo■cted
•
ANALYSIS AND RESPONSE
TO
IIAMl'IJ EN 1111.1.S AC COMM rrrEE
I.ETTER OF APRIL 26, 2004
Follow and ad here lo all EPA guidelin es in the removal.
di11Dosal , and clean uo or such malcrials at the dcvcloomcnt silc .
12. Provide measures to mi 1ig :uc . r,.:stri ct, or climi nolc construc1ion . Dra ina ge rc pon p.:irt of PUD suhmim:i l
impact -noise , dust , din , debris. rond din, detours, ex ca vations, . Covered in PUD. see drai nage references In PUD -S,6
construction vehic le trarfic, vibr:11i on11, utility disruptions.
dDinogc p:utcm altcralions . hou~ of opc rali ons -for !he Hrc of
the project In addition, during the life of the projecl en sure und
infonn all agencies and the surroundi ng ncig hhorhoods if
dangerous or h111.ardous materials or usbestos issues arc round .
Follow and adh ere 10 all EPA guidelines in !he rcmov::il.
disnoul, and clc.:in up or such mo11 cri :als ut lhe dc vel oo mcnt site .
l3 . Confirm developer will pro vide scc unty :u lhe t.lcvelopmenl si le . Developer will comply wi1 h Ci1y or Engle wood hiws .:ind ortlinanccs
and odiaccnt nci1h borhoods du ri n2 all phases or const ruction .
14. Provide assur:mces then cumnt ul ilhy servi ces will noi be Covered in PU O, sec PUD -5
leucncd but n:inrorccd :md c~pandcd for neighborhood usage ir
needed.
0&0'16H...,,Hillt1Mnadllapollw•lat
•
ANALYSIS AND RESPONSE
TO
II AM l'IJ EN IIIL LS AC COMM ITT EE
LETTE R OF APRIL 26 , 2004
R-ue.1t ror lnformallon llcms:
Iss ue Ham----::i"en llllls Co mm en t Rtsnonsc
lmpac:tnf I. The impact of winier shadi ng on Floyd Place residences is a Shadow study to be produced nnd prc scnlcd
Winter Shading primary in1crcs1. Exis ting R-3 Zoning stales elevati ons nol to
Cll.Cccd 60 rcc1 in he ig ht . The new PUD Zoni ng all ows an
cittrcmc 300% increase or more in build in g clcv111ion s, heigh t,
wh ic h will reduce s un and solar exposures on the adjacent
properties . This will decre ase the qu ality of h:i bitat nnd lifcslylc
in the backyards of th ese propcny owners . We · k 1h01 tho rough
and occuratc sun / shade diogr.1 ms for 1hc cquin oim and
so lst ices be provided 10 show effects on the adjace nt properties
to 1hc nonh and wcs 1. [___ ___
Demonstration 2. The buildings see m qui1e high for the surrounding
I
. P~limir,.i ry design mode l com pltled and availab le fo r review at DOTA
of Bulldln1 ne ighborhoods . Th ere are no e,i,hibi1 s that help us understand . Ptl0-4 •1rt::niJ !'ies location or Building en vel opes
Height and these he ights . We ask rc-r st udy models to show the buildin:, . PUD-4 ls uhding Height Summary indica tes heights or Buildings
Mus masses and lhe area contours. The model ing could be done P\.10....1 sho-Ns !he Bu ilding bulk plane :dong the Nor1h/West property line
electronically,
Building 3. There is no in form,nion 1hat 1horough ly describe s the buildi11g ~-. PUO Dist rict Plan defines Arc hitectural Churacter.
Materials ■nd materials :md the appearance or all or th e bui ldings. This is also ARCHITECTURAL CHARACTER
Look the case for th e building masses one to the other. We iuk for It is the intent or this deve lopment 10 attract sophis licated, disc rim in111ing homeowne rs
dra wings of all building el evatio ns of all structures in all phu.ses . 10 an urban yt:1 intimately sca led miJ.ed -use village of variou:\ sized buildings crcal ing
Show all ele vations or each building ; use as accurate as possi ble a pedest rian oriented European almos phe rc. By strategica ll y planning a mixture or
final grade and site improve menl profiles. Additiona ll y, we ask variou~ sized condominium buildings in the center or the eleven acr.: site to gai n
for material sample boa rds for aJl ·cxteri or building products and dramatic views 10 the surrounding mountains an d ne arby downtown , then surrou nding
the ir co lors :md re lntionships -w:111 vcne1:rs , glazing and rramcs , them with a. n11now gated private DCccss road, and using the perimeter or the site to
roors,1rims,ctc. positio n lower scaled townhouses, . \'arie ly of int imatel y sca led pcdestrinn
environments will be crc111ed .
-..... --~
CM.CM.lfl "'"""'"' HIits lnwr:t ...:1 RQf!OIIK ~l.ds
• • •
• •
ANALYSIS AND RESPONSE
TO
HAMPDEN HILLS AC COMMITTEE
LETTER OF APRIL 26, 2004
•
A commons building, str:i tc gica ll y located :i t 1he prim11ry entrance on University
Bou levard will welcome homeow ne rs nn d senic the new com mun ity w11h nn up-10-do1e
bu si ncsn center. pool house , fitness ce nter ;!nd in1im 111c mec ling spoc cs for the
homeowners .
Pl.iced promincnl1 y ill the comer of University Bou levard ond Hampden Avenue, an
oppropri111cly sca led n:1ail compo ncnl wi ll crea te n goum,cl food shopping experience .
A n:s1:iurant , cofC ond meetin g sp:iccs for cooki ng clossc!. will join with n vari ety or
unified but sma ll shop food pu rveyors of specia lt y meats, cheeses, wines ond nowcr
shops in a sening reminiscent of a European village . A small office comr:>ntnl will
house the developers' offices :md a separate building is pl::mncd for o sm:dl bank for
the convenience or 1he neighborhood .
Critically importanl lo define 1he a1mospherc or !he development. only appropriale
high quality materials will be used in all the buildings . The primarily mosonry
buildings will be highlighted with arch itectural accents. Anroclive lighl fixture s,
1houghtfolly shielded 10 minimize illumination impocl on surrounding neighborhoods
will help crenle the pedes1rion reel along g:irdens and open sp:aces accessed by paved
walkways to be experienced by !he homeowners . The individual uni!S will be large :md
aicy ond os open 10 views os possible wilh expansive windows to con1ras1 1he m:isonry
exterior. Steeply sloping roors with projecl ing cornices will complement 1he European
reel to the architecture 1aking clues from the University or Denver and nearby
rcsidenlial communities.
The spec ific design, materials, and colors 10 be incorporn1r.d in the buildings will not
be dclermined unlil dc1ailed architectural drawings have beeli prepared. The
prepara1i on or such detailed architeclUral drawings is an expensive and time-consuming
process that is not likely lo be undertaken until the proposed PUD has been finally
approved by lhe City. Applicant shall submit specific desi gn elevations . list or primary
m:uerials and a color bo:ard ror the e.111erior or 1he buildings at least 30 days prior to the
issuance or the first bu ild intz oenni l for the nroicct.
l..otatlon and 4 .
Look or
Buildings
Nearest
flamtvten HIii s
Llghllng un d ).
Slgn1ge
H1mpden/Unlve 6.
nlly
Slrrcltt~;rt
Look
Trame 7.
ANALYSIS AND RESrON SE
TO
IIAMrDF.N HILLS AC CO MMITTEE
LETTER OF ArRIL 26, 2004
We c:i nnot disce rn lhc rcla1 io nsh1p of 1hc proposed build ings to . As indicated in District Pl an. cuc1 designs wi ll not be complc1cd until final
1hc exi sling Hompdcn Hill s ncighborhooJ . We ask for draw ings npprovol, but specific design elcv111ions , lis1 of primary mo1en11!~ and a color
of bui ld ing profiles along the nonh anc.l wes t bou ndaries. Show boa rd fo r the exte ri or of the buildi ngs will be submitted at least )Od:iys prior to
bnlconies, roofs , projections , and the building m11 sRs. Provide the issuance of the first building pcmiit for the project
dimen sio ns for the set backs uf :all huihlinn fe :uurcs.
We feel that site lighting ca n impac t our ncighhorhOOO bu1 there . The Di stri ct Pl:m con tains :i commi1ment to use a11 rac1ivc light li:<turcs ,
i, no information :iv:iil:ible. Also the sign:ige for !he project is of thoughtfully shielded 10 minimize illuminati on impact on surroundin g
infc"C!'-1. We nsk for sil t. lighting plnn s (s1rec 1 li ghts, building neighborhoods
li gn ls, p:irk i11g lot lights). Provide fix ture type and illum1nnt io n
ch:iracteristics. Also provjdc drawi ngs of proposed rel ail
Sig n:igc is specifica lly dcnlt wit h in PUD-l I
buildin" sirmaoe. :ind residentinl cntrv nnd idcntifvin i, sii,n;1o e.
We think the presence of the project ,dong University Bou levard . Sec L:mdscnpe Plan in PUD-10
and Hampden Avenue should be reOcc1ive of the neighbo rhood
ch ar.icier. We hove not had renderings oflhesc corridors . We
ask for pcrspcclive drawings showing land scapi ng. features and
improvements now inte nded for the Uni ve rs i1y Boulevard :1 nd
Ham en Avenue rioht of wavs ,
The lrarric impact is a majorCo nccm 10 1he nc ig hborhoocJ. The The developer has retained the pre-emine nt Traffic Engineers Fcllsburg Hoh &
study already done docs no! appear to adequately address our Ullevig h> 11n1lyu the c~isting Denver Seminary she. to stud)' the proposed proj ~
concerns . We nsk th at the lraffi c study be redone :ind amended clements and iu components. :md 10 study 1he projc«.1 ' hnp:acts on the surrounding
lo encompass the University Boulev11rd corri dor to Dartmoulh s1m:11, tr:affic and ncighbothoods . Thal report, (FHU ref no. 0J-211) updated in April
Avenue . Identify 1he currcnl traffic ,md roadway conditions ond to renccl modific11tlons to the project rollowing neighborhood meetings aind recdt»ck .
cirtumslances as 11 bnscline lo add the impacts of the project. wns submiucd wilh the revised PUO is available rrom the City, and :accooting lo the
Consider: sttttk ing distances southbound Universi1y Blvd . north updated traffic repon :
Arter 1he projttt is completed :and the 1trecl improvcrw.nts made, the Univcnlty & or 1he proposed sig nal light : stack ing distances northbou nd Hampden in1erstt1ion will see :t 13%-I SCII improvemcnl in the short term and 1%-4% Universily Blvd . sou th or the proposed signa l lighl ; sou thbound improvcmcnl in the long term (20 yean) from the cumnt Seminary use.
University Blvd. left tum 10 Hampden stacki ng : access 10 . lmprovcme nls to the Univenity -Hampden inlencc:tion more lhlln m:ake up for the
University Boulev ard from side streets (Floyd Place, Fl oyd 11ddi1lon11I traffic imp:ict ca used by the devclopmcnl .
Avenue, Flora Pl ace, :1nd Dartm outh Placc)(rc2 :1 rdless of
IWIW.26 ll1"'f'Jd(,lllilbht:1n111dR"p,:...H•ldoc
•
• • •
ANALYSIS ANO Rt:~l'ONSE
TO
IIAMl'IJF.N HILLS AC COMMITTE E
L E1T ER IJF APRIL 26, 2004
number o r ve hi cl es accessi ng); access 10 side s 1rec1s from
Uni vc rsi ly Boule vard; ve hicle speed: speed cnfor ccmcn 1: bus
slops: pedes1ri ::m traffi c alongs ide and cross in g Univcrti ty
Boulevard : tnffi c noise: polluti on in crc:1sc s,
Identify the JU risdic 1ions h:ivi ng rc spo nsi biht y fo r Unive rsit y
Boule vard -m:iinlcn :mcc ; 1r::i ffic cnforccmcn1 : imo ro vcmenl s.
Curren t ,.oni ng :11l ows v:irious use by ri ght on the propc n y, In the simpl es! use by ris ht
scc n:i rio, 11 devel oper could bu ild 456 rc sldc nti:i l uni1s. As the upd:n cd u~ffi c study
ind ic :uc s, suc h :a sccn;i rio wou ld res ult in grt:ucr traffi c impacts in the AM Pc:ik I-lour
period :ind :app roxi matel y the sti mc impacts in the PM Pc:ik Hou r period
PUDR enu rtments:
Issue Hamoden Hills Commcnl Response
Add= I. Prov ide requirement s and rc stri c1io ns in respo nse and pen ain ing . Sec above unde r "Rc4uc st fo r lnfonna1\o n hem s "
lnrormallon 10 each or lhc 7 concerns s1a1cd above. The se cannot be acc uralcl y
llems defined at thi s 1imc until {unhcr in fo nnali on ,s avai lable . Howe ver
we believe that sprci~· · rtQ uircmcn1 s will become app are nt
lh:l ghls to 2. Make lhe defined build ing he ights inclu sive of parapets, Co vered in update PUO filin g: Sec "Building Envelopes " no1e on PU0-4
Include screens , antenna, spires, fcatun:s. penthouses. etc
Protrusions
Screening and 3. Prov ide screen ing and I or en clos ure to all bu ildin g :md roof lop Covered in PUD Oi s1rict Pion : Sec Note 14 under "Gcn eru l Notes" wh ic h slate s: "All
lnclnsure or allnchment s and append age s. structures and projections shall be co nstructed wilhin lhe bui lding en vel ope s, bulk
Rooflop planes, :md building height limils noted on the pro posed site plan ··
AooendHes
Sound Wall on 4. Provide 11 "Nova " type so und wall with app ro priate landsc ape . "Nova" type sound wall 10 be prov ided along the nonh propcn y lin e
North and 1rces along the north 1,ro pcny boundary line . The final . Height or wa.11 between 6' and 10' to be specified by Developer
Boundary height and fin ish matc n,,,._ o be determined by the nonh Fin ish materials on nonh side of wall to be de1ennincd by AC Commi ttee from
propert y owners and the Hampden Hill s AC Committe e. a paleue of motcrfol s and col ors provided by Developer so long as AC
Committee decision mlld c not later than September I, 2004 and so long o.s
finish materials are same for entire north side of wall . Finish on sou1h side of wall 11.nd n111un: or wall cap to be dctenn incd by
developer . L:i ndsc:icinll on dcvelooment side to be detcnnined bv developer
As.suranccs ror 5. Prov ide in the PUD Cit\' or Enll le wood ass uranc es th at ovcrnow . Devel ooc r will instruct cmcl ovce s and resi dents or oro iccl 10 nol nark on
CMtM ~61l1mpk~ H,l h lm,n1...i 1tnpoi,w,~l 11ot
I
I
I
No r arking In
Neighborhood
No Accus lo
Neighborhood
In or from
fllvtloo mcnt
;it-" ••
Comp letlon
PUO Applicable
lo Denver
S,mlnary Sile
On lv
Definlllon or
Allowable Uses
Allowable
Retail Hounor
Opentlon a nd
Number or
Emnlovees
Mlllgolc
Comlrucllon
l mpad
•
ANALYSIS ANO RESPONSE
TO
IIAM rDEN 1111.!.0 AC COMM ITT EE
I.ETTER or A l'R II. 26, 2004
or no n rc s1dc n1 parking will nnl be :illowc~ o n Flo )·d r1 :a::-c. Floyd named s1recu
Avenue, Flor.a Plocc. Eas 1man Pl ace. or Sou 1h R::icc S1n·e1. . More 1h:in adequa 1e on site r:\i:.1rat, most ly under gro und will be provi ded: 5CC
PIJD -7 & 8 -6. Provide in the PUD City of EnglcwOOO :murancci. 1hat :icccss 10 Resident ial prOJCCI o n si1e wil l he nv11 1c. gate -guarded commun ily
lhc deve1opmcnl wi ll not be allowed through any point or propcny . No access will be provided 10 or from nei ghborhoods on nonh or wcs1
on Floyd Place or So uth Race Street. . Project will be walled on north :md west with wall between 6' and 10'
1. Provide in 1he PUD City of Englewood ass urance 1ha11he . City of Englewood UDC guve.ms limin g or cn1i1lcmrn1S and requircmcnl s for
minimiz:llion or 1he time be tween phases will be rcques1cd . fonherrcvicw
Provide ;mur.inccs !hot ir lhc pro Jee! doc s not proceed as scheduled . Ph a~e complc1ion w11! be ai. N}.'t d as the marke t :i nd financing requirements
future phases will be subject 10 pubhc review and c1 1y processes fo r pcnnit
rc-aoorov :d .
8. Prov ide in the PVD City or En glewood assurances d:at !he . PUD zoning is by dcfi011io,; np plic:ible to the dcfint'd propert y o nly : Sec
rezoning requ irements arc applicable to this proJCct only. Englewood UDC
9. Provide in 1he PVD Cily of Eng lewood definition o r allowable . Covered in PUD Di stri cc PIJ1 ,
retail uses .
10. Provide in the PUD allowable ho urs of rt'lail opcr:Uions and . Retail hours :ire controlled by City of Englewood ord m::mccs
number or retail emp loyees. . Numbe r or retail employees mus! be established and controlled by retail
operators
11 . Provide mc115urcs to mitigole, restrict. or eliminate conslruc lion . Numero us City. st:11c, :ind rcderal lows govern such items
impact -noise, dust, din. debris . road dirt , detours , exc:iv1tions , . Covered in PUD : Sec Gener.ii No1c #15 which stales: "The developer shall
construclion vehicle traffic, vibntlions. u1ility disruptions. comply with all :ip pl ic:ible City codes, regulations and stondards:"
drain::1ge pnnem alteralions, hours of operations -for the life o r
l he project. In addilion, during the life of !he projec1 en su re and
info nn all agencies and the surrounding neigh bo rhoods if
d:in2erous or hazardous ma1crials or ::1sbcstos iss ues arc round .
• •
•
Drainage
Improvements
Sec urity Du ri ng
Construction
Curttnl Ullllly
Services Not
Neeatlvely
lmnadtd
•
ANALYSIS AND RESPONSE
TO
HAMPD EN 1111.LS AC COMMITTEE
LETTER OF APRIL 26, 2004
Fo ll ow and adhere 10 all E?A guidel ines in 1hc rcmov:il.
di snns al. ond clean un of such materials at !he devclonmcnl site.
12. Provide measures to miligalc, rcstric1. or e li min:ite construction . Drainage report pan or PUD submitt:il
impact -noise, dusl, dirt, debris, rond dirt. detours, e11cnv111ions. . Covered in PUD, sec drainage references in PU0-5 fl
co nstruction vehicle troffi c. vibrations. uti lit y disrup1ions.
drainage patte rn a1 te rntio ns, hours of operations -for the life of
the project. In addi tio n, durin g the life of 1hc project ensure and
inform all agencies and th e surrounding ncighborhooc.Js ir
danaerous or h11Z11rdous materia ls or asbestos iss ues arc found .
Follow and Ddhcrc to all EPA.guidelines in the removal ,
dis..,..s11I, and clean un of such mate rials at the devclonmcnt si1e .
13. Confirm devel oper will pro vide security at 1he development site . Developer will comply with City of Eng lewood low s :ind ordinances
and adiocent nciohborhoods durino oil nhascs of co nstructio n.
14. Provide assurances that current util it y services will not be Covered in PUD, sec PUD -5
le ssened but re inforced and c:c.pnwJcd for neighborhood usogc If
needed .
(M0&11!111mpdeftlllthb111n 1-411flpo11M•l.doc
•
Tricia Langon
,,, .. :
o :
Subject:
Dlddlebock [dlddleboek@pc lsys .nel]
Thursday, April 29 , 2004 8:10 AM
Tric ia Langon
A Soulhern Hills/Denver res ldenl wriles ...
Tricia, A quick note to register my obj ections to the current proposal to redevelop the
Denver Seminary property into a mixed-use residential /retail c omp lex.
A project of that magn i tude would worsen t ra ffic-congestion problems in that sec tor, as
well as d iminish the single-home residen ~i al character of the nearby neighborhoods .
Anything you can do to combat this proposal , as well as to keep us informed of its status,
would be sppreciated .
Thank you , Bo b Diddle bock
3020 E. Flora Place
De nver, CO 80210
303 I 759-8037
Fl 13031 759-0766
diddlebocklipcisys. net
•
•
•
•
•
3103 S. ,\dam s \'('ay
Demer CO 802 10
:\pril 21. 200..s
Ms. T ri ci :i Langon
City of Englewood
Community Dcvd o pmcn1 Department
!000 Engk-wood P::irl..·w:ir
Englewood, CO 80 11 0
Subjecr. Proposed Redevelo pment of Denve r St:minary
CO MMUNITY DEVE LO PMEN T OEPA RTMENT
B
ENGLEWOOD, COLORADO
In hum:in beings . he-.1hh y growth is .1 wo nderful thing. whcr~1s unheal thy growth h:is1its own name: ,:mccr.
Wh ile I unde~tanJ rhar h~th)· growth in J commun ity pro\ides Yir-J.lity .ind new so urces o f rncnuc to
im pro,·c th e lh·cs o f th us c 1n rfr.1t co mmunit)', I submit th.at the proposed rcdcv d opmi:nt of the Dcm·c r
Semi nary is unh e:.tl thy growth. 1 foel \'Ct'}' strongly th:it yo u m:i y be tradin g ,1 n~r -tcnn g.1in in rc,·c nu c fo r .1
long·tmn. pcrrnan c.-nt Jl·crc:-a:;c in th e l.{\t:.t.liry of life of Engk-wQod md SWTOL1m.ling .tre:1s. with ,lll mmdant
im.:rc:i.sc in i:os ts to th e !ow n likely .
. \s pro pose d. the rt:dc\· 1mcnr proje,t will be .1 phys ic:tl blighr o n .1 lo ng-t:!l:is ring n::.1dcn 11.1I .1rc:1. 1-ligh-nse
bu il dings .ind signifo::in r •i r.me rci:tl space Jtc: mus t dctinircly not 111 keeping \\i th th e char:u.:rcr o f the Jte:1 .
:\t least .LS impmnnr, rhe ,J 1tio n of numero us dwellings. plu s the trJ ftic gen er:ued br the cu mm crci.11 .tspet.:ts
ot the dc\·clo pm cnr , w11\ grea tlr cx :u.:erlme ,lll .1l rc:uJ y barely ten ;1ble tr.tfti c sirua t10 n on Lni\·crsi rJ 13oulc \'a rd . I
.un sure you do no t ne ed robe told {yet :tg:iin] th.it !h e b:u.:kup s .ind bloc king of intcrsc,tions co mmo n to rush
ho ur wi.11 .Umos t ,err.ii nly bs t all da y. Th e n.-s ult of th is wi ll be: large delays fo r resi dents simpl y try ing m go
aho ut rhcir b us im:ss. plus incre:tst•cl noise .lntl po llu ti o n in the :tr~1. Thus, th e tr.tffo.: incre:is c \,·ill res uh in rt':i.l
t.-..:o nomic problem s th:i t .trc likclr to cn r.ul c:\ll s on the pub li c pu rse for correcti on .tr .1 brcr time. Ir 1s e:tsy to
im:.tgmc 1h:u rnch direct .ind indirect co~ts \\ill ~1 urwcigh rhe nc:lt·tt:rm rt\·cnuc mcrc:i.~t.-s.
I h.1n: no do ubt rh.1r )'O u .ire r.ikmg these co m.:cms into co nsidcr:1ti u n .tnd chJ t yo u will rh 1nk lo ng .int.I h:ird
be fo re pc rmitrin g su~h .1 t.lr-J.Sric ,in d t.le rrimenr:tl ch:mge to the :ttc:1.
Re spectfull y ~•o urs,
0-,.v0v Oci 6 l¼-~-v _
Luc i J. :\tkimo n
cc : Co mmi ssio ner Suslfl Beckman
.\fayor Do ugl:is Ga rrett
~l:l}'Or pm um OlgJ Wolosy n
:\ls. L1urcn 13,UTcntinc
.\I s. Beverly J. Br:1d sh:1w
.\fr . John .\loorc
.\fr . lby Tom,1sso
Mr . .\lid1.1cl \'un.:h1ck
.\Ir. J im P:mk oni n
Mr. Jerry ~l:uchb
.\Is. Sus :m Co n.1w.1y
Jam S o rl ing
K.1thy S orling
Tricia Langon, Senior Planner
City of Englewood
Community Development Department
IOOO Englewood Parkway
Englewood, CO 80110
Dear Ms . Langon:
April 25 . 2004
As a lifetime childhood resident of Englewood. and now a close neighber for mo st of my
adult life , I am writing to you to express my concern for the development being planned
for the Denver Seminary Property at Uni vers ity and Hampden Ave .
I realize that I am not an Englewood re sident, but would like to express my concerns
regarding this development in hopes that you will consider all of the people surrounding
this development when you are voting for/against such a plan.
Originally, I was thrilled 10 read in the paper that a s pecialty grocery store was to be
developed on the property. It would be co nvenient and much needed . However, wh e n I
discovered the full development project and realized that several high tower
condominium units would be built along with 60,000 sq. feet of commercial space and
realized the traffic problems that would re sult from such a development I quickl y decided
that I could live without the grocery store. So much in so linle space cannot be good for
the community, and the resulting traffic problems would be a hazard to my neighborhood
and the children re siding in it because of the increased traffic through Dartmouth and
Yale . It is already difficult to manage th e trafYic. That intersection and the one at
Hampden and Colorado Boul eva rd ha ve fre4uent accidents.
Therefore, I hope ~ou will reconsider changing the zoning th a t would allow this
development to proceed. There arc existing commercial are:is nearby that suffice for the
needs o f the community . I thank you for consideration ofmy con cerns.
CO W,1UN ITY OE'!f lO •\,E~T DEPARTMENT
L:~ 2 8 2004
HlGL EM~O. COL ORADO
Sincerel y,
' .,
.. ,.i: tu i-/;ri-1/.i:. {'_ ,u
(/
Janet Mordecai
3 222 S . Adams Way
Denver, CO 80210
303-758-7057
•
•
•
•
•
•
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
Raymond J. and Linda L. Carmich el APR 2 3 ?004
210 East Floyd Place
-····· ood co 801)3
ENGLEWO OD. COLORA017T'cl: 30 •781-5626
April 21, 2004
Arapahoe County Arapahoe Count/ Manager of Capitol Engi neering Division
Commissioner Commissioner Improvements Manager
Susan Beckman Bernie Zimmer Brian Wimer Jim Pankonin
5334 S. Prince Street 5334 S. Prince Street 10730 E. Briarwood 107 30 E. Briarwood
Littleton, CO 80120 Littleton, CO 80120 Ave . Ave.
Centennial, CO Centennial, CO
80112 80112
Traffic Engineer Planning Division CDOT City of Englewood
Jerry Maschka M anager Region 6 Planning Senior Planner
10730 E . Briarwood Susan Conaway Manager Tricia Langon
Ave. 10730 E. Briarwood Gregg Mug,le 1000 Englewoot'
Centennial, CO Av,:. 2000 S. Holly Street Parkway
80112 Centennial CO Denver, CO 80222 Englewood, CO
80112 80110
Traffic Engineer Englewood City Englewood City Englewood City
Lad Vestry Council Council Counci l
1000 Englewood Douglas Garrett Olga Wolosyn Laurette Ba rrentine
Parkway 1000 Englewood 1000 Englewood 1000 Englewood
Englewood , CO Parkway Parkway Parkway
80110 Englewood, CO Englewood, CO Engkwood, CO
80110 80110 801l0
Englewood City Englewood City Englewood City Englewood City
Council Council Council Council
Beverly J . Bradshaw John Moore Ray Tomasso Michael Yurchick
1000 Englewood 1000 Englewood 1000 Englewood 1000 Englewood
Parkway Parkway Parkway Parkway
Englewood, CO Englewood, CO Englewood , CO Englewood , CO
80110 80110 801 IO 80110
Denver Post Rocky Mountain John F. Forstmann David Owen Tryba
Christine Tatum News JVF, LLC Architects
Business Section John Reb chook PO Box 7890 1620 Logan Street
1560 Broadway 400 West Colfax Avon, CO 81620 Denver, CO 80203
Denver, CO 80202 Denver, CO 802Qq
To Whom It May Co ncern:
The builder of the re-development of the northwest co mer of Hampden and University is
proposing an upscale projec t. The re -development of th at comer is inevitable because the
Baptist Seminary is moving to South Santa Fe.
We live on the north boundary of the property within the city limits of Englewood. IJ:!!S DOES
/\FFECT OUR QUALITY OF LIFE .
They are l'roposing to put on 12 acres of land 65,000 square feet of retail space plus three
story townhouses and four, one each of 7 , 9, 11 and 14 story co ndo buildings for a total of 350
units. The builder is allowing 1.5 parking spaces per unit a nd 1.5 parking spaces for so many
thousands of square feet .
Ir parking is not co nve nient and easy for the co nsumer by a llowing mo,.-e than enough pa,.-Jcing
spaces (current proposal is NOT even enough), the retail that is proposed will not succeed.
Then we will have another disaster equivalent to the Trolley Square project.
I am proceeding with the thoughts that the builder and city wil l come to their senses and
provide sufficie nt parking, not just what code demands. The builder and city want to make
money and are not realistically concerning themselves with VERY SERIOUS TRAFFIC and
SAFETY ISSUES.
The builders are saying that traffic will only increase by 1 % due a project of thi s size. And they
are proposing an additional traffic signal on University by their property .
Here arc my concerns regarding traffic for this area:
• Another traffi c signal so close in proximity to Hampden and University traffic signal
will back up traffic overflowing INTO the intersection of Hampden and University
and will have extremely negative impact on the s ide streets havi ng access to
University .
• Traffic will be at nd still while large delivery trucks try to figure out whe .~e they
can access the p1· . ty and mane uver them on 1.0 the property property .
•
• T:-affi c will remain at a stand still after construction for the large delivery trucks to •
supply the retail space that includes a European style market, two restaurants, a
wine store, cooking school, banquet room flower market, and a, ditional trash
trucks.
150 employees at least two trips a day, providing they do n 't leave ror errands and /or
lunch. As you are aware, if parking is an issue, the EMPLOYEES will be
asked /required to find somewhere else to park. We are the closest property to that
property.
• 350 units that :,robably equates to 700 people .
• Consumers for tl-.e retail, students for the cooking school, etc.
Anyo ne in Denver is awa1 ~ rha t th'! traffic at thi s intersection is a NIGHTMARE.
The safety , parking, air quality, and traffi c should be a MA,JOR concern to all of you . Please
act now be/ora it is too late.
Sincerely,
Linda Carmichael
cc: Hampden Hills Bloc ks 8, 9 & 10 •
•
•
•
Page I of 2
Tricia Langon
From : JONAH M STALLER Uonahstaller@msa .com}
Sent: Saturday , April 17, 2004 11 :23 AM
To: Tric ia Langon
Cc: Audrey Heidtbrink; Heather Mulvihill; Mcintee, Kathleen; Wilson Jane; Matt Perk ins; Elizabeth
Temple ; Steve Peterson; amyday; cabdesign; greggesche
Subject: Denver Seminary
Tricia • I have some questions regarding the project :
• Has the City asked the rleveloper to do a visual simulation of the project? If not, would you
ask the developer to produce a visual simulation study, Including various ground level
views from surrounding neighborhoods? I would be more than happy to allow the developer
to takes photos from my property at 3345 S. Columbine Circle, and I'm sure others would
feel the same way. I would also suggest that views be analyzed from Hampden and Floyd
Avenue east ot University . One of the Joys of walking on Floyd is the great view of Mount
Evans, and I'm pretty sure the de velopment will block these views to a sign ificant degree. Of
course, Hampden Is the gateway to Englewood, and it'd be kind of a shame if the
development detracts from the natur;,I surroundings. In any event, I think a visual
simulation study would be an Important and necessary tool to help citizens, the Comm ission,
and the Council to understand the significance of the proposed heights and masses, from
both the skyscrapers in the cen ter of the property and the perimeter buildings .
• Has the City asked the developer to do a shadow study? This would also be an Important
and necessary tool to help underst and the Impacts of the proposed development.
• Would it be ~ossib le to for the Cor.,mission and Council to do a site visit to gain a better
understanding of neighbors' concerns? For exam ~le, folks might not really understand the
im pacts of a 20 foot setback combined with a SO-fo ot tall build ing unless they visit the back
yard of a Hampden Hills ne ighbor on th e north side of th e Seminary. Likewise, if they could
vi ew weather balloons fly ing at the proposed heights in t he proposed locations, they might
start to get a sen se of what th is will feel li~e .
• /J.' the Jar,uary informational meeting, Mr . Tryba said perim eter t~w nhomes would be 2 or 3
stories tall. I know they're sti ll listed as 2 or 3 stories, but heights can go as high as SO
fe et . Is this a mistake? Has lhe City asked the developer about this, and if so, what was the
answer from the dev~loper?
• At the January Informational meeting, Mr . Tryba said that the northeastern -most tower would
be 11 stories tall. Fowever, the plan says it could be as high as 167 feet, only 12 feet lower
than the 14-story tower to the we st. Is 167 feet a mistake ? Has the City asked ?bu ut this,
,.,.,.,,.,,vu
Page 2 of 2
and if so, what was the answer from the developer?
• Whe n the plan says building he ig hts are exclusive of penthouse, what does that mea n? The
no tes are confusing because they seem to distinguish elevator penthouses from some other
form of penthouse . Can the roofs extend abov the height !Imitations?
Any updates on timing for referrals? As always, thank you for yo ur ass istance .
4/?? /?f\04
•
•
•
•
•
Tricia Langon , Seni or Planner
City of Englewood
Community De velopment Department
1000 Englewood Parl-way
Englewood, Colorado 80110
April 16, 200 4
Subject : Denver Seminary project
Dear Ms . Langon :
COMM UNITY OEVELOP ME IH DE PA RTMEN T
B
ENGLEWOO D. CO LO RA DO
We are a committee of homeowner s in the Cherry Hills Heights neighborhood, and are
responding to the proposed rezoning of the Denver Seminary prop•!rt y. The Cherry Hills Heights
neighborhood , located in unincorporated Arapahoe County, consists of 50 homes nd lies
di rect ly to the east of the Seminary propert y across Unive rsit y a~~levard .
For nearly 60 yea rs, residents of our neighborhood have enj oyed a sense of privacy , li ght ,
and space associated with relati vely large lots , limited horn~ he i~ht s, significant setbacks , and
consistent surroundi ng uses . This has been a great place 10 live , with a high quality oflife and
steadily increasing property values . Now, the proposed Seminary rezoning threatens that
qualily of life and properly vn lues , and we must register our objections.
This is not to say the propo~ed development does not have positive elements -it does .
We appreciate the quality of building the developer is pursuing and the continuo us right-turn
lane on the west side of Uni ve rsi ty . We're pleased that the developer has hired David Owen
Tryba. who displayed care and sensiti vity in his desig n for Englewood City Center.
Ho wever, these positive element s are significantly out we ighed by the negatives of the
proposal -an our view, di sturbing negati ves that appear to stem from a disregard for the existi ng,
surrounding neighborhoods , both withi~ and wi th out Englewood .
These comments do not represent a final list of our concerns as we are stil l re viewi ng the
plans and attemp ting to engage appro priate experts . However, we wanted 10 express our most
significant concerns as soon as possible, and our preliminary suggestions, so that you can share
them with the de veloper, othe r staff, and appropriate referral agencies .
We app reciate your assistance and co nsideration in thi s matter . We al so are more than
willing to meet with rep rese nt ative s of th e City or the de veloper at an appropriate time to discuss
ou r concerns , listen to the City 's and de veloper 's concerns , and exp lore the potential for a
coopera ti ve sol ut ion .
We believe th at we can all work together to make redevelopment of the Seminary a
win-win-win si tuation for the City of Englewood, the develop er, and the exi sting neig hbors.
Summarv of Concerns
1. Traffic: The propo se d development will ha ve significant nega ti ve impacts on traffic for
our neighborhood specifically , and for anyone traveling through the Hampden and
University intersection . The applicant's traffic study seriously underestimates traffic
impacts from the proposed development. The pass-by trip rate of 75% is particularly
unreasonable .
a. The added traffic and prop osed traffic signal will exacerbate current problems at
Hampden and University, and al th e intersection of Floyd and Uni versi ty .
b. Traffic will back up furrher anr' more frequentl y to the north beyo nd Floyd , and
residents of our neighborhood will find it next to impossible to access Univers ity
southbound .
c. We will experience more cut-through traffic , which will pose a significant safety
hazard 10 our children and to pedestrians walking on Floyd .
d.
e.
The propo se d mid-bl ock traffic signal on University will increase noise, li ght, and
air pollution for residents of Cherry Hills Heig ht s whose homes back to
University .
We will experience more noise , li ght , and air pollution generally from the
increased traffic .
2. Height/Intensity/Density: The proposed rezoning represents an attempt to insert a
highly urbanized de velo pment into suburban surro undings .
a. The excessive height s. commercial uses, lack of sufficient s~tbacks and
landscaping , and overall density /intensity of the proposed plan are inc ompatible
with longstandin g, existing nei ghbo rhoods and are inappropriate .
3. East-Side Widening of University: The proposal to widen University on the east side in
order to create space for a left tum lane for the Seminary development will degrade our
neighborhood and threaten the safety and welfare of our residents . We wi ll be left with
no buffer between our fences and University , and pedestrian and maintenan ce access 10
any remainin g strip of land will be impossib le.
4. Construction Impacts:
a. The Englewood Code permit s co nstructi on from 6:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m., Monday
through Saturday . These hours are excessive and will create a certain , five to six-
year-long nui sa nce for surrounding neighbors .
b. We 're very concerned wi th the potential for asbestos and dust pollution .
•
•
•
•
•
Summary of Suggestions
I. Traffic:
a. Reduce the density and intensity of uses . Because the commercial uses will generate
the most trips , we question whether the most significant traffic issues can be
mitigated without eliminating or greatly reducing commercial. Not coincidentally,
the exi sting R-3 zone district allows only very limited commercial uses .
b. Require installation of a IO to 12 foot high sound wall around Cherry Hills Heights
(east side of University and north side of Hampden) to mitigate noise and light
pollution and other impacts from increased traffic . Require large trees on the east
side of University . These steps would also help address other project impacts .
c. Eliminate the traffic signal on University or ensure appropriate mitigation of
congestion, noise, light , and pollution impacts cau sed by the si gnal. For noise and
light pollution , require the sound wall and trees described above . For increased
traffic congestion and air pollution (from increased vehicle idli ng,) we wonder
whether adequate mitigation is possible .
d. If a traffic signal is appro ved , pro vide for pedestrian and bicycle crossing, and require
construction ofa sidewalk on the east side of Uni versity This will benefit Seminary
residents in at least two ways : a crossing and sidewalk wi ll providP a means for
Seminary residents to safely access our neighborhood for walking and biking, and
will also provide a means to safely access the bus stop on the east side of University .
e. Require installation of appropriate "traffic calming" on Floyd Avenue to discourage
cut-through traffic and to reduce speeds .
2. Height/Intensity/Density:
J .
a. Reduce hei ghts to within the 60-foot height limitation of the R-J zone district. We
would support limited excepti ons (up to 80 feet) in the center of the property if the
developer would maintain reduced heights (30 feet or less) on the perimeter of the
property . The oroperty can be developed at a high density without exceeding existing
height limitations .
b. Eliminate or greatly reduce commercial/retail development. Commercial uses bring
with them a number of imp ac ts, in addition to traffic , that would not be present in a
strictly re si dential development , including additional noise , li ght pollution, security
concerns , and potential for blight due to business failure s. We note that The
Waterford does not include commercial uses .
c. Increase setbacks from University and Ham pden around the entire perimeter of the
property and insist on significant landscaping within the setback .
East-Side Widening of University: Eliminate the widening of University on the east side .
Respect the existing buffer to the west of Cherry Hills Heights neighborhood on the east side
of University . !fa left tum lane is needed for the development, the land for th e tum lane
should come from the Seminary propert y, which is creating the need for the tum lane .
4. Construction Impacts :
a. Res trict constru ction hours to 1 to 5 n weekdays and 9 to 5 on Saturdays. No
co nstructi on on Sunday s or holid ays.
b. Ensure appropriate suppre ss ion and contai nment of asbestos and du st pollution.
Require observation and monitoring for asbestos. Require notific atio n of nei ghb ors
before demolition of any Seminary buildings .
We believe our suggestions are warranted. The starting point for this redevelopment should
not be ignored . Since 1968 the property has been used as a ~e minary , a relatively quiet use with
minimal impacts on surrounding neighborhoods. Surrounding land uses have remained low-density
residential, and infill (for example, the Buell development) has followed the sa me template .
he ;
us,
sign.
modific .
deve lopment of the Seminary at the fully permitted residential densities and the 60-foot
tio n under •he existing R-3 zoning would represent a significant change from present
:cognize this as permissible. The proposed PUD zoning goes beyond a
ange to a radical and unreasonable one. Accordingly, the plan should be
.,rotect the fabric of the existing, surrounding neighborhoods.
•
Obviou sly , the PUD zoning request has many aspects , and we feel there are a number of
other concerns and det ai ls that should be discu ssed . We intend to provide addition al comments at a
future date . If you should have any que st ions, please do not hesitate to contact Jonah or Katty Staller •
at (3 03) 762-1081.
cc Englewood City Council members
Englewood Planning Commission mem bers
Arap ahoe County Commis sioner Su san Beckman
David Owen Tryba
Ron Pickens, Jenna Eyre, Hampden Hills
Cheryl McKnight, Bu ell
Norm Smith, Southern Hills
He at her Mulvihill, Sun se t Dri ve
Clair Morgan, Kent Village
Jim Norling , Kathleen Mcintee , Cherry Hills Heights Denver
4
•
•
•
•
April 16 , 2004
Tricia Langon
City of Englewood
1000 Englewood Parl<way
Englewood , CO 80110
Dear Ms . Langon,
Lynne Uhl
3250 S. Monroe Street
Denver, CO 8021 0
Please deny the rezoning permit requ ested for the area occup ied by the Denver
Seminary at Hampden and University Boulevard . I am very conc erned about the
proposed high-density development planned for th is area . The intersection of
Hampden and University already has extreme traffic congestion problems . On
southbound University, traffic backs up many blocks and crawls nearly every clay.
The planned developmen t will ad d to the seve re traffic problems that currently exist.
Our neighborhood consists of si ng le fam ily homes limi ted to one story . This
development of high ~se build ings would negatively affect the quality of life of all of
the surrounding neighborhoods .
The rezoning request for th i• high-den5ity p;.:.··. · : ~•,id be denied. I understa nd the
developer is interested in me~i rnlzi ng µrn fils Out traffic congestion and negative
ne ighborhood impact should w in out.
Sincerely ,
Lynne A. Uhl
Cherry Hills He ights home owner
COMMUNITY DE VELOPMEN T DEPARTMEN T
8
EIIGL E\·,c o. COL ORADO
CO M:,,,.,.,, •.. :c •.• ,· :,·:,Apri l 9, 2004 a
HI GL :V/000 . COLORAD O
Tric ia Langon, Se ni or Pl ann er
City of Englewood
Community Developme nt Depanment
1000 Englewo od Parkway
Engle woo d, Co lorado 80 I I 0
Subject: Denver Semin ary proj ec t
Dea r Ms . Lan go n:
Jon ah Sta li er
3345 S. Co lumb ine Cir.
En glewood, CO 801 13
303 -762 -1081
I'm try in g to keep up -to-date on the fil e fo r thi s project , and I wou ld a pprec iate it if yo u
cou ld provi de th e fo ll ow in g:
I. The li st of adj ace lll ow ners that t_he applic ant/deve lope r used 10 notify neighbor s of the
January 13. 2004 informa ti ona l mee tin g.
2. Any writt en co mmuni ca tio ns bet we en Ci ty staff and/or officials and the
app li ca nt /de veloper . or th e app licant /de ve loper 's consultan t(s). mad e before th e
appli catio n was submitt ed on Feb ru ary 20, 2004 .
3. An y materia ls that ha ve D,•n added to th e file si nce th e app li cat ion fo r PUD rezo nin g was
ori ginall y filed on February ~O, 2004 . We alrea dy have the appli ca ti on materials th at we re
filed on February 20, 2004.
You can mail these docu ment s to me at the above addres s or call me and I'll pick th em up .
I'm prep ar ed to pay fo r co pies , but pl ease noti fy me and get my okay befo re making co pies that
wo uld co st more th an S30 . As alwa ys, th ank yo u for yo ur assis tance .
Sin ce rel y,
•
• .JANE P. WHITAKER
3090 SOUTH ST. PAUL STREET
DENVER, COLORADO 80210
,_ I 2 0 0
COMMUNIT Y DEVELOPM,NT OEPARTMENT
B
ENSLEW0::1 0, CCLOR AOO
·]n--'--'. cJL-«--{.'.y--~.s (}~ ~ ~, .. ,( 7 L
'f~"--'--<.; J' J} r-.--c..-U_ t..., ? ~.;_ t, )1,1~!,~ Cl..u1
~u... e.L-0!.... --c, a-LL~ i · t ~--, ~, 't;.J j:,
J~~~'-J ~-... f. Lut._ u..,.__ '---
~ 16"-( -f,,__j,,.,,....,,..__ , 1)1...,-r'L.. ... t L/ j),.,.c. • .._
N ~-j J ,.,,~ '. ·,, .__ <-<,·~-e..,_~
l.1-hj t V\,~
& 7 4-C <z...:: ....... ,
•
•
•
•
•
•
BUELL M A N SI ON
Trisha Langon
Senior Planner
Englewood Community Development
1000 Englewood Parkway
Englewood, Colorado 801 10
March 26, 2004
CO MMUNI TY DEVELOPME NT DE PAR TM EN T
[·~' _, •M I
EIIG LEWCO D, COLORAD O
Re: Objection To Denver Seminary Proposed De vel opm ent
Dear Ms . Langon ,
The Buell Mansion Owners Associati on wishes to express its objection to the
proposed development of the Denver Seminary property . We oppose a change to the current
zoning that would allow retail or more intensive residential use of the site .
Our neighborhood is directly southeast of the Denver Seminary. Our residents
have first hand daily experience with the traffic patterns at Hampden and University .
Currently , at certain times of the day our residents must wait through three to four light
cycles while attempting to tum eastbound on Hampden from southbound University . Adding
another light on University as proposed in the current plan, would be a catastrophe and cau se
gridlock and chaos during rush hours .
In addition, the proposal for multiple high density high rise towers is out of
character for the area. The surrounding neighborhoods have re sisted growth and retained
single family residential character . Multiple residential towers belong in the Cinderella City
area, or downtown Denver. They are inconsistent with the surrounding single family
residential zoning of the neighboring Englewood, Denver, and Cherry Hills Village
Communities .
This is an important decision that will affect all neighuoring communiti es for
many years. The proposed retail/high density development would be a mistake. We urge
you to maintain the existing zoning restrictions . A less ambitious development is possible
under existing zoning that would maintain the character of th , surrounding neighborhoods .
Thank you for you willingness to listen to our concerns.
Sincerel y,
Trisha Langon
March 26, 2004
Page2
VP Buell Mansion Owners Association
For the Board of Directors
cc : John Hickenlooper
Doug Scott
Doug Garrett
•
•
•
• Tricia Langon
•
•
From: Bob Simp so n
Sent: Friday, March 26 , 2004 9:27 AM
To: 'KELLS WAGGONER'
Cc : Tric ia Langon; Ken Ross ; Da vid Tryba (tryba @dota .com)
Subject : RE : Denv er Seminary-PUD
Kells,
Good morning . Thank you for your comments, As usual, your thoughts are constructive . I will
forward them to the appro 11rlate people to consider. City staff has met with the development
team last week to discu ss preliminary issues based on the submittal . Much of your commen t s
were considered in our di si:ussion and rev isions are in progress. The devP.lopment team was
receptive to our comm ents. We are by no means complete in our review.' Much work is still
required to ensure that the development is well integrated into our community . Thank you for
your thoughts and contribu ,:ions . I look forward to talking with you further before the public
hearings.
Rob ert Simpson
Englewood Cor nmu niry Developrnenf Direc tor
303.762 .2346
·····Original Message·····
From: KELLS WAGGONER [mailto:wkells@msn .com]
Sent: Thursday, March 25, 2004 6:06 PM
To: Bob Simpson
Subject: De nver Sem inary ·PUD
Bob:
I attended the meeting at the seminary, listened to the presentation, and still have three
major concerns about the development, i.e.
· Traffic: At the present time south bound traffic backs up , at times, pa st Floyd Avenue .
It is difficult to make a left turn from north ·bound Universi ty to west·bound Floyd Ave. and
almost impossible for a left turn at Floyd Place . The re has, for a long time, been a need
for a south -bound double left turn . The City was told, years ago, that the reason for not
getting a double left was the limited R.O.W., now is the time for the double left and a free
right. I don 't believe a signal on University, at any location, will solve the present or
future problem. Perhaps the traffic people should look at a signal light at the west end of
the property on Hampden Avenue. From there residents could go west with an
acceleration lane , east and sou t h from Hampden, and north with the double left at
University . Limit the access on University to right·,. an d right-out.
Drainage : I understand that there will be some underground detention for storm
water. That sounds good ~J long as the area is kept clean and not used for parklog .
Parking lots that nood could have a tendency to trap people and damage vehicles. As you
know, Romans Park is a detention facility and holds nood water. !l has a control'ed outlet
so as not to exceed the capacity of the pipe in Floyd Avenue . The detention fac la.ty for the
seminary prop,•rty wou la need to detain all of the storm water t !,at exceeds historic run•
off from the ;:,ro 1,erty. The underground storage could not be ni leased until the
Pa gr. 2 of 2
hyd ro graph peak has past Romans Par k and the park has drained . If th~ release is early, •
It could nood people downstream from Romans Park. In review;~. the dra inag e study for
t i,e PUD prepared by Carroll & Lange, Inc. I could not tell if the historic now was based
upon the property being bare ground or If they were us in g the existing de ve lopment as
historic. Historic now should be bare ground.
Shading Effect of Tall Buildings : The north side of buildings are problems for snow and
ice buildup . In order to protect the properties along the south side of Floyd Place would It
not be better to locate open space on the north side of the property and locate the tall
buildings on the south sid e where the shadow would stay within the property boundaries .
Tall build ings on the south side would not affect Hampden Ave . and the problem with snow
and Ice build up would be restricted the the development.
Your review of these concerns would be greatly appreciated . Thanks!!
Kells Waggoner, 3301 S. Race St., Englewood, CD 80113 •• (303) 781-0725
3/30/2004
•
•
•
•
•
icfv••"
Cahen Architectural Group P.C .
March 24, 2003
Mr. Robert Simpson / Ms . Tncia Langon
City of Englewood -Community Development Department
1000 Englewood Parkway
Englewood , Colorado 80110
Re: Denver Seminary P.U .D .
NE Comer of E. Hampden and South University
Dear Mr. Simpson and Ms La ngon:
CO M:,1UNITY D,VELOPME NT DEPA RTMENT
MAR 2 9 2004
ENG L:WOOD . CO LORA OO
Thank you for meeting with Mr. Clarold Morgan, President of the Kent Village Association
("KVA') and me regarding the proposed Denver Seminary PUD application .
We appreciate the City's willingness to address the concerns and issues of the Association in
order to ensure that the presentations and commitments of the Developer are enforceable and
that the final constructed project reflects the high quality standards demanded of such a large
profile development. Our collective goal is to cieany define the parameters in which this
development can be approved , constructed , and maintained to create a valuablE asset to the
surrounding community and the City of Englewood as a whole .
Attached with this letter is a revised copy of the comments and declarations that we believe
are the minimum to be incorporated into the PUD documents . These Items were discussed in
our m·eeting and it is encouraging that you and your staff have already considered many of
them . We remain very concerned over the lack of specificity regarding the physical
appearance of the project as well as projections beyond height and setback limitations.
Almost without exception, the projects our office has worked on in the greater Denver area,
have demanded that elevation drawings be submitted as a requirement of the review process
to cleany indicate the extenor design for the entire project. Without this being part of the
required subm ittal package, there is no way to fully ascertain the effects of the development
on the surrounding area, and more importantly , serve as a way for the City to control the
quality of these projects . We do not see how this proj ect could be fully approved and deemed
to be in harmony with the Comprehensive Plan without knowing all factors of the project being
asked to be approved .
It is true that several approval processes allow for a more genenc approach, realizing that the
full and final design may not be in placa . These are typical of Overall Development Plans,
Subdivisions Plat and the like, but that is not the case here. Your department has told us that
•lWO TAMARAC . 7535 EAST H.~POEN AVENUE , SUITE 425 . DENVER . COLORA DO , 80 231 • (303) 743-0002 • (303) 743-,
coos.
this is the final and full approval process for th is project; thereforr,, we feel very strongly that
the final designs must be submitted and made part of the approval.
As this project is to be phased , it stands to reason that the earlier stages of the development
are more final than some of the later phases. Accordingly , ~ the complete plan is not
submitted for public hearing and comment at this time for that reason, then an appropriate
alternative would be to approve the project in separate phases , as definitive plans are
submitted, so that each separate phase is subject to a separate public approval process. In
that way, current design trends you mentioned could be accommodated, and the City's and
residents' interests property protected. In any event , we beliel(e it is inappropriate to approve a
project of this size and impact on the City and the surrounding environment by looking at only
a fraction of the total plan details, without specific plans for the entire project.
This developer has made representations as to the design, size and appearance of the total
project• not just the initial phase(s) • and it is essential that all of those repre~entations be
presented for public hearing , not just the initial phase(s). If the developer is planning to
implement its project in phases , then ~ is equally proper that the City's approval/hearing
process be structured in complimentary phases.
It our understanding from our meeting that the applicant will be receiving your "initial " review
comments in an effort to have them revise their submittal to more adequately address the
concerns raised by several parties. Once the resubmitted documents are returned to you ,
another round of rev iew will commence and further referrals to adjacent municipalities and
other interested part ies ~.:11 also be sent out. We look forward to your office notifying KVHA
when the resubmitted package wi 'I be ready to~ re-inspection.
Thank you again for discussing this project and including the affected parties to be part of ,
process of approval. That has always been the intent of the code and the way it should b.. ..
Very truly yours ,
Cahen Architectural Group PC
Craig I. Cahen , AI A
President
CIC/slm
Cc: Mr. Clarold F. Morgan Kent V illage Association
•l'NO TAMARAC , 7535 EA ST HAMPDEN AVENUE . SUITE 425 , DENVER, COLORADO, 60231 • (303) 7•3--0002 • (303) 743-
0005•
•
•
•
•
•
•
DENVER SEMINARY PLANNED UNIT
DEVELOPMENT /DISTRICT PLAN)
THIS SUBMITTAL IS MADE BY CAHEN ARCHITECTURAL
GROUP, P.C., 7535 EAST HAMPDEN AVENUE , SUITE 425 , DENVER ,
COLORADO, CONSUL TING ARCHITECT FOR KENT VILLAGE
ASSOCIATION.
1. PRIOR TO THE FIRST PUBLIC HEARING, AS PART OF THE
SUBMITTAL PACKAGE (I) THE TRAFFIC STUDY SUBMITTED BY THE
DEVELOPER IS TO BE RE -GENERATED UTILIZING THE LATEST TRIP
GENERATION FIGURES AND USES (7TH GENERATION), AS COMPILED BY
THE INSTITUTE OF TRAFFIC ENGINEERS ("ITE "); AND (II) COLORED ,
EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS OF ALL PROPOSED BUILDING FACADES ,
INCLUDING ALL MATE.~IAL AND COLOR SPECIFICATIONS ON EACH
SHEET WITH THE PROPOSED MATERIALS CLEARLY INDICATED ON THE
ELEVAT IONS SHALL BOTH BE DELIVERED TO l HE CITY FOR REVIEW AND
MADE AVAILABLE FOR INSPECTION AN O REVIEW BY INTERESTED
PARTIES.
2. THE FOLLOWING ADDITIONS/REVISIONS SHALL BE SET
FORTH IN THE "DENVER SEMINARY PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT
(DISTRICT PLAN)" DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS AND SHALL BE AN
INTEGRAL PART OF THE FINAL PLAN .
PUD DISTRICT PLAN -DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
A. GENERAL REGULATIONS . UNLESS OTHERWISE PROVIDED FOR IN
THIS PUD OR AN AMENDMENT THERETO , THE PROVISIONS , STANDARDS ,
REGULATIONS, AND PROCEDURES PERTINENT TO AN APPLICATION FOR
THE DEVELOPMENT OF LAND WITHIN THIS PUD ZONE DISTRICT SHALL
COMPLY WITH THE REQUIR EMENTS OF THE R-3 ZONE DISTRICT OF THE
CITY OF ENGLEWOOD AND RELATED ZONING REGULATIONS IN PLACE
AS OF THE DATE OF FILING OF THIS APPLICATION WITH THE CITY .
B. THE FOLLOWING USES SHALL BE PERMITTED WITH!N THE PUD ZONE
DISTRICT IN THE SPECIFIC LOCATIONS INDICATED IN THIS PUD AND IN
NO OTHER LOCATION(S):
1. RETAIL USE NOT TO L GEED 60 ,000 SQUARE FEET ,
SPECIFICALLY EXCLUDING THE FOLLOWING : (A) ADULT BOOK
STORES; (8) OPERATIONS THAT ARE HAZARDOUS OR
OBJECTIONABLE DUE TO NOISE, SMOKE . FUMES, AIR
POLLUTION , HEAT , GLARE , RADIATION OR VIBRATION ; (C)
DRIVE-IN TYPE OR ADULT MOVIES OR PRODUCTIONS ; AND (D)
NEW OR USED CAR OR VEHICLE SALES OR SERVICES.
2 . ALL RESIDENTIAL US ES
3 . AL L OFFI CE USES , NOT TO EXCEED 5 ,000 SQU ARE FEET
4 . PUBLIC AND PRIVATE COMMUNITY FACILITIES OF THE TYPE(S)
AND IN THE LOCATION(S) SHOWN ON THIS PUD
5 . PUBLIC AND PRIVATE PARKING FACILITIES IN THE LOCATION(S)
SHOWN ON THIS PUD
C . ACCESSORY USES. ANY RETAIL , OFFICE OR SERVICE USE NOT
PROHIBITED ABOVE, WHICH IS PROVIDED FOR THE ACCOMMODATION
OF THE TENANTS , CLIENTS , PATRONS , RESIDENTS, OR CUSTOMERS OF
THE PERMITTELl PRINCIPAL USE. SUCH ACCESSORY USES SHALL BE
LIMITED TO A RADIO , TV OR OTHER ANTENNAE WITHIN THE MAXIMUM
HEIGHT LIMITS OF THIS PUD, A SWIMMING PO01 A TENNIS COURT AND
CLUBHOUSE.
D . DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS (SEE SITE PLAN FOR DETAIL)
1. MAXIMUM BUILDING HEIGHT-SEE SITE PLAN TABLE
2 . MAXIMUM RESIDENTIAL UN rt..;: 350
3 . MAXIMUM RETAIUOFFICE SQUARE FOOTAGE :
65 ,000 SQUARE FEET OF GROSS LEASEABLE AREA
4 . PARKING: SEE PARKING PLAN FOR DETAIL
5 . SIGNAGE: SEE SIGNAGE/FENCING PLAN FOR DETAIL
6 . LANDSCAPING: SEE LANDSCAPING PLAN FOR DETAIL
7 . VARIATIONS APPROVED BY AUTHORIZED CITY OFFICIAL
E . COLORE D, EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS OF ALL PROPOSED BUILDING
FACADES --: TO BE MADE PART OF THE PUD SUBMITTAL DOCUMENTS
AND SUB~ _D FOR APPROVAL ALONG WITH THE REMAINDER OF THE
SUBMITTAL r-A CKAGE . EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS SHALL INCLUDE ALL
MATERIAL AND COLOR SPECIFICATIONS ON EACH SHEET WITH THE
PROPOSED MATERIALS CLEARLY INDICATED ON THE ELEVATIONS.
F . ALL BUILDING AND UPPER BALCONY SETBACKS TO BE NOT LESS
THAN 25'-0" FROM THE NORTH AND WEST PROPERTY LINES .
G . MAXIMUM BUILDING HEIGHTS TO INCLUDE ALL PERMANENT
STRUCTURES SUCH AS ELEVATOR PENTHOUSES , PARAPET W A LLS ,
STAIRWAY ENCLOSURES, ANTENNAE , ROOFTOP MECHANICAL AND
PLUMBING EQUIPMENT AND THEIR ASSC' 11\TED SCREEN WALLS , AND
ARCHITECTURAL ROOF AND FIREPLACE L-nlMNEY FEATURES .
-ii -
•
•
•
•
•
•
H. NO STORM DRAINAGE RUNOFF MAY SURFACE FLOW ONTO
PROPERTIES WEST AND NORTH OF THE PROJECT SITE AT ANY TIME .
UNDERGROUND DRAIN LINES SH. '-L BE SIZED AND A SUFFICIENT
NUM BER OF AREA INLETS PROVIDED TO ACCOMMODATE THE
POTENTIAL FOR 100 YEAR STORM FLOWS .
I. GROUND-MOUNTED PATIO SETBACKS TO BE NOT LESS THAN 10'-0"
FROM ADJACENT PROPERTY LINES . .
J. ALONG THE \hEST AND PROPERTY LINE , JUST INSIDE THE PROJECT
SITE PROPERTY , THE DEVELOPER SHALL CONSTRUCT AND MAINTAIN A
10'-0" HIG \I, NOVA SOUND WALL™, BlllLT ON PERMANENT, BELOW-
FROST LINE CONCRETE FOUNDATIOr.S , WITH COLOR , TEXTURE AND
DESIGN FEATURES (INCLUDING PILLARS AND CAPS) TO MATCH THE
DESIGN , CONSTRUCTION SPECIFICATIONS (EXCEPT HEIGHD AND
APPEARANCE OF THE PRESENTLY EXISTING NOVA SOUND WALL™
INSTALLED BEGINNING AT THE SOUTHERLY 50' ON THE WEST
BOUNDARY OF THE SITE AND EXTENDING WEST ALONG HAMPDEN
AVENUE ALONG THE SOUTH BOUNDARY OF THE KENT VILLAGE
ASSOCIATION . HEIGHT OF WALL TO BE DETERMINED AT THE IMMEDIATE
ADJACENT GRADE . THE WALL SHALL INCLUDE INTERIOR SOUND
ABSORPTION MATERIAL REC"MMENDED BY THE MANUFACTURER AND
SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED AND COMP '..ETED PRIOR TO ANY OTHER
PHYSICAL WORK BEING COMMENCED ON THE PROJECT SITE.
SPECIFICALLY INCLUDING DEMOLITION OF EXISTING STRUCTURES AND
ROUGH GRADING .
K. ILLUMINATION FROM ANY PART OF THIS DEVELOPMENT MAY NOT
ENCROACH UPON THE SURROUND PROPERTY AT ALL TIMES . AIRCRAFT
DIVERSION LIGHTS , IF REQUIRED , SHALL BE DESIGNED SO THAT THE
LAMP SOURCE IS NOT DIRECTED DOWNWARD AND SHALL NOT BE
·VISIBLE TO THE PROPERTY OWNERS IMMEDIATELY ADJACENT TO THE
PROJECT SITE. HIGH SOFFIT LIGHTING ON TOWNHOUSES LINING THE
WEST AND NORTH PROPERTY LINE SHALL BE PROHIBITED . LOW-LEVEL ,
GROUND MOUNTED UP-LIGHTING OF EXTERIOR WALLS MAY BE
UTILIZED.
L. LANDSCAPE DESIGN ALONG THE \NEST BOUNDARY SHALL BE FULLY
COORDINAT ED WITH AND APPRO'v ~ J BY KENT VILLAGE ASSOCIATION
WHOSE PROPERTY IS LOCATED DIRECTLY ADJACENT TO THE PROJECT
SITE ON THE WEST. THE DEVELOPER SHALL INSTALL AND MAINTAIN
UPRIGHT EVERGREEN TREES IN SIZES , LOCAT IONS AND Sf'·ECIES
DETERMINED BY THE ASSOCIATION 'S LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT . ALL
NEW EVERGREEN TREES TO BE NOT LESS THAN 20'-0" IN HEIGHT AND
SHALL BE PLANTED AS PART OF THE PHASE I CONSTRUCTION AND
PRIOR TO THE COMMENCEMENT OF PHASE II CONSTRUCTION .
-iii -
M. CONSTRUCTION/DEMOLITION OF ANY KIND SHALL BE LIMITED TO
OCCUR BETWEEN THE HOURS OF 6 :30 A.M. AND 5:00 P.M., MONDAY
THROUGH FRIDAY , BETWEEN THE HOURS OF 7:30 A.M . AND 5:00 P.M . ON
SATURDAY NO CONSTRUCTION/DEMOLITION OF ANY KIND SHALL TAKE
PLACE ON SUNDAY AND ON NATIONALLY RECOGNIZED HOLIDAYS.
CONSTRUCTION TRASH REMOVAL MAY ONLY OCCUR DURING THESE
TIMES THROUGHOUT CONSTRUCTION .
N. THE DEVELOPER MUST ENSURE THAT ALL NOISE AND DUST
CREATED BY THIS DEVELOPMENT SHALL BE FULLY CONTAINED ON-SITE
AND SHALL NOT AFFECT ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS .
0 . CONSTRUCTION TRAFFIC MAY ONLY ACCESS THE SITE OFF OF
SOUTH UNIVERSITY BOULEVARD AND EAST HAMPDEN AVENUE .
P. SERVICE AND DELIVERY VEHICLES MAY NOT IDLE FOR PERIODS
LONGER THAN 15 MINUTES IN EACH HOUR THEY ARE PRESENT ON THE
SITE.
Q. FOOD SERVICE VEHICLES MAY NOT SOUND THEIR iiORNS ONCE
THEY HAVE ENTERED THE SITE.
R. STAGING AREAS SHALL BE COORDINATED AND APPROVED BY THE
LOCAL HOMEOWNER 'S REPRESENTATIVES PRIOR TO MATERIAL
PLACEMENT AND STOCKPILING .
S. OFFICE AND KETAIL DELIVERY AND TRASH REMOVAL VEHICLES WILL
BE ALLOWED ONLY BETWEEN THE HOURS OF 6 :30 A.M. AND 5 :00 P.M.,
MONDAY THROUGH FRIDAY , BETWEEN THE HOURS OF 7:30 A.M . AND
5 :00 P.M. ON SA,URDAY . NO DELIVERY OR REMOVAL ACTIVITIES SHALL
OCCUR ON SUNDAY AND NATIONALLY RECOGNIZED HOLIDAYS .
T. OUTSIDE STORAGE OF MOTORIZED AND NON-MOTORIZED VEHICLES
AND OUTDOOR GRILLING/SMOKING EQUIPMENT SHALL NOT BE
PERMITTED ON ANY RAISED EXTERIOR BALCONY AREAS FACING THE
ADJACENT PROPERTY OWi JERS .
U. EXTERIOR SPEAKERS ARE PERMITTED HOWEVER ; SOUND LEVELS
MAY NOT BE LOUD ENOUGH TO BE HEARD FROM ANY ADJACENT
PROPERTY .
•
•
V. EPA AND LOCAL GOVERNING JURISDIC iiON GUIDELINES AND
ORC'''.'IANCES MUST BE FOLLOWED THROUGH THE DEMOLITION AND
CONSTRUCTION PERIOD . DEVELOPER WILL BE RESPONSIBLE TO CLEAN •
-i v-
•
•
•
ANY DUST , DEBRIS , AND/OR OTHER DELETERIOUS MATERIALS
GENERATED BY THE PROJECT SITE FROM THE ADJACENT PROPERTIES .
X . ANY CELLULAR TELEPHONE EQUIPMENT PLACE D ON ANY
STRUCTURE MAY ONLY BE INCORPORATED UTILIZING 'STEAL TH "
DESIGN TECHNIQUES.
W . THE "PUD DISTRICT PLAN -DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS" ON PAGE
PUD-1 OF THE SUBMITTAL SHALL BE .REVISED TO READ IN FULL AS
FOLLOWS:
THESE, DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS MAY BE INTERPRETED BY
AND MINOR VARIATIONS IN SUCH STANDARDS MAY BE MADE BY
THE CITY'S DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT (THE
"AUTHORIZED CITY OFFICIAL"); PROVIDED. TH!\T (I) AN INCREASE
IN BUILDING HEIGHT(S); AN INCREASE IN THE NUMBER OR
LOCATION OF PARKING SPACES ; (Ill) AN INCRl,ASE IN THE
MAXIMUM RES IDENTIAL UNITS; (IV) AN INCREASE IN THE
MAXIMUM RETAIL OR OFFICE SPACE; MA CHANGE IN THE
PERMITTED HOURS OF CONSTRUCTION OPERTAIONS; OR (VI) A
CHANGE IN THE LOCATION OF PERMITTED USE(S) SHALL NOT BE
DEEMED A MINOR VARIATION IN DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS AND
NONE SHALL BE CHANGED EXCEPT PURSUANT TO NOTICE,
PUBLIC HEARING AND APPROVAL OF THE CI TY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF ENGLEWOOD .
-v-
March 17, 2004
Ms . Tricia Langon
City of Englewood Building
1000 Englewood Parkway
Englewood, CO . 80110
Re : Planned PUD for Denver Seminary Property
Dear Ms . Langon,
CQ :,, ''"'lllY OE".UOFME NT 0:PA RTM ENT
i ,,~ "~ I
E:·'.t.,·1000. COLORAD O
Please refer the foUowing to your associates and directors that would influence the
decision to accept the proposed planned PUD for the Denver Seminary Property .
I represent the Southern Hills Community, directly east of the property, and I have
knowledge of over 600 plus residents that are opposing this particular plan.
The areas of opposition are the following:
I. The der.sity of the project.
2. The pr,posed retail
3. The high rise buildings
4. The proposed additional traffic light and lane expansion for traffic flow just north of
Hampden Ave.
Those ofus who have lived in thi s area, most ofour lives have knowledge and reasons
for this opposition.
I . The density would create traffic congestion that is already above safe traffic flow .
2. More traffic accidents would be occuring than already occur and would negatively
impact insurance ra, , and safety issues .
3. The proposed retail would draw more persons to the 111"':'.a, which additionally to traffic
would impact personal safety of residents from those outsiJe of the neighborhood , ie :
vandalism , theft and trash.
4. The high rise buildings would impact the privacy of residents that live across from
Hampden Avenue to the south, where they are paying TOP doUar and TOP taxes for
their privacy and their safety and which would include the residents of Kent Village
Condominium complex and those smaller homes in the neighborhood .
5. It would be driving the realestate value of our neighborhood down .
•
•
6. It would also impact the safety of those residents to fire and emergency vehicles that •
would have great difficulty getting in and out of the area safely, without many accc55
•
•
•
areas for resid ents to nee or emergency vehicles to come in, should a se rious
emergency exist .
WE are NOT opposed to deve lopment and are suggesting that the planned developm ent
be limited to a condominium complex that does not exceed two stories, in price rang es
more within the range of the neighborhood which would be approximately 350 ,000 to
500 ,000 . We would suggest that there is NO retail, which would encumber the whole
area negatively . We have enough retail east and west of the project , that supports our
area well We bought in this neighborhood to stay away from high density projects and
we feel our comfort and safety and happiness will be affected by this proposed plan.
If you would need signed petitions for support of our opposition. We can make that
available quickly.
Respectfully submitted,
~~h!iott.♦eiler
Southern Hills Community
Board Member
"'!, \Cl <,, :S. \.>.;\\!, C..~.
be.t-l.-J t.n.., t.o -,ci,-z.1 0
Sunset Drive Homeowner's Association
Two Su nset Drive
Cherry Hills Village, Colorado 80113
3-11-2004
Trisha Langon
Senior Planner
Englewood Community Development
1000 Englewood Parkway
Englewood, Colorado 80110
Dear Trisha :
COM MUNITY DEVELOP MENT DEPARTMENT
B
ENGL :WCOO . CO LORADO
On behalf of the HOA of Sunset Drive in Cherry Hills Village, we are
writing to express our concern about the proposed development of the
Denver Seminary property .
Our neighborhood is directly to the south of the Development, on the
South West corner of Hampden and University. We are opposed to
any change in the current zoning that would allow retail space to be
built on this site .
The surrounding neighborhoods have retained a peaceful, residential
ambience throughout decades c1f significant growth . Allowing
commercial development on this pristine corner will permanently
destroy the quality of life for everyone who lives In and around this
area.
Our concerns are as follow:
• Increased traffic and traffic related accidents
• Increase in noise level at all hours
• Increase in crime
• Obstruction of view corridor
• retail lighting -pollution
We trust that Englewood will make th e right decision as they did when
Cinderella City was proposed to be developed in this area, and denied.
As we all work toward preserving open space and smart development
with land usage that supports open space, decis ions like this one are
crucial to the future of Colorado .
•
•
•
•
•
•
-2-
The best use of this property would be In keeping with Its surroundings
and current zoning restrictions, thus remaining a residential property .
We urge you to deny the zoning change request.
Thank you for your time and willingness to hear the concerns of your
neighbors. We appreciate It greatly.
Sincerely,
1 Heather Mulvihill
President, Sunset Drive HOA
Jane Soderberg
Officer, Sunset Drive HOA
CC: John Hinckenlooper
Peggy Lehman
John Moore
Doug Scott
Gary Sears
Brett Wittenburg
Tricia Langdon
City or Englewood
1000 Englewood Parkway
Englewood, CO 80110
Dear Ms. Langdon,
James F. Norling
3101 Ea. Floyd Drive
Denver, CO 80210
Fax: 303-757-2813
Phone: 303-757-1732
3-16-04
•
I am concerned about the proposed development at Hampden and Univenity Boulevard which wil
only add to the severe traffic problems on both streets. For several hours during the evening, tram
on Univenity it backed up to the north to Dartmouth and sometimes to Yale which makes it almos
impossible ror us to esit Floyd to travel south on Univenity.
I request that I be notified or any bearings concerning tbi.t proposed development
Youn truly,
?~~~
James F Norling
CO MMUN ITY DE VELOP MEN T OE,a ,·
MAR 1 9 2004
rnGLEWOOO. COLORADO
•
•
•
•
•
ERNEST P. OTTO
293 . SO . JOSEPHINE ST. / DENYER , COLORADO 80210 (303) 757-25 28
March 15, 2004
Trica Langon
Senior Planner
·,
Engle woo d Community De ve lopm ent Office
1000 Eng lewood Parkwa y
Englewpo d, CO 80 I I 0
Dea r Ms . Langon :
,.
MAR' ]' 9 · 2004
EU GL :\,0o0. C0 L0n .100
I Jm a reside nt of Southern Hill s and li ve just one block eas t of Uni ve rsit y Bo ul evard on
Jo se phine Street. My family and I are very co ncerned abo ut the proposed development
of the Denve r Se min ary Prope rt y .
The traffic on Unive rsi ty is unb eli eva bl y conges ted at most all times of da y, especially
during bot h ru $h "hou rs". Traffi c headi ng so oth sta ns backi ng up at Hampt on (the
loca ti on of the propo se d development) at 3:00 P:VI and ca n back up fo r block s. To ,void
co ngested Uni versit y mnn y dri vers tum ea,t on Dartmouth to co nn ect to Colorad o
Bouleva rd . goi ng 100 fast ri ght by Slavens School Siavens is a K-8 sc hool. rherefore the
el ementary sc hoo l childr en slJrt sc hool at 8.45AM an d end at 3:30 P\-1 . The middle
school children ane nd fi-om 7 JOAM 10 2:30 P"vl. Bec,use Slavens is a neig hb orh oo d
sc hoo l many of th ese children are dail y walking to and fi-om sc ho ol around these four
different time peri ods.
Ot her dri ve rs avoid Unive rsit y tr affi c by turning eas t onto Bat es and then So . Clayton to
Ya le to Colorado, or they tum east on E. Corn ell to So . Jo se phine to Bat es -directl y in
fr ont of our house Nume mus oth er nei ghb orh oo d "s hort cuts" exi st for the dri vers trying
to 3•;0id •he 1,atli c on Univer sity.
I was very di sa pp oint ed that the "Traffic Imp ac t Analysis" prepared for the pro posed
Se min ary Deve lopm ent did not address any of the abo ve nei ghborhood co ncerns .
Unfort un ately this st ud y fa lsely assum es that all traffic stays on Uni versit y Boule va rd and
Hampden Ave nu e and does not imp ac t the su rrounding neig hborh oo ds.
I al so find it incredulou s that anyo ne (except the de ve lopers) would believ e that 75
per cent of th e retai l trip s wo uld be attrJcted 10 the sit e by th e exi stin g dri ve-b y traffi c on
L;nivcrsity and Hnmp to n. Red uci ng this number 10 SO perc ent (realisticall y it would
probabl y ,;ve r. be !owe r) wo uld add 1.300 trip s to the "net change in trip ge nerati on"
n11n1 bcr or <J OO prop osed by thi s st ud y. yielding ~.200 trips an d an incr ease of 144 percent
over what is proposed . I also question the reduction of daily trips by 400account for
internal trip s between the residences and the retail center that would use the adjacent road
system ." The Traffic Impact Analysis repon suggests that 350 residential units will
generate 450 •'internal capture" trips daily . Does this mean that each residential unit visits
the retail establishments once per day, and 29 percent of them make two trips?
As a resident that has lived for almost 19 years, one block east of University Boulevard ,
I only wish that the anticipated growth in traffic on University and Hampden would be
0.2 percent per year . I think this number does not adequate ly address the anticipated
increase in traffic in this area.
The very high density housing and the retail space that is propos ~d for the Seminary
Development will only exacerbate the serious traffic problem on University Boulevard
and increase the number of cars and trucks "cutting through" our neighborhood,
inc reasing the noise level and endangering our residents and children .
I strongly believe a lower density project with no retail space wo uld be a better tit with
the surrounding neighborhoods and not add to the existing traffic mess .
Thank yo u.
Sincerely,
~-~ --r-
EmieOtto
cc : Peggy Lehmann
Den ve r City Councilwoman District 4
•
•
•
•
Tricia Lannon
Senior Planner
2:850 f , fLORA PL
0l!NVU, COlOIIADO 80110
756-6909
Englewood Community Oevelorment
Englewood , CO 80110
Dear Tricia ·
COMM UNITY OEVELOPMENT OE PARTMENT
EJ
ENG LEWOO O, COLORAD O
~arch 5 , 2004
Ile are wr1tin9 to you as residents of The Southern Hills r.ommunity
Ps soclation of which ,lo Pnne ls a board l'lember.
It is our understandln~ that l'lany co....,unity associations concerned
about the devP.lot'fflent of the SP.f"inary ororP.rty at South llniversity
and east Hamoden are opnosed to it because of the ororosed very hi~h
density and the hei9ht of the condo buildin~s as well of the commercial
~ortion of the development .
Please give all of the community associations involved an opportunity
t o contact ~ur var! ous constituenc i es. This renui rP.s not 1 ficati on in advance
of any l'leeting or hearin~. Each colll'lunfty would arpreclate bein!' notified
so as to have a rer resentative in attendance .
CC · Pe~gy Leh mann . City Council Homan nistrfct Four
t/om Smith, Pr es id ent SHr~
16 February 2004
Mr. John H. Moore
City of Englewood
I 000 Englewood Parkway
Englewood, Colorado
Dear Mr. Moore :
! am writing to express my deep concern about the propo sed Den ver Seminary development.
P-'..u/
I) My lot appears to have three (l) town homes backing on to it, which me3lls fmirdifferent
families looking into my ~ackyard . This is a si :;mfic:int impact on my privac y.
2) The 11 and 14 story towers arr going to cast shadows on many of the Floyd Place lots
during the winter. This is un acce ptable , and suould not be allowed to happen within the City of
Englewood with any de ve lopment• we all have rights to so lar access as a fundamental living condition.
3) Th e tal l towers should be mo ved further to the so uth so that th eir visual dominance is not
as great over the neighbo rhood. The y should al so be moved so that above-mentioned shadows are not
cast onto the lots .
4) The northerly setback should be maintained at 40 feet co nsi stently .
5) Windows from the townhouses should be minimized on the north side to maintain
privacy. This would be good practi ce in Colorado for passive so lar design .
In regard to the tax basis , you might talce into consideration that through the years-H for me personally •
a considerable amount of property taX has been paid by th e residents of East Floyd Place . J feel that any
development that would have severe impact on our li ves should be very carefully co nsidered from a
viewpoint beyo nd that of monetary benefit to the City of Englewocd .
Sincerely,
---:;;_,,~...k..-/_~-;4r"'✓~../
Kathleen Johnson COMMUNITY OEVELO FME NT OEPARTMt ;iT
23 08 E. Floyd Pl. B
ENGLEWOOD , COLORADO
•
•
•
•
•
•
January 17 , 2004
Ci 1 y of Englewood
Communit y De velopment Departmenl
I 000 Englewood Parkwa y
Englewood, CO 80110
Attn : Tricia Langon, Senior Planner
CO MM UNITY OE 1JELJF \\C.~lT OE?AF.T:,\WT
Re : l'roposed redevelopment of Den ver Seminary property
I attende ~ rhe communi1y meeting at the Denver Seminary on January 13, during which
the City and Fcrstmann Development Group presented their proposal for th e
redevelopment of the property . Since the meeting , I have developed some questions and
comments about this proposal .
Re : Forstmann Development Group itself. What do we know about its fin ancial success
with this sc,rt of project ? I would like to see a business report on this compa ny prepared
by an unaffiliated agenc y, including references to their his1ory with de veloping this sort
of project .
Re: 1he project itself . What do we know about this sort of retail and living project ? It is
my opinion that Savoir Fair is not a strong concept and I question its long-term viability
at this location . I appreciate the apparent thought that has gone into design so that things
like delive ry trucks , etc ., will all be underground . Howeve r, it is my opinion that adding
350+ re sident s/cars 10 this small bl ock at an alre ady congested intersect ion will be a
detrim ent to the retail and not an enhan cement to it.
Re: th e de sign of the residential portion of the project -It is my opinion that an I I-story
townhome complex is out of place at this location of older ranch-level homes . It is also
_my opinion that the height of the Waterpark building, which was mentioned as a
reference , is also out of pla ce. Adding to the mistake already made will not make
anything better .
Re: the effect on traffic in the area -many comments were made at the community
meeting , and I support those comm ents . I would like to take this opportunity to do
anything I can to strengthen them . I am unconvinced that adding a street light at the
Uni versit y entrance to thi s co mplex will help anything exc ept perhaps the Forstmann
De·,elopment Company . As desi gned , the onl y Hampden entranc e/exit will be for west
bound traffic onl y. The Universit y entranc e/exit will have to handle entranc e/exit for
traffi c from eastbound Hampden , as well as north -and southbound University . This is an
unreasonable additional burden to put ont o a narrow street in a residential area .
Re : the role of the Cit y of Engle wo od -I would like to know of;ill_support and advice
the Cit y ha s alread y pro vid ed fo r th is proje ct. I understand that the City is eager to take
the property to a much higher level for providing tax revenue . Has the City provided any
incentives, any at al~ to Forstmann Development Company or any of its affiliates with
this project? How much taX revenue does the City anticipate bringing in from this project
after it is fully developed? ls the reason that this project was not proposed for the larger
and less densely developed City Center area because of the price of the property? If so,
could the City ofEogl~wood help the proposed developer to find the City Ceuter area, or
any other commercial area, to be more financially f..asible and otherwise more desirable?
lo summary, I find the proposed project interesting, thought-provoking and creati ve. I am
generally in favor of"new urbanization" and the re-use of space wherever re.iSonable and
feasible . I appreciate the amount of thought that the proposed developers have put into it.
However, I believe that the property chosen for the project is a serious miS!Jlke. I believe
that the traffic tie-ups all around the area and the height of the buildings will substantially
dec rease the quality oflife for all those in and around the project area. As such, I ask that
this proposed project not be apprr ,r this location .
I hope to find responses to all m)
come from the application process .
md comments in the written reports that
Thank you for the opportunity to particip ate in the ~rocess .
~:6»idJ
3361 S. Race Street
Englewood, CO 80 I 13
•
•
•
•
•
•
KENT VILLA6E ASSOCIATION
ENCiLEWOOD, COLORA'DO
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
Hal Dwyer
Paul Kadle
Oarold Molian
Leonard Plank
Jeny Robm•;on
Reda Walsh
Bob Wham
Tricia Lango n, Senior Planner
January 15 , 2004
City of Englewood Community Development Department
1 000 Eng lewood Parkway
Englewood , Col orado 80 I I 0
Dear Ms. Langon :
OFFICERS
Clarold Morgan, President
Leonard Plank, Vice President
Paul Hadle, secretary
Jerry Robinson, Treasure<
~ii\flitl\\i'!9W&o)IMiNil!Wl-~~11.N
\ ·-'M1N 22-,G·.2003
'
On behalf of the board of directors of Ke nt Villa ge Association , thank you
and your staff for participating in th e neighborhood meeting at the Den ve r Seminary on
Tue sday evening , January 13 , 2004 in connection with the proposed Denver Se minary
PIJD app li cation .
Kent Village is located immediately west of the de ve lopment si te.
As I stated to the presenter at the meetin g, th e Association and its
consultants prepared a series of questions and concerns similar to those exp ress ed at the
meeting by Mr. Ron Pickens of the Hampden Hills Associatio n. A copy of th ose
qu es tions are anached fo r your ready reference .
In the interest of tim e (and based on the assurances th at the developer and
the proj,:c t architect will respond in writing to each one of th ose inquiries prior to the first
public hearing on this matter), the Association did not make its full pre sentation .
Tricia Langon
January 15, 2004
page -2-
However, the answers to those questions are important to the Association, the
surrounding neighbors and the City, and we look forward to the developer's prompt
written response . As soon as the response is available, could yo u pl ease provide a copy
to :
C. F. Morgan, Pre si dent
Kent Village Association
3440 South Race Street
Englewood , Colorado 80113
I can also be reached by tel ephone at 303-743-0003; by fax at 303-743-
000 5; or by e-mail at cfm@morganlaw.net.
I also request that you send a copy of all notices and information relating
to this application to my attention at the above adc!ress(s) as it becomes available.
Thank you for your cooperation and assistance .
Very truly yours,
KENT VILLAGE ASSOCIATION:
by : ~ \lu.k WJ.S
Clarold F. Morgan, Presid#c -
cc -Kent Village Association Board of Directors
•
•
•
•
•
Denver Seminary Housing Project
Neighborhood Response & Questions
Presented by Roa Pickens & Carson Miles
Architectural Control Committee
Hampden Bills, Blocks 8, 9, & IO.
January 12, 2004
This is in response to re-zone the Denver Seminary property from an existing R-3 to PUD
(Planned Unit Development). The proposal includes residential and retail space .
I. Traffic -the project will increase traffic .
a. Increased traffic will back up past Floyd Place. Residents would lose usage of
turning left or right on University from Floyd Place and ,·ice versa.
b. Will consideration be given to having a signal light on Univers ity Blvd . &
Floyd Avenue?
c. ls closing Floyd Place University access a consideration/possibility?
d. Can parking on Floyd Place be restricted to Floyd Place residents and their
guests? If not, what restrictions can be pl aced to ensure Floyd Place Resident
parking?
e. What plans ensure pedestrian safety, both along and crossing University Blvd?
f. Wh at plans ensure emergency acc ess to Floyd Place residents, i.e. Fire, Police
and Ambulance?
g. Is there a proposal to mitigate traffic noise?
2. Utilities
a. Will the 8-foot easement on the R-1 properties be utilized for any project
utili ti es?
b. Where on the property will the infrastructure be placed?
c. Where are the water and sewer mains; and where will the service branches be
tapped? Water and sewer issues have been a problem in the past. What
provisions will be made to ensure neighbors will not have an adverse effect
d. Does the City of Englewood provide water and sewer service?
e. What is the source of the primary electrical power?
f. How will the primary and secondary electrical power be configured from the
source and on the network power grid?
g. Where is the gas main, and where will the services branches be tapped?
h. What are the developer plans for water drainage control for the project?
i. Electric power issues have been ~ problem in the past. What pro visions will
be made to ensure neighbors will not have an ad verse effect?
Denver Semin ary Housing Proj ec l •
Janu ary 12, 2004
Page2
3. Dcvelopmen l Proces s/lmplementalion Plan
a, Applications and permits, what are normal lirnclincs and evo lvemenc?
b. In the phased development, what are the timelincs to complete the plan?
c. What assurance or legal commianents do the developers ha ve to complete plan
as proposed?
d. Are a nwnber of pre-sales required before project begins?
c. How many people will have to patronize the retail space to make it profitable?
f. When fully occupied, what is th e projected number of residents and units?
g. Arc rentals planned for th e townhouses, or any other units? What is the
projec ted effect of increase or decrease of existing neighborhood property value
and why?
h. Tov.nhouses -co nfirm if parking is available behind the townhouses on north
& west pro: erty lines?
i. Is capitol set aside to accommodate adjoining property owne r is sues?
j. For privacy, co nsider mov ing the taller buildings closer to Hampden, rather
than north and west of the project.
k. At the Ci1 y Council study session on 1-5-04 , the set back from the property line
was staled as 40 feel; diagram reflects 30 feet on the northeast and 25 feet on the •
north we st -need clarification.·
I. If all parking is underground, how are emissions/exhaust vented and where
would venting be located?
m. Is the parking fo r townhouses higher or lower than existing ground lev el?
n. Will there be disrup 1i ve roadwork on Floyd Place during coostruc1ion?
o. Will a con tacl be made available for qucs1ions, conce rns or complaints?
p. Will this projec1 be phased?
q. Will thi s project be bui lt piecemeal?
r. Wha l is the length of time for build out and what lega l comm itment can be
mad e 10 ens ure this timelinc is met.
4. Qualir; of Life
•· Safety issues and crimc /r.1ischief issues are a concern. Wha l is developer's
experie nce? Is a srudy available?
b. De scribe plans 10 handle the asbestos during demol ition of Seminary.
c. EPA an alys is , request dev eloper pro vides a copy of analysis, wh en comple1ed.
d. Would construc1ions run 24 hours a day? How will no ise be handled?
c. En vironrn enla! iss ues -pro vide project plans to han dle the dust , mud and
flooding 1hroughout project.
f. Sun/Shade diagrams -pro , idea profil e of the shade panem s, including time of
day and year for all buildings.
g. Provide copy of plan for privacy wall .
h. Pro vide traffic anal ysis wi1h proj ec tions to 5 years past bu ild out. •
City o f Englewood, Colorado
Denver Seminary
Redevelopment Site:
Source Locations of
Written Comments
LEGEND
• Source locations al Wrtllen Commenls
c:J Redevelopment Property
c::IJurisdiclional Boundari es
--Street Network
Jun e 2004
i,
e
0 400 800
feer
1,200
• , Englewood Issue and Statu s• • Denver Se minary Planned Unit Development
Issue Statu s
Sheet PUD-1 -District Plan
1 Projections in lo Bulk Plan e and projec tions beyond building enve lope: ?? poss ibl e conOi clS in Standard s D2, Ge neral Co rr ec lecl
Noles 14 and "Buildino Erwelooe" o n Shee t PUD 4
2 Stand ards 17 Refer ences IO ·1 li e I 6 -"o ld co de" in Ba cko ro und and E. Modifi cati ons OK: th is is co rrec t
3 Site Da ta OK: difference is th e area
Tola l si te square footag e changed lo 495,38 1 fr om 497, 0 11 (? righl turn 1,,ne?) 10 be cl edi ca led for 1h e
Does th is affec t ac reage in Ba ckground righl !urn lan e. No eff ec l
Does this affect landscape area on She et PUD 4 Ba ckground . Dea n lo edi l
Landscap e data
4 Exp lain: Lands cape area in crease of approxirnalely 59,000 sq uar e fee l. Clarified
Sheel PUD -3 -Prono se d Phasine Pl an -Phase 1
5 Phase 1 should includ e constru ct ion of a de lenlion fa cilily . Al th e Dev eloper's/ Enginee r's op ti on, the facility ca n be Answe red on PUD -3 Nole
temnorarv or ,--.erman ent. 14
6 It em 1 2 shou ld be plural, th ere are thr ee bus stops th at will need to be re located, one on Hampd en, two on OK , changi ng th e bus st o ps
University (northbound as well as so uthbound). In addi ti on, th e proposed sout hb o und locati on on Univ ers ity will on Hampd en and th e NB
need lo be sou th of the □rooosed si•nal, nol at the nort h nrooerlv lin e as ind ica ted on lh e □I a n . Univ ers ilv no la ncer reauiri
7 Phase 1 does not ind icate what utilities will need 10 be built to su pp or t Phase 1 dev elo pme nt. (' Note 15 indi cates Answe red PUD -3 Nole 15
"Construct Utiliti es", bul ther e are utiliti es shown beneath existing Adrninislralion Building whi ch does not get
remo, •d until Phase II , and th ere are utiliti es be nea th th e Loop Roadway whi ch does no t ge l compl eted until Phase
II.I
8 #12 Rel oca te bus stop. Will bus st o p on eas t sid e of Uni ve rsity be affect/ See above #6
# 13 Walls -will this ch,,nge be ca us e of Ken I Villag e/Hampd en Hill s discussions OK
# 15 Provid e Utility pha sing plan Se e a bove #7
9 Ph ase I plans will be revi ewed under th e 1997 Uniform Codes and th e 2002 NEC.
Sheet PUD-3 -Pronoscd Pha sin• Plan -Phase 11
10 Phase II shou ld indi ca te th at all int e rna l util iti es are to be install ed prior 10 th e internal loo p road bei ng co mpl eted. Answer ed PUD-3 Note
40
II Phas e II shou ld ind ica le that all landscaping along th e oul sicl e perim eter o f th e deve lopment will be completed aft er Answered PUD-3 Note 9
all the sound/miva cv wa ll s are co rnol ete.
• Cummulntive com ments and observations (since np11lication su nnitt a l) 1· \·epared for the applicant to ass ist in issue r ~so lulio n.
·I nf R
Cily of .wood Issu e and Slalus • • EXHIB •
Denver Seminary Plann ed Uni! Developmenl
Iss ue Slalus
12 #6 Walls -w ill thi s chan•e becau se of Ken l Vi ll aAc /Hampden Hill s di scuss ions OK : Nol es on PUD-11
Shccl PUD -J -Pronoscd Pha sine Plan -Ph ase Ill
13 I recom mend addi ng a Phas e IV. I have 1ero confid ence that th e sit e works for parking and snow aba tement. Answe red l'UD 7 Nol e 8
Therefore, I would reco mmend Iha! Resid ential Buildings 7 & 8 be pos tp oned until it is demonstral ed th at park in g
and snow remova l is no t RoinR to be a probl em for th is develo pm ent.
14 # 1 & 2 Chanl!e Co mu/ete to Co nstru ct Co rr ec ted
15 Narr ati ve -2~1 oaraeraoh : Clarifv decal lanes What abou t decel lum la nes fr o m SB Univers itv l o EB Hamnden Answered PUD-3 Note 6
Shcc l PUD-4 -Prooosed Sile Plan Slatu s
16 At th e two entri es th ere are two hu ge ex pan ses of pavemen t propos ed. Nol onl " w ill thi s be un attra ctive, bu l ii will OK, the new ce nter
be very problematic for controlling traffi c. treatm ent s work a lot
bett e r than w hat was
nrooosed before.
17 Sile plan should be revised to indica te the locati on o f both bus stops on Universi ty. Bo th bein g loca ted on th e "far OK, changing th ese bus
side" of lh e propo sed traffic signal o n University. TI1 e bus stop on Hi ghway 285 sho ul d be located to th e ea st of th e stops is no longer a
proposed access not l o th e weSI as shown. rec1uir ement.
16 The mail kiosks sh ould be localed wh ere th e 'emp parking is bei ng provided, th at is o n th e o ut si de of th e proposed OK
curv es. It is a ba d idea to require peo pl e l o cross th e str ee t wh en stoppin g to pi ck up mai l. Are th e ki osks for th e
condo resi den ts?
19 The land scape fea ture at th e comm ercia l corn er should be expa nd ed to better con trol traffi c movements al !his OK: Reco nfigured
loca tion.
20 Th e radius o n lh e inside of !h e curve adjacent lo Bui lding A is too tight to all ow large vehicles to ge l arou nd th is OK: Re configured
corner. Th e nec kinR down of th e oaveme nl shown al this loca ti on nee ds to be eli minat ed.
2 1 Because of lh e ex isting geometry on Highway 285, !h ere w ill be no widening required al University, and th en ii OK
va ri es as yo u head wes t. Th e inlent is l o provide a 1 2-foo t wide decel lane, not jusl l o add 1 2 feet of add iti o nal
oa ve ment.
22 Due to 1he trip gene ratio n fr om thi s sit e and th e potenti al adverse impac ts l o th e left tum move men t on University at OK: Done
HWY 285 addi ti ona l wi denine. is rea uir ed at th e co rn er to nro vid e a dua l lert turn ca Dabili tv.
23 Proicc ti ons from buildinos A B C D & E aooea r to be ou tsid e of 1he e n velo □e Answe red PUD -4 Note 4
24 Access ibility to all buildings sha ll comply w ith U BC Chap ter 11 and th e CABO/ANS I A 11 7.1. To be addr esse d during
nermit mocess
• Cummulativ e co mm ents and obse rv ations (since ap 11lic atio n submitt al) 11rep arcd for the ap pli can t lo assist in issue reso htli on.
2 of 8
Cit y of Eng lewood Issue and Sta tus • EXHIBIT 3
Denver Semi nary Planned Uni t Development
Issue ;1a tus
25 1 A tru e proper ty line should separa te townh o us es , th e presence of a co mm on und erground p.irkin g garilge woUid OK: "T Q \ mhorr:e" is
prohibit thi s also, th e wes t end of Buil ding #4, Buildi11A 2 Jnd Bui ldi ng 7 do no t app e,,r lo ha ve .,cccss to a publi c concl on·,1 nium ownership
way as req uir ed by U C Sec ti o n 503.1
26 Build ing enve looes -clarifv : are tcrract!s at e.rad e? OK: ves at r.rade
~7 Bu ildin g Height Summary No les : Answered PUD -4 Notes
From what poi nt is height meas ur ed ? We di srnsserl top o f grade, but 1,2, Dwgs 2,3
#2 "measu red fr om firs t fl oor eleva tion"
ID "meas ured from too Qf_ga rage"
28 Heir.ht of Building F = 167 feet i,•,rev iousl~ not ed) Previously co rr ec ted
29 D efin e/descri be ro oft o~ scree ning meth od Ans we red PUD -4 Note 8
JO Remove nc tes regarding fir st fl oor eleva ti on at Clu bhous e and Buildirrn. A. Done
J I Land Use Summary : Explain chang es in foo tprint areas fr om pr elimin ary st1bmit1 al OK:
)2 Provide breakdown of buildin g foo tprint s PUD -4 Land Use
Summary
)) All wo rk in Public right-of-way (U ni versitv Bo ulev ar d) wi ll need 10 be ner Ci tv o r Engl ewood Standard s. OK
)4 Wi ll ne ed cross se ctions and design sectio ns pf th e st reet for both ex isting and proposed Uni vers ity Bou levard lan e To be addres se d during
addi ti o n. oermil or oces s
)5 Will nee d des ign sec tions of th e proposed str ee t for Uni ve rsit y Bou leva rd lane addition . To be addressed durin g
permit oroc ess
)6 Will need a dedicated ease ment for the new sid ew alk constru ction adja ce nt lo Uni vers it y Bo ul eva rd . To be pr ov ided on
Subdivision Plat
Shee t PU D -6 -Proposed Ons ile Utility Plan Status
)7 Proposed nh as ing o f the onsi te utiliti es shou ld be indica ted. Answ ered PUD -3
)8 This sh eet also shows th at th e pr o pos ed widening on Universi ty northb ound will be takin g traffi c right up to th e OK , wideni ng lo th e eas t
fence o ( th e si nel e famil v resid ent s of th e Cherrv Hill s Height s Subdi vision in Arapah oe Co unt y. no lone er indicat ed.
)9 Pro vid e th e pr opose d co nstru cti on phasing for futur e publi c uliliti es {wa ter and sanitary). Th e Ci ty will not accept
ow nership of ph ase d ut,litl es. All sit e utiliti es mu st be coml)le te prior 10 final acce pt ance.
40 Potab le water lin es must be loo ped prior to se rvice us e. To be addr esse d during
Derrnit mocess
4 1 Hydrant s are requ ired lo be install ed and functional pri or to co nstru cti on. To be addresse d during
□ermil mocess
• Cummul at ive co mments a nd o bse r va ti ons (si nce AJ>Jll ication suh mi tt al) J>re pared for th e AJ>J>li cn nt to ass ist in iss ue resolution.
P • J of R • • •
City of .ewood Issue and Status • • Denver Seminary Pl anned Unit Development
Issue Status
42 Standpipe system shall be in stall ed in every building four sto ri es or more when th e progress of constr ucti on is not To be add ressed during
more than 35 fee t In heieht. See UB C Se ction 904 .5 fo r m eci fi c reauircmcnts. Dcrmi l uroce ss
43 Approved road surfa ce in th e projec t is req uir ed prior to construc tio n. To be addressed during
uermit orocess
44 Fire lanes are required to be sl ated o n th e rec ord ed pla t plan. Provide on Subdivisio n
45 Additional hvdranl is required or it's eauiva lent in th e so uth ea st area of th e sit e.
46 Access to th e res id ential area is very limit ed . Sugges ti on of enl argin g th e stree ts. Come rs of stree t int ersecli ons wi ll Redesigned wi th
not acc ommoda te fire appa ratu s. mo1mt ahlP. curbs to
acc L.1n,noda te eo uioment
Sheet PUD -7 -Proeosed Surface Parking Plan Status
47 The maii kic sks should be located where th e temp parking is being provided, that is o n the o utside of th e proposed ! OK
~a I
48 The para ilel rarkin g propos ed is not accep tabl e. A minimum 7 x 22 foo t stall sh ould be used . People need room I~ 1 P rl, secl 7x20' spaces
parallel par 1;. As a res ult, th e su rfa ce parking is overs tated by abou t 12 parking spaces. (' Th ey did increase th e siz e
of the sta ll lo 7x20', I measu red parallel parki ng on EaSlma n and on Windermere and th e 7x20 appears to ~
adeq uate.)
49 Parall el parking stall s ca nnot be count ed for hand icapped parking unl ess th ey are 4-feel w id er than th e regular OK, par: ll el parking stalls
paralle l parking spaces. To co unt as tru e handi ca pped parallel parking spaces, we must assume that th e driver could are no longe r shown for
be handicapped, and th erefore addi ti onal room mu st be provid ed to all ow a handicapped driver to ge t out of th e handi capped.
ve hi cle and not be in th e traveled wav of the looo rc .. clwav.
Answered PUD -7 Nv~;·t.'7 so The snow storage areas shown in front of drop off areas and the angled park in g wi ll req uire people l o exi t th ei r
ve hi cles and walk out in th e street past th e ends of th e snow storage areas. ·-
51 The proposed snow storage is a concern . I did a rough calculation of just th e pave men t areas proposed on thi s si te. Answe red PUD-7 NO\• 8
I ca lcula te that th ere are approxim ately 78,000 square feet of pav in g. Thi s does not include th e sidewalks th at will
nee d to be shoveled. The snow storage areas proposed calcula tes at 6,330 squar ,• :eel. This means that fo r a run -of-
th e-mill 6-in ch storm, th e snow would have to be pi led 6 fee t hi gh. Snow, when piled in this fas hi on, does not melt
very fa st. This means th ere wi ll be no roo m for addi ti onal storms, a1 ,d th at th e res id ent s an d customers will have to
look at piles of dirty snow al hi gh traffic areas for most of the winter.
Trucking snow to th e Lowry Landfill w ill be a hu ge expense . Bu i th e si te does not eve n lend its elf to stockpi lin g
snow in one or two areas to allow loading of th e tru cks . If th e eco nomics dictate that every squ are foot of thi s si te
must be developed, I hope th at wi nt er abat ement cos ts have been addressed and fa ctored i nt o th e equa tion as well .
I recomm end th at Residential Buildings 7 and 8 be shown as future deve lopment, and all ow th e pro per ty
ow 11 ers/man a2ers 'o 2et a fe el for how th e sit e will fun ction af ter build out occ ur s.
• Cummu lntive comments and observations (si nce appli catio n submi tt al) prepa red fo r the ap pl icant to assist in issue resolution .
• 4 of 8
I
Ci ly of Eng lewood Issue an d Sla t us • EXHIB IT 3
Denver Sem inary Planned Unit Deve lopment
Iss ue Slatu s
52 ! Bicycle Pa rin g: How rr1uc h is being provided? Answe red PUD -7 Nole 7
SJ No handi capp ed parking spac es arc provid ed on 1h ,. resid ential loop. II?/ Residentia l HC spa ces
prov ided below gro und.
Parall el spa ces als o use d
asHC
54 Van acc ess ibl e spaces/ADAAG requirement s Answered PIJD -7 Note
Wh at are th ose req uirement s? 2,3
How do th ey apply here?
I Do th ev affec t the oarki ne soace numb ers? i.e. total
Shee t PUD-8 -Prooosed B 1 /82 Pa rkin e Plan Sta tus --·· 55 Th e pro posed condominium parking ca ll s fo r 466 spac es. Acco rd ing to whJt I hav e seen and hr;:.:rcl abo •1: th e Answ ered PUD -8
residential charac ter o f this deve lo pm ent , th ese condos are going to be pri ced betw een $300,U0U ,1ml $1,000,000 "Co nd ominium Park :ng"
wi th th e hopes of attrac ting executives who are no l in to maintaining yards and prop erty . I am cmi ous ;,s 10 wh ,.•th er
any studie s have beer done lo determi ne what amo unl of parking should be provided for thi s lype o ; ,: ent elc. As
proposed, on ly 1.5 ,,,aces are being provid ed for eac h unit. In rn elro Denver, lhere are approxi mat ely t .7 v. h:cles
per house hold. And when yo u look at house hold in co me s, th e numb er of vehi cle.:. goes up eve n hi gher: u ive n th e
type of clien tele that thi s deve lopme nt is seek ing to attra ct, I have to ques tion whet her adeq uate parking is being
provided . The numb er of one, two, and thr ee bedroo m unit s indi ca ted could help add ress this questi on.
56 Wher e parallel parking is prop osed, lh e spaces need to be 7 x 22 feet. So the afT'oun t of tow nh o use parkin g is Alt ered dimensi cns to 7 x
overstat ed. 20. Park in• # corr ec ted
57 It app ea rs lhat people wi ll ha ve to ba ck 250 feet lo th e ramp for Buildings 3-6 fo r both th e priva te gara ges and th e Add iti onal ga ra ge entries
para ll el parking, at th e end s of th e tow nhous e b•sement pa rk ing . Are th ere go in g to be any pro visions fo r people to in di ca ted
•et turn ed around at th e ends of th ese u .. de rgr ound garae es?
56 Provide Staff a breakdown o f retail USl'S to show how pa rk ing requir emen ts were met. To ta l appears to be 460 Answe red PUD -8 Retail
spaces Parkine note
59 Retail parki ng "illL!Q 400 ... standa rd & 8 HC..." does thi s mea n tha l less than thi s numb er ca n ne !"Ji lt ? Clarified PUD -8
60 To tal res id ential parking appears to be 665 unit s • Cl,1ri fy Clarified PUD-8
6 1 Res id ential Con do park ing : char l shows 466 spa ces !includin g HC) 1,arra live stal es al least 458 Clar ifi ed
• Cummulnti ve comments and o bservations (since n11pli cn ti on sub mitt a l) prepared fo r t he np 11li ca nt h> ass ist in issue r esolut io n.
P ~,.so rs
• • •
City of Aewood Issue and Status •
Denver~minary Planned Unit Development •
Issue
62 N eed so mething to exp lain th e "a t least " # of parkin g spa ces -Ci'.ln mor e be built -and how many mor e
63 Residential ga rages are "primarily" und ergrmmd , height "va ri es" -to what degr ee -thi s co uld affec t ove rall heigh! of
resid ential building ove r the ga ra ges . Retail ga rag es are "full y" und erground . What's th e difference bet ween th e
eara•es?
Sheet PUD -9 -Pronosed Pedestrian Circulation Plan
64 Where new sidewalks are proposed al ong Hampd en and Univ ersi ty, if th ey ar e atta ched to th e back of curb, th en
th ev shall be 6 feet wi de , whe re deta ched, th el mai ~e 5-fee t wide.
65 Wher e sidewa lks are adj acent to angled ,,arking, th ey wil l need to be 7 fee l wid e lo comp ensa te fo r vehicles
overhan•in• the sidewalk.
66 A cross wa lk should be shown across Universit y Blvd . 011 the north side of th e interse cti on to f;et bus rid ers across
Uni ve rsitv to thi s deve lonrnen l and Seminaru Site resid ents inatr o ns to th e no ri:1 bo und bus .
67 Pleas e show th e no rthb ound bus sto p on th e north side of th e sig nal ize d inters ec tion . Th ere is an ex istin g 60 fool
long concrete bus pad in Univ ersity Blvd . This pad w,11 be in th e wrong pla ce if th e pro posed wid en ing is permitted .
Thi s nad should be relocated to th e new bus ston .
Sheet PUD -10 -Pronosed Landscane Plan
68 Lands cape area was 12 1,262 on pr elim and is now 18 1,5 11. Explain in crease. What does thi s includ e
69 What does 50"/o "MA " mean 1
Sheet PUD -11 -Pronosed Sienaec/fencin• Plan
Pe rim eter fencin•: 6' -1 O" where/how do es it varu
70 Signag e
How mu ch signag e permill ed l size of signs/area
H ow man\J si 0 ns are nermilted?
71 Sig na ge Lege nd
Ar e sig ns for individual tenan ts anywhere o n buildings
Are signs 1, 4 & 5 joint signs
How many of each sign is permitt ed
How is building fr o nta ge det ermined
Siens 6 -9 ar e not indicated on th e nlan . I-l ow man v siz e
72 Si•na oe: refers to 16-4-19 -that 's th e old Co de. ?16-6-13 : Sion s, as amend ed.
Status
Clarifi ed PUD-8
OK: ba se d on grade and
th at retail I \I floor will be
at one leve l
OK
OK
OK
OK , widening to th e eas t
no longer considered.
Answered PUD-10
Leoend It em 5
OK : tvoo for maximum
OK:
Clarifi ed PUD -11 , Tabl e
and notes
Cla rifi ed PUD -11 , Tables
and not es
Wordirw Modifi ed
• Cummulative comments and observations (since a11plication suhmittal) prepared for the applicant to assist in issue resolution .
r ··•< 6of H
City of Eng lewood Issue and Status • EXHIB IT 3
Denv er Seminary Planned Unit Development
Issue Stat us
Traffic Studv Status
73 In Part II , Se ction C. Tra ffi c Volum es and Ope rati o ns -At th e Uni versi ty/Hampd en int ersec tion , th e AM Peak OK
crea tes a LO S F, whil e th e PM Peak operates at LOS E, eve n th ough th e total traffi c int o the int ersec ti o n is abo ut 7
percent grea ter in th e PM ve rsus th e AM . This deg radati on in th e leve l o f servi ce appea rs to be th e res ult of th e
southbou nd to eas tb ound traffi c vo lum es in th e AM Peak. There is not suffi cie nt tim e ava il ab le to handl e th e vo lum e
now and , acc ordin g to th e traffi c stu dy num be rs; thi s is go in g in crease by 2 1 percent (33 percen t in creas e in th e PM
Peak}. Th ere is no que stion th at to help to all ev iate th e additi o nal deman ds caused by th is deve lop ment , additiona l
widening will nee d to be provided in orde r to crea te th e opportunity for a du al left turn movement for so uthb ound
U ni ve rsit y,
74 111 Part 111, Secti on B. Trip Generatio n -Re tail trip s we re re duce d by 75 perce nt! This is huge! A bett er case needs OK
to be made for thi s type of red ucti on th an "ba se d on a sit e loc ation adjacent to two hi gh vo lum e arterials and
conversations wit h City staff." 111 additi on, if a redu ctio n fr om ITE trip ge nerati on fi gur es i, go in g to be pu r .ued, th en
it is necessary to separate the office us e from th e sho pping cen ter, sin ce "In ternal capture" and "pass -by trip s" wo n't
be a fac tor for th e office use.
75 In Appendi x B. Leve ls of Servi ce -Pl eas e provide a qu eue ana lysis for th e propo,"e"t1 Uni vers ity/Sit o Access si gna l. Queuing Ana lysis
provided by FHU under
seoarate cover
76 The rev is ed Traffic Study needs to be cl ea ned up to re0e ct some of th e changes th at 1,;v,;--.e<•n mad e to the site FHU responding by lett er.
plan. For in stanc e:
1. O n page 17 It still refer s to an au xiliary lane that ex tends fr om th e Uni •.rm t:f ac,.c.s to Hampde n, which is no Updat ed Tr affic Study
longe r th e cas e. wit h all edits and
2. O n pa ge 18, Table 4. has southbo und storage length s for the so uthbound ri ght turn lan e ont o Hampden th at modificati o ns requ ir ed
are not cor re ct. prior to City Co un ci l
). Fi2ure 9 does not renect the revised wideninR and lan e confiRurati ons that are beinR proposed. Publi c He arin•
rrelimi narv Drainaee Studv
77 In Part 111 Se ction D. Hydrau lic Criteria -The street and ;nle t capacities hav e been ca lculated usi ng a ma ximu m Carr oll & Lang e to address
gutt er de pth of I foot for th e major storm . Is thi s really possibl e give n th e numb er of dri veways th at go down to in Final Draina ge Report
2ara2 es in bas ements ?
78 In Appen di x B -Hydrauli c Calc ulati ons -Th e release rates fr om th e <l,•te n1i o11 pond shou ld be redu ce d by th e areas Ca rr oll & Lan ge to addr ess
o f th e deve lo pment th at wi ll no t drain to th e oond . in Fin al DrainaRe Reoort
79 O n th e Drain age Plan, th e two sump loc ati ons ar e opp osite drivewcivs th ::.i ~o i~t o ba se mer:it leve l parking . Ex tr er Carr oll & Lang e to addr ess
care should be tak en to add ress emerl!encv ove rO ows in th e_~P ::; cd~ ~o make sur e ba se ment s ar e not Oooded. , Fi nal Drainage Report
• Cu mmulative commc uts and observat ions (since applicatio n submitta l) prepared for the app li cant to assist in Issue reso lu tion,
P·"1c 7 of 8
• • •
City of Englewood Is sue a nd Status • EXHIBIT 3
Denver Se minary Planned Unit Development
Issu e Status
80 Thi s dev elo pment is being proposed in phases. Are th ere any dr ai nage impr oveme nt s that ar e go in g to be phas ed/ Answ ered on PUD-3
Other Issues And Concerns
81 Are we, and is th e Planning Com mission going to be OK with approving a PUD that ca ll s for underground 11arki ng Answ ered PUD -8
with C1 ut actuall~ seeing what th e parkinR layou t looks like /
82 Has the developer done any soils inves tiga ti on to determin e whe re the gro un d water tabl e is l Since th is proposal is Lett er regarding high
to •o down two levels for underRround parkinR. Rroundwa ter may be an issue . 2rou11dwater or ov ided
8) Mis ce ll aneous typos and other edi ts as discussed with Dean Foreman on 5/24/04 (S ee R~dlin e ) Corrected
84 Subdivisi on and dedication of publi c-ri ght-away requires Major Subdi vision To be addressed by
separate oroc ess
• Cummulatlve comments aml ob serv111io 11 s (since a1111lication sub mitt al) prepared for the applicant to assist in issue resolu !ion .
D--e 8of8 • • •
Public Works and Developme.
COMMUNITY OEVE LOPMENT OEPARTMENT
B
107J0 E. Brfo1m. .:,od Avenue , Su lie 100
Centenn ial, Colorado 8011 2-JSSJ
Phone : 720-SH-6500
Fa.x : 303 -791-J201
www.co.arupnhor .co.us
publlcworlts@co.arap11h0t .co .us
DAVID M. SCHMIT, P.E.
May 17, 2004
Tricia Langon, Senior Planner
City ofEnglewood
f \,mm unity Development Deparme nt
! 1\00 E·.1glewood Parkw ay
fa igleHood . Colorado 80 ! I G
ENG ~:1'/00 D. CO LORACO
RF', Rezoning Application Referral for Denver Seminary Urban Housing Village
DeM Ms. I angon,
Arapahoe County Engineering Staff appre.:iates the opportunity to review this case, and we thank you
Olrrctor
for your referral request. The Engineering Staff would like to comment on the following issues . •
Ac!:ti•;p nally, Arapahoe County Engineering Staff would appreciate continued involvement in this
project as it progresses .
I. Please label the right-of-way (ROW) rm the plans. Existing ROW for University should
include the 40 feet of ROW in Englewood, as well as the 40 .34 feet of ROW in Arapahoe
County.
2. Arapahoe County Engineering Staff would like to request construction plans or a conceptual
design that include the propos ed and existing laneage on University. Additionally, we would
appreciate reviewing these plans as early as they become available.
3. Arapahoe County's Transportation Pla.'1 (March 2002) recommends that University be an
Urban Principal Arterial with 144 feet of ROW. This would adequately account for six
through lanes and a raised left tum median or left tum lane(s). The number of travel lanes and
median is warranted because the travel volume on University is greater than 45,000 vpd, as
found in the Transportation Plan . We realize th at 144 feet of ROW is impractical for this
stretch of University, but additional ROW should be dedicated in order to allow for six
through lanes and a raised median, along with the necessary auxiliary lanes .
4. The Transportation Plan also shows the projected 2020 daily traffic demand on University
south of Hampden to be 46 ,450 vpd. However, the Traffic Impact Study (TIS) shows th e
long-term traffic volume on University south of Hampden to be 28,700 vpd. Th e
Transportation plan shows the 2020 dail y travel demand on Hampden east of Universi ty to be
&UILOIP.'<,
107 JO E. 8rh1rwood Aw. Sit. 100
Ct'ntl'nn l.11 , CO 90112 •185]
Phont': 720-874 •6600
Fu:: lOJ-798 -6054
ENGINEERING
107JO E. Brl.mYOOd Ave. Ste . 100
Cen tennt•I. CO &011 2-JUJ
Ph orw : 720·&71 ·6.SOO
F.u: lOJ-791·1201
Pl.
107 lu l. ·wood Ave. Ste. 100
Cent en n 80112 ·J&5J
Phone: 720-0 71·6650
Fu: JOl·79S -60H
•
• 5. 76,800, and west of Univer,;ity to be 78 ,400. There is again a difference in th e TIS traffic
volwnes, wh ich show the travel demand east of University to be 66,500 vpd, and west of
Univer.;ity to be 68,400 vpd . Th ese fig,.ircs seem dramatically different. Such increased travel
demand co uld greatly affect the proj ec ted Leve l of Services (LOS).
6. Engineering Staff is concerned with the spacing from the proposed University access signal
and the ex isting Univer,;ity/Hampden signal. It appear.; that the spacing will be approximately
4 I 5 feet centerline to centerline. Arapahoe Co unty Engineering Staff would like to see a
sim ulated model of how the traffic signals will work togeth er from University/Hampden to
Univer,;ity/Dartmouth. The Floyd Ave. and Floyd Place inter.;ec tions should also be shown in
the modeling .
7. The proposed traffic signal at the Univer,;ity access will likely be panly withir the Arapahoe
County ROW. Typically, the County requires a 30 x 30 foo t Public Utility Easement (PUE)
for signal s. This will need to be coordinated with and agreed to by the County. Additionally,
Arapahoe County Staff would like to propo se that Engl ewood accept the re sponsib ility of
mai ntenance .
8. Please include all intersections in the vicinity of the site within the TIS . This should help
ascertain how surrounding deve lopments might be affect ed. The East Floyd Ave. and E.
• Flo yd Place intersections with University sho uld be analyzed within the study.
•
9. The TIS propo ses that a University northbound left tum lane will be 265 feet in length,
including 65 feet of taper length and 200 feet of storage . Will this amount of taper allow for
vehicles to properly slow down and maneu ver into the left tum lane? Additionally, it seems
that there is a po ss ibility for vehicles stopped at th e proposed Univers ity access signal to stack
into the University/Hampden intersection , causing further delays or problem s. Please add ress
this issue .
I 0. The TIS shows the existing taper on the eas t side of University is proposed to be moved about
325 feet north. Where will this additional land come from? Staff would like to recommend
that any land necessary for the creation of a new tum lane into the development should co me
from the west side ofUniver.;ity .
11 . The plans show a crosswalk will be built at the pro po sed University access from the west to
the eas t side ofl/niversity. We reco mmend the proposal include the construction of sid ew alk
along the east side of University, north of the access to Floyd.
12 . How is it possible that the 500 additional trip s ( 1700 actual new daily trips) will be generated
from the allow ed zoning, but the net change in the Ai'vl peak hour trip s will be reduced by 40?
Additionally, how is it possible that travelers might experience less delay at the intersec tio n of
University/Hampden than if nothing were done in the area?
13 . Because so much of the pt.,.., is conceptual at this point, Arapahoe County Engineering would
appreciate remaining as a referral agency throughout the process .
14. To what extent will the details of this project be coordinated with surrounding neighbors?
Please feel free to call me if you have any questions.
Ashley Byerley
Engineer
Arapahoe Coun l;,
Public Works and Jk •1opment
Cc : Charles V. Haski ns, J\.l an ager, Land Dev elopment Services
AABRDR
•
•
•
. Arapahoe
• ~ :?;!~;,2'
•
•
IUIWING
Public Works and Development
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
~
Ms. Tri shn Langon ~
Ma)' 18 . 2004
107 JO E. Brl.1rwood Avenue. Suite roo
Ccnrcnnl.1 1, Co lorado 80112-3853
Phone : 720-87-f-6S00
Fax : 303-79 ◄·3 20 1
wwiv.co.arapahor .co.us
publlcworkJ@co .a rapuhouo.us
City of fnglewood e1;:;~,1·.c:J CG Co ADO
Community Development Depanmen,__ _____ ----~ 011\110 \t, SCHMIT, P,E.
I 000 Englewoo d Parkway
Eng lewoo d, CO 80 I I 0
RE: Ca se 2004-05-Denver Seminary Rezoning
Dear Ms. Langon:
Thank yo u fo r the opportunity to comment on the above-re fere nced project. Arapahoe
Cour.ty ha s carefully reviewed the propos al to rezone the 11 41-acre Denver Sem inary
Site from R-3 Hi gh Den sity Residential to Plann ed Un it De ve lopment . The County does
not supp ort this propo se d rezonin g and has ~,e following co ncerns :
► The mass and sc ale of the propo:,ed de ve lopm ent is not in harm ony with the
existing adjacent uses. The proposed devel opment see ms incompatible ; the sca le,
massin g, and density are o ut of proporti on wi th the adjacent uses. This prop ose d
devel opment is out of con te xt ; it is an urban development in a suburban setti ng.
The bui lding heights should avoid the percepti on that individ ual buildings are out
of sca le with the size of their lots or with neighb orin g buildings , and should avoid
unnec essary snow shadow in g of neighb oring buildin gs and public rights -of-way.
► The prop ose d 166-foo t setback fr om th e west prop erty line fo r the 179-foot
building will create a sig nific ant solar shadow on the prop ert ie s to the west and
north . The County requests that a shadow anal ys is, wh ich accounts for all day-
light hour s and prov id es a repre se ntati ve sa mple fo r all seaso ns, be co mpleted to
demonstrate the affect of the propose d multi-story buildings on the adjacent
properti es. The shadow anal ysis should also include the impact to the
neighborh oo d across University to the cast of this proposed development.
► According to the Minor Modifica ti on de sc ripti on on PUD-1, an increase in the
maxi mum height is all owe d up to 5%. Thi s provi sio n would allo w the height of
the building to be in cr eased to 187 .9S-feet. Thu s result ing in an eve n greater so lar
shadow impact on the adjacent prop erti es.
► Arapahoe County reques ts that an analysi s of the surioun ding den sitie s be
completed to demonstrate compatibility . The surr ounding densities are
significantly less than the 30 .67 dwe llin g units per acre. A comparison of the
ENGINEERING PU.NNING
Dlrrctor
10730 E. Brt .uwood A~. Stt. 100
Ccntcnnl,I. CO 801 I 2·l8!1J
Phone: 720-871·6600
107 JO E Br i.uwood Ave. Ste. 100
Ccntcnn l.al . CO 80112 -J85l
Phone · 720-8H-6SOO
107)0 E. Brl:mvood Ave, Sir. 100
Crn1rnnt.1I , CO 80112 ·)85)
~;.;;_'~'s'J:6~ F.ax: JOJ· 798-6054 F .. : JOJ·Hi ·J201
adj acent densiti es wo uld prov id e a more detail ed anal ys is of th e adjacent uses and
ma y addres s so me of th e in co mpatibili ty iss ue s.
► There app ears to be a very small amount o f open space for such a den se
developmelll and it appear s th at seve ral of the areas designated as open space
would not normall y quali fy as open spac e. Sp ecifically, the pri vote terrac es, mail
kio sks, and the front entry stoo ps , should not go toward m ,•'lnil the open space
requirements . The pri vate terraces and fr ont entry ,to ops are private spaces and
thus should not be included in th e un obstructed open space requirements for the
overall de vel o pm ent. The mail ki os ks are structures and thus should not be
considered in the unob structed open space calculati ons. For compari son, the
Coun ty"s Land Dev e lopment Code require s that R-PH (high density)
de vel opments provide 35% un obstructed open space .
► A more detailed anal ysi s of the traffic imp ac ts should be comp leted . Alth ough
the traffic stud y indi ca tes th at the traffic fo r the pro po sed re zo ning will be le ss
than what wo uld be exp ected fo r the exi sting zo nin g, the exi sting Den ve r
Seminary pre se nt s a sign ificantl y lower traffic imp ac t than what wa s anticipa ted
with the exi sting zo ning . Therefore, any increa se d traffic pr JY ,~d for this
alrea dy di ffi cult traffic situ at ion will greatl y impact the adjac en t res ident s.
► The Co un ty has re viewed Secti on 16-2-7(H)3.a of the Englewoccl Unifi ed
De velopm ent Code (effecti ve February 23 , 2004 ), which sp ecifi ,•, !hat "the
resultin g rezoned property will not ha ve a significant negative impact on those
propenie s surro undi ng the re zo ned area and that the general public health , safety ,
and we lfa re of the co mmunity are prote cted." Ara pahoe County belie ve s that the
general wel far e of the surrounding co mmunity has not be en tak en into
consid erati on with this propose d re zo nin g and tha t thi s proposa l will hav e a
signifi ca nt ne gati ve impact 0n the surroundin g propeni es in te 1"'11 S of solar shadow
and increa sed traffi c volume s.
► The En glewoo d Unifi ed Devel opment Code al sc sta tes th at rews ';:,•, "shall be
consistent with the Comprehen siw Pl an.' Inc Engl ewoo~ Cai, ·nsi·, . Plan
discu ss es Re sid ential Area s: Areas ol' Chunge and th e imp onanc • ;, a,w
residen tial inv es tment s and housing :·ehab s" be desi gned to ''be comp atibl e and
consi stent with surro undin g res id entiai neighborh oo ds . Re sidential des ign s
should refle ct the exi stin g character of the neighb orh ood" (p g 65 , Resid ential
Area s: Areas o f Change). Ass uming that the interse ction of Univ ersity and
Hampd en is desi g11 ated as a re sidential ''Area of Change," the Coun ty be lieves
that thi s propose d re ,oi;;ng is inc onsistent and i, oatib le "ith th e surr oundin g
re sid ential nei ghb r .-hood s in term s of building h, .,, ma ssi ng of structures and
the rati o of height to set back , and that this proposed developm ent do es not reflect
the ex isting character of th e "ei ghborho od.
► Upon re vie w o f th e revis ed Englewoo d Unified Devel oi, .. 1ent Code, the exi stin g
zo ni ng of R-3 is not a curre nt zo ne di stri ct in this revised co de. Fro m the tabl e
P11gc 2 of 4
•
•
•
•
•
provided on page 142, it appears that a zoning designation ofMU-R-3-A would
be a similar zoning class ifi cation. As such, MU-R-3 allows a maximum height of
32-feet and that a zoning designation ofMU-R-3-B would allow a maximum
height of 60-fcet. This proposed rezoning more than doubles the height that
would be allowed in the MU-R-3-A or MU-R-3-B zoning . Arapahoe County
firmly believes that this proposed rezoning is greatly in excess of what would be
considered reasonable and allowable with the existing zoning.
► The County feels that this proposed development docs not meet or exceed the
l~vels of public amenities othc:wisc applicable under the Englewood Unified
Development Code nor does the existing zoning ofR-3 create a situation in which
the property cannot be developed or that no reasonable economic use of the
property can be achieved (Section 16-2-7(8)(2). A rezoning, according to the
Eng lewood Code, must meet one of the following criteria :
a) That the proposed development will exceed llle development quality
standards , levels of public amenities , or levels of design innovation
otherwise applicable under this Title , and would not be possible or
practicable under a standard zone di strict with Conditional Uses or with a
reasonable number of Zoning Variances or Administrati ve Adjustments;
or
b) That the property cannot be devel oped, or that no reasonable economic use
of the property can be achieved under the existing zoning, even through
the use of Conditional Uses or a reasonable numhcr of Zoning Variances
or Administrative Adjustments .
► Neighborhood meetings should be held for all surrounding neighborhood groups,
regardless of whether or not a formal/active Home Owner 's Association exists for
these gro ups.
► All non-permitted uses shown in the Allowed Uses Tab le should be removed from
the cover sheet. It is confusing and the extraneous information should be
removed .
► Existing building footprints for Hampden Hills and other odjacent properties
should be shown. The distance from the property lines sho uld also be included.
► Proposed building elevations were not included with the referral packet.
Proposed bui ldin g elevations should be provided . The building architecture
should contain some similarities with the existing residential deve lopments .
► On the PUD -4, guest parking is limit ed to 12 space s. However, on sheets PUD-7
& ' a total of 109 guest spaces arc listed . l'lcasc r 1arify .
► The plans show that 52 surface parking stalls will be provided for the office/retail.
Staff und erstands that a large amount of parking wi ll be provided underground,
Paac J of4
but co nfus io n for retailers may ari se due to parking conflicts with re sidents and
gues t parking.
Overall, Arapahoe County believes City of Englewood and the De ve loper should take
into consideration the welfare of th e ex isting , adjacent neighborhoods, especially with
regard to compatibility, solar shadows, height , and traffic and that a detailed analysis
should be provided that addre sses the allowable uses , densities , setbacks, building
heights , and open space requirements for the existing R-3 zoning and the propos ed PUD
zoning. This side -by-si de comparison is es se ntial for the public to make an informed
decision regarding the proposed rezoning request.
Arapahoe County is not opposed to the density, understanding the current zoning .
However , it is unc lear from the proposed plans how the building design and massing
work with the surrounding neighborhoods in terms of integration and transition . More
details are needed to evaluate the proposal. lt appears that the de ve loper is attempting to
"sta ir-s tep " the project up from the perimeter of the site to accomplish the transition.
Howe ve r, such a transition from a majori ty of single-family homes adjacent to the
property line to 52-foot town homes on the perimeter of the site is not a logical transition
nor does i1 ,flee t the "character of the neighborhoods " generally surrounding the
property . T. ~ Waterford high rise to the west is not represen tative of the general
neighborhw ·' The 3-s tory Marks Multi-family proj ect further to the west is more
representativs of multi -fa mily in the surrounding area. The Coun ty is concerned th at the
site design does not integrate or provide a logical transition and is inc ompatible and
inconsistent with the general character of the area.
The County believes that thi s propose d de ve lopment raise s concerns for the adjacent
communit ies and that these co nc ern s warrant a re-e va luati on of the propose d re zo ning .
Arapahoe County is coo rdinating our co nc erns with Cherry Hill s Villa ge and the City of
Denve1 through meetings and written correspondence.
The County look s forward to subsequent referral s for this project. lf yo u have any
questi ons , or require additional inform ati on, please feel free to contact thi s office at 720-
874-6650.
~~
Carol Kuhn
Planner 11
A111pahoc County Boud ofCounl)' Commi ssione rs
Susan Cona way, Planning and Zoni ng Oiv151on Man,gcr
Mdiua Kcndnck, P11nnin1 Progr1 m Manager
Chuck Haskins, LOS Proar.un Mangagcr
Ash ley Bye rley, LOS Enginttt I
Bren Wincnbcrg, Community Ocvcl opmcnl Oircc101. Chert)' Hills Villai;c
P11gc 4 of4
•
•
•
•
Cherry Hill s Heights Water and Sanitation District
City of Englewood
Community Development
1000 Englewood Parkway
Englewood, CO 8 I 620
Tricia Langon, Senior Planner
Dear Ms. Langon :
In response to the City of Englewood's r~ferral regarding the Denver Seminary
redevelopment projec t, we are providing comments on behalf of Cherry Hills Hd1 ;hts Water and
Sanitation District (CHHWSD), which serves the Cherry Hills Heights neighborhor>d i..'1
unincorporated Arapahoe County (CHH-A). We appreciate this opportunity.
We would like to be able to support the project and members of our neighborhood have
been working with the developer toward that end . We have not yet reached a definitive
agreement , but we hope to continue our discussion, on the mitigation of potential imp acts.
As part of this effort, we believe it is nece ss ary to fully assess the nature o f the project and
its likely impacts . We respectfully request that the City ofEnglewoo.i cari fully analyze the
project 's impacts before acting on it . We have the following concerns .
Traffic
Traffic is a major concern for us . We have attached a letter prepared by Kathleen Krager , a
traffic engineer and expert that neighbors from CHH-A and other nearby neighborhoods have
retained. As noted by Ms . Krager , we feel the latest Felsburg Holt & Ullevig traffic study has
several flaws and problems . We are cor.~erned that, as long as these flaws and problems remain,
traftic impacts from the yroject will no t be adequately addressed
Mer.-.'.,ers of our neighborhood and the Cherry Hills Heights Denver neighborhood (CHH-
D) have met with the developer and the architect to explore our concerns. These items include
traffic calming on Floyd Avenue, pede st rian access across University, possible snow and ice build
up due to the project shadow at Floyd Avenue and University , traffic noise and the addition ofa
three quarter turn access off of Hampden into the proposed development. We asked the developer
to consider funding mitigation measures for traffic on Floyd, a sound wall on the east side of
University and to pursue greate r access to the Seminary from Hampden. No resolution was
reached on these issues, but we hope to continue discussions .
Page t of 5 Pages
Other Project Impacts
We urge the City to fully characterize and analyze the following and to require appropriate
mitigation/changes in the plan :
Street-side impression. The scale, density, and intensity of proposed uses are
unprecedented in this area. A development of this _, scale wii, alter the character and
image of the area and of the City of Englewood. The preliminary and conceptual
architectural details that have been suggested are indeed ofa quality nature. However, to
th,': pass ing motorist or pedestrian, the detail of the perimeter site plan may have the
greatest impact. Specifically, the proposed ,·,,tbacks from University Boulevard appear to
be minimal , the proposed sidewalk is attached and fairly narrow, and the depth for street•
side landscaping appears to be very limited. We urge the City to consider the impression
these elements, combined with the immediately adjacent three-story facades. We believe
increasing setbacks and enhancing the experience at the human sca le would be a positive
step .
•
Increased noise . Sources : (a) traffic noise reflected fro;n new walls and tall structures
along University with min imal setbacks; (b) traffic noise caused by vehicle acceleration •
and deceleration at the proposed traffic signal on University; and (c) noise produced by
activities and ver.ues within the property.
Loss of prjvacy , light, sense of space, and neighborhood character due to tightly packed
use of property and tall structures.
The developer shared a shadow study with members of our neighborhood on May
12, 2004 . The shadow study shows that , at certain times of the day , the proposed
buil dings will cast shadows on properties and streets on the east side of University
as far north as Floyd Avenue and as far east as South Columbine Circle . We note
that the shadow study did not include certain hours of the late afternoon and early
evening when the sun is still above the horizon. At these tirn~s. we would expect
shadows to the east and northeast to be even longer. In addit io n to shadow impact s
on neighbors within CHH-A, we are concerned with the potential for proj ec t
shadows to cause or increase snow and ice buildup along University Boulevard,
including the intersection of Floyd and University.
We believe the City and the public will not fully understand plan impacts on
neighborhood character wiless the City requires and evaluat es comprehensive
visual analyses of the proposed plan from outside the Seminary property. These
analyses should include sca led sections and elevations, ground-level perspe cti ve s,
and visual simulations accurately showing the proposed buildings within the •
existing landscape .
Page 2 of 5 Pages
•
•
•
Among other impact s, the proposed towers will block a clas sic view of Mt. Evans
from Floyd Avenue at the eastern boundaryofCHH-A. Englewood and non-
Englewood re side nts enjoy the view as they walk or jog within our neighborhood.
The developer has indicated some willingness to analyze the project's impacts on
this view corridor , and we welcome that analy sis. The developer has also
indicated that majo r design changes will not be possible.
Light pollution. We urge the City to analyze and require restrictions on project Lighting to
protect surrounding neighbors. Neigh borhood m,·mbers have discussed some of these
issues with the developer. The developer has indkated that no wash lighting or up-or
down-lighting of the towers is planned .. We would like to see this codified within the
plan . We also reque st that all project lighting be shielded and low-intensity lighting be
used. Another potential source of light pollution is vehicles exiting the project at night ,
whose headlights will shine through the existing fence(s) of nei ghbors that Live to the east
of the j)roposed project entry on University. The project will probably generate a
significantly greater amount of nighttime trips than the Seminary has.
Signa~e. The plan should provide greater detail regarding signage . The plan cross-
references the Englewood sign code. We ha ve nn• · · time to review the sign code but
suspect it allows types and sizes of sig ns with whit,. ,e would no t be comfortable.
Potential impacts are significant due to the Limited distance between single-family
residences on the east side of University and the proposed commercial/retail structure on
the west side ,,f University.
Construction impacts. There are a number of potential impacts during the construction
phase: security , noise. dust , blowing trash/debris. parking, construction traffic , lane
closures , hazard o u.s materials, etc. It is essential that these impacts be mitigated .
Mitigation sho,tld ;ndude the following : (a) restrict construction hours to 7 -5:30
weekdays, 9 -5 Saturday s, with no construction on Sunday s or holida ys; (b) require dail y
removal of deb ri s/trash fr om the east side of University Boulevard; (c) require that all
construction parking be on-site; (d) require sweep ing of both sides of University
Boulevard on a weekly basi s; (e) require security p.strol of surrounding neighborhood s, not
just the Seminary property ; (f) to the extent possible, require that traffic improvements bt,
completed at the initiation of construction; (g) req·Jire installation of walls at st art of
construction ; (h) require notification of surrounainz neighborhood s before demolition of
any Seminary structures . Members ofour neighborhood discu sse d so me <'fthese items
with the developer, who has indicated a willingness to consider appropriate restrictions for
contract(s) with builder (s). Howewr , we have not couclude d the se discu ss ion s .
P,ge J of 5 Pages
PUD language and the need fo r adequate restrict ions within the plan. Additi onal
re strictions shou ld be included in th e plan to protec t surrounding neighbors, parti cularl y in
th e eve nt project ownership changes. Neig hborhoo d members have discussed so me of
the se iss ue s with th e de velo per and will be provi ding suggeste d language to the de ve loper.
Among others, we believe the fo llowin g restrictions would be appropriate : (a) prohibit
fast -food restaurant s such as McDonalds, Wendy 's, Burger King, Taco Bell , etc .; (b)
prohibit 24-hour convenience stores like Seven-Eleven, 24 -hour groc try use , and any
other 24-bour uses; (c) prohibit reflecti ve glass and reflective meta l as buil ding materi als;
(d) require des ign ati on of the co lor scheme on the plan ; (e) to the extent possible,
represe ntations re garding materials and architecture should be co dified as part of the PUD
plan through inclu sio n of elevati on dr aw ing s. If not , the Cit y should prov ide for a later
public process for the,se elements of the deve lopment.
We believe severa l impac ts fr o m the project co uld be mitigated through construction ofa
masonry sound wa ll on the east side o f Unive rsit y Boul evard along the wes tern perim eter of
CHH-A . Repre se nt atives o f CHH -A an d CH H-D have propose d thi s to th e de ve loper, but so far
no agreement has been reach ed. We believe such a requirement wo uld not be unre aso nable, or
unpreced ent ed. It would likel y provi de a signi fica nt benefit to the de ve lope r as we ll , as it would
allow creat ion of a cc ·sistent , more appealing visual image along Un ive rsity. and almost certainly
mak e it easie r to se ll unit s within the project. The de ve lope r has ex presse d a willingness to bear •
the lion share of the cost to "beautify University Bl vd". Creatin g a type of corri dor wit h masonry
wall s and land sca pin g on bot h sides of Uni ve rsit y co uld acco mpli sh thi s. We are very int erested
in hi s proposal and would like to funh er di scuss his visio n.
We wou ld also like to take this o pportunity to mention so me of the positive steps the
develo er has tak en. for exa mple , the lat est plan includes a pedestria n cro sswa lk at the proposed
signal on Unive rsit y, allow ing int egra tion of neighborhoods , which should be a key element of
any de ve lopment. Another example : instead of se eking to use the right-o f-way on the east side
of Uni ve rsity to create space for left -tum lane s, the developer 's current plan uses the ri ght -o f-way
on the west side of Uni ve rsity and a portion of the Seminary property to make traffic
improvement s at Uni versi ty an d Hampd en. It has been very helpful for neighborho od member s to
have the opportunit y to share id eas and co ncerns wi th the deve loper an d architect. We hope that
dial og can continue.
Page 4 of l Pa ges •
•
Sewer
Our main concern here is that sewer improvements for the project not interfere with our
lines or level of service . We are unable to determine whether the main line for the project will tie
into the same main line that serves our neighborhood. It would be helpful if your e gineering
department could answer this question for us . It is imperative that lines for the project be
adequately sized , and that downstream lines be able to handle combined flows from the project
and upstream neighborhoods .
Thank you for your consideration of these comments.
If you should have any questi0ns , please do not hesitate to contact us.
~:incerely,
• Cherry Hills Heights Water and 'ianitJtion District
•
John Temple , President
(303) 692-8801
Me lissa Grossman, Treasurer
(303) 788-9599
cc : Commis sioner Susan Beckman, Arapahoe County
Arapahoe County Engineering Department
Arapahoe County Planning Department
attarl-..... Pnt
Page 5 of 5 Pages
Odell Issac , Secretary
(303) 639-9376
n Street , Suite 210
Colorado 80203-31 54
6-2626 FAX (3 03) 446-0270
Mr. Jonah Staller
3345 South Columbine Circle
Englewood , Colorado 80113-7606
303 762 1081
RE : Traffic Review of Propose •
Colorado
Dear Jonah :
~r Seminary Urban Housing Village in Englewood ,
459ljs.doc
Per your request , I have reviewed The Denver Seminary Urban Housing Village Traffic
Impact Study . prepared Felsburg Holt & Ullevig , April 2004 . The purpose of this traffic
•
study appears to be an attempt to prove that the new development will have minimal tfa~c •
impacts , rather than to identify traffic impacts and recommend needed improvements. The
study contains questionable assumptions and numerous errors . I have listed my concerns
below :
Existing Traffic
Existing traffic counts were modified to remove the existing seminary traffic from the
background traffic . While this concept is acceptable, several errors are present. The peak
period of site-generated traffic should be consistent with the peak period of the adjacent
street. Therefore , the 7:00AM to 8:001-\M driveway count should be used rather than the
8:00AM to 9:00AM count. Also , the seminary traffic should have been counted by
direction , or a directional distribution should have been considered . The Felsburg Holt &
Ullevig (FHU) study assumes that all traffic from the Seminary uses the intersection of
University/Hampden . The cumulative effect of these errors results in under-estimating
existing background traffic at the University/Hampden intersection by 43 vehicles in the AM
peak hour and 21 vehicles in the PM peak hour.
Wh at is of more concern to me is the discussion on Page 4 about how low the traffic
volumes were at the Seminary on the day of the counts . The activity level at the site is
meaningless to this exercise , since increased traffic at the site would have resulted in a
co rresponding increase in traffic at adjacen t intersections . This is a basic concept in traffic •
analysi s, and I am concerned that such a simple concept was misinterpreted in the st udy .
•
•
•
Mr. Jona h Sta ller
Background Traffic Projections
May 17, 2004
Page 2
The FHU traffic study uses a 0.2 percent annual growth for a twenty-year period. This
growth rate was attributed to the DRCOG (Denver Regional Council of Governments)
traffic model. Th is is a very low growth rate . The growth rate which my office assumes for
in-fill areas is 2 percent annual growth (ten times as great). I have requested a review by
the DRCOG Staff as to the appropriateness of this very low growth rate .
Site-Generated Traffic
Th e study uses ITE trip generation rates to estimate site-generated daily and peak hour
trips for the proposed development. Wh ile I agree with this technique , I do not agree with
the land use categories that we re assumed in the traffic study . The study uses a shopp ing
center land use code to describe the retail area . The ITE land Use Code for Shopping
Centers does not categorize grocery-store-anchored centers as a shopping center .
Instead , site-generated trips should be estimated using the land use categories for grocery
store , specialty retail and restaurant uses . I have attached a trip generation table based
on the proposed uses . This trip generation estimate is considerably higher than the FHU
trip generation .
Trip Reductions
The aggressive trip reductions used in the FHU study are of particular concern . The study
assumes a 60 percent pass-by trip reduct ion for the retail uses . This level of pass -by
traffic is rarely seen for any retail use , not even for gas stations/conven ience markets (56
percent) or fast-food restaurants (50 percent). ITE has pub li sh ed the ave ra ge pass-by rate
for a grocery store as 36 percent and for a shopp in g center as 34 percent. The study
provides no j ustification for the 70 percent rate , and I am n t aware of any documented
study that would support this assumption .
The report also assumes a 20 percent internal capture rate between the res ide nti al
development and the retail uses. While th is reduction is common for large mixed-use
areas , it may be too aggressive for this sit~. The 20 percent internal capture rate assumes
that each household vis its the retail area once , every other day . Since the average family
visits a grocery store twice a week, it is doubtful that a 20 percent internal capture rate
would actually be achieved .
Miscellaneous Errors
There are numerous math and input errors with in the study , including ones in the trip
generation table , in the assignment of site-generated traffic , in link lengths with in
SYNCRO , and in results reported from the analys is.
Mr. Jonah Staller
Summary
May 17, 2004
Page3
The traffic impact study for the proposed Denver Seminary Urban Housing Village under-
estimates the traffic impacts of the proposed development to such an extent as to render
its findings useless. Projected background traffic annual growth is under-estimated by a
factor of ten , and site-generated traffic is under-esf:nated by a factor of four. The roadway
improvements needed to accommodate traffic from this development cannot be identified
based on the results of thi s report. Any decision regarding this development proposal
would be suspect until a reliable traffic study is available .
Please feel free to call me regarding this matter.
Sincerely,
44~
Kathleen L. Krager, P.E ., PTOE
Transportation Engineer
Attachment
•
•
•
•
•
•
May 17, 2004
THE CITY OF CHERRY Hru.s YIU.AGE
2450 E. QUINCY AVENUE
CHERRY Hu.ls VILLAGE, CO 80110
303-783-2721/30 3-76 l-9386
City of Englewood Community Development
Ms. Tricia Langon, Senior Planner
1000 Englewood Parkway
Englewood, CO 801 I 0
Dear Ms. Langon :
COMMUNlrY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
B
ENr.L:WOOO. CCL09AOO
Thank you for the opportunity to review the rezoning application materials for the property
located at 3401 South University Boulevard . Upon review of the materials , the City of Cherry
Hills Village offers the following comments :
I. On page seven (7) of the Traffic lmpACt Study it is indicated that only 500 to 1,000 new
trips per day would be generated compared to "busy activity days" at the existing
Seminary. No analysis was done that identifies trip generation for those busy activity
days and the fact that they occur on an infrequent basis . Whereas, the proposed
development has the potential to have a seven day a week traffic impact.
2. It appears that additional right-of-way would be required along Hampden Avenue and
University Boulevard to construct ce11ai n improvements .
3. The traffic study should take into account the transportation plans of the vari ou s
jurisdictions that are impacted by the development.
~-What , if any, might be some stacking issues for vehicles entering the residential areas at
the entry gates?
5. Why are kennel/animal day care prohibited as permitted uses within the commercial use
areas and allowed as an accessory use in any area?
6. It would be benefi cial if the car wash, auto detailing (underground fa cility only) be more
clearly defined . The se types of uses can pose problems for stacking an d generate
additional trip s. If the facilities are located undergrou nd, what impact does that have on
parking and access?
7. On sheet PUD-3 it is indicated that the sidewalks alo,1g University Boulevard and
Hampden Avenue arc attached. Given the speeds along these two thoroughfares and to
keep separation of vehicular and pedestrian traffic a detached sidewalk might be more
beneficial in these areas .
8. There does not seem to be a very good tran si tion in the height of the proposed structures
from the existing single-family residential area to the north . There is only approximately
l:IUSERS\TRGIDEVLPMN1\semrcv .DOCKEN1'EXPUSEIREVIEW\D 11003
166 feet from the property line of the existing single-family uses and Building C that is •
rroposed to be 179 feet in height.
9. A shadow analysis should be provided to show the impacts on adjacent properties.
10. It appears that there is only one vehicular access point to the garages for the residential
units . Access, security and life safety issues should be addressed .
11. Note number three (3) indicates that building heights will be measured from the top of
the garage plane, which varies with final site grading. At this time no elevations have
been prov;ded for the top of the garage planes. This has the potential of creating
structures that are greater in height than indicate<\ on the plans .
The City is concerned that the temce areas are being calculated towards the open space
requirements . Is this permitted under Englewood's Ordinances? Is the proposed Amenity Arca
adjacent to the Club House included as part of the open space requirements? What are the areas
of the landscape features and are they included in the open space calculations?
Sincerely,
efni!~g~
Community Development Director
City of Cherry Hills Village
Cc: Mayo r and City Council
•
•
Tri cia Lang on
• n:
::.~nt:
To :
Su bject:
FYI
-----Original Message-----
Ladd Vestry
Wednesday, May 12, "004 8 :27 AM
Ken Ross; Tricia Langon
FW : Denver Seminary Urban Hous in g Village / Traffic Impact Analysis Comments
Fro m: Mitchell, Bria n L -PW Transportation (mailto:Brlan.Mitchell@ci.Jenver .co.us ]
Sent: Tuesday, May 11, 2004 9:04 AM
To : Wheeler, Doug C. -CPD
Cc: Yuan, Zhixu -PW City Engineering; Ladd Vestry; Lehmann, Peggy A. -City Council Dist #4
Subject: RE : Denver Seminary Urban Hous ing Village / Traffic Impact Analysis Comments
Do ug,
I have looked over the traffic impact analysis for Denver Seminary Urba n Housing Village', and aside from a couple of
minor iss ues with the proposed striping design shown in Fig ure 9 on page 19 , I think the report 's conclus ions are
reasonable. I fin~ nothing to disagree with in the concl usions reached by FHU in the su mmary and reco mm endati on s
sectio n on pages 22 and 23 . The report also mentions that the elimination of special eve nts at the si te will remove the
circumstance that has the greates t likel ihood of negat ivel y impacting the Wellshire /Un ive rs ity Park Neighborhood in
Denver jus t ea st an d norte ot the Denver Sem inary site.
My two issues with Fi gu e 9 on page 19 are :
• The proposed striping plan does not include !he second southbound lelt turn lane for University Bl vd at Ha mpden Ave
;h the report recommends be pro vided on page 22 . Therefore , one addi tio nal lane width (approx. 12') of widening
needs to occur on University betwee n their new signalized access point and the ex istino traffic signal at University dnd
Hampden . Ti,is is in addi!ion to the widening also proposed for a southbound rig ht turn lane.
2) The left turn storage leng ths for each of the traff ic signals on University Bl vd are shown as being approximately 200·.
The southbound left turn volume tor the signal at Hampden is roughly twice that ol the projected northbound left turn
volume for !he new signalized driveway serving the Seminary develo pm ent site . so the st rip ing des ign should be changed
to make Iha left turn storage lengths proport ionate wit h the an tir.ioated volume dema nd . I wou ld recommend a 150'
storage length fo r the northbound le ft turn pocket and a 250 ' storase length for the southbound left turn pocket
approach ing Hampden , assum ing th at the southbound left at Hamp,•en is going to be a double lef t turn and that !he
propos ed locat ion fo r the signalized driveway to the nort h does not ct ange .
Another issue ·,hat the City of Englewood will likely address is lhe p-.posed spac ing between the new traffic signal on
Un iversity for the Denver Seminary development project and the exist ing signal at University and Hampden . The
re comm ended distance for another traffic si gnal on an arter ial corrido r away from a major intersection of two arterial
streets is 1/8 mile or 660'. Th e proposed traff ic signal is less than 500' north ol the exist ing signal at University and
Hampden which will like ly crea te problems in terms ol signal timing and coordination. There have historically been
problems with long qu eues for southbound University approaching Hampden so I suspect that the City of Englewood will
try to ha ve the Denver Seminary development move the signa lized driveway furthe r north if possible . Eve n if !he ,:riveway
on University Bl vd is moved further north . I do not see this as having a neg ative impact on the Wellshire/University Park
Nei ghborhood . In fact, proper coo rdin ation ol these two traff ic signals will min imize the likel ihood ot south bound traffic on
Uni vers ity Blvd seeking alternate routes during pe ak hour congestio n.
Tho se ar e my com ments on this re port . I will return the documen t to your office later this morn ing .
Bri an L. Mitchell , P.E., P.T.O.E .
• •nior Traffic Operations Engineer
lie Works / Traffic Eng inee rin g Ser,ices
_ .. y and County of Den ve r, Colorado
e-mail address : bri an .mitchel1@ ci.denver .co .us
mmr1
REsEARCH &
CoNSULTING
111] Chtny Crtn NoM Ori'tt:
SuittUO
Dt1MJ, Colorado 80209-11127
303.]21 ,2.S,47 fM J0JJ99.0441
-.bbcrmllth.com
bbc9bbc.rN11th.com
May 04, 2004
Mr. Robert Simpson
Community Dcvclopmcnr Director
City of Englewood
1000 Englewood Parkway
Englewood, Colorado 80206
Re: Se~,..ln ■ry Project -Fisca l Impact
Dor Mr. Simpson:
This letter presents the likely fisc:i.l impacts of chc Den ver Seminary proj ct rh :u is proposed for the
currcnc Denver Seminary si,c at the corner of Univcrsicy Boulevard l nd Hampden Avenue.
Th e Project
The Seminary project will include 350 rcsidcnrial uniu, configured as town homes and
condominiums, and approxim :udy 65,000 square feet of rcr:ail :ind comm ercial spacc 1
, The
commcrciaJ clcmcm of this project will include a high volume, gourmet food score and a var iccy of
smaller shops and services oriented coward the needs of project residents. The residential unirs are
expected to be valued ac $9 50,000 chousand per unit (average) and the commercial elemencs valued
-for asscssmenc purposes ac S250/squ3.rc fooc .
Pr perty T•x Re ve nues
Exhibic 1 jocumencs the key as,;umpcions chac define th e projccc's dcvcl op mem characceri stics :uv::I
che cakularion of property w: impacts .
Ar build our, the projeq will add $332 million doll:us in residential mark er val ue ,nd ,n ,ddirional
$16 .25 million in commercial value t'> the Engl .wood f2X roles . Given cu rrenc assessmenc
procedures and che city's prcsenc 7.7; mi ll levy, the Seminary proj ec c will gener:i.re an additional
$242,265 per year to che ciry's gener<Ji fund in annual y ux revenue.
1 Cu"encly plans anticipate 60,000 of retail and 5,000 of office, the l:um assoda1ed with project ules and homro wnc~s
wociuio n man:a.gcmcnc
•
•
•
•
Exhi b it 1.
Engl ewood Semin ary :
Project Value a nd Prope rty
Tax Calculations
Sourtir: Btc Rnt.i,ch fc Con iultin9: moll
ltvytrornOtyot(nl)ltwood
Sales Tax Revenue
New Resldent111I Units :
Re si dential Uniu
Pro/ect V11lu es:
Residentl:.l lJniU (.4.vg. Value)
Market Valu e al all un!U
Res ldential Al.s.nsment Ratio
Re.sidenlla l As.seued Va luation
New Commerdil Deve lopment:
Total retail(sq.ft.)
Ave rage V1 lu e:
Retail/Office (S/sq. ft.)
Commercia l Ma rket Value Taxable
Commerc ial Aueumeot Ratio
Commercial Assessed Valuation
Tota l Assessed Va luatlon
City of Er,glewood Mill Levy
Total Property Tax Revenue Accrued
350
1950,000
S? 32,S 00,000
0.0796
126,467,000
65,000
l250
1 16,250,000
0.29
$4,7 12,500
131 ,179,500
7.77
S 2◄2,265
Page 2
The Sem inary projec t will gencr;m: new sales tll in rwo ways. T he new specialty food sco re and
associ ated rcra.i l will prod uce ove r $18.0 milli on in new sales , hu e Englewood does noc tu
unprepared food thus taxable sales are projected ar $250/sq.ft resulti ng in $525 ,000 in new city sales
tax receipts. In :iddicio n, ch c 350 new house holds will have off-si re local retail spe ndi ng, whic h at
$500/monch/unir will produce an additional $73 ,500 a year. In sum , ac bui ld out the project will
produce a total of $598.500 in annual new saJcs r:lX for th e city of Englewood. C:a.l cu.J:u ion s art
show n in Exhi bit 2.
bhlblt2.
Engl ewood Sem inary: Sa les Tax Calculations
Eng lewood Sa les Tax Rate
Estimated Taxable Sa les generated in Englewood Seminary (1)
Estima ted Sales Tax revenues in Englewood Semi nary
Estima ted Sa les 9enerated elsewhere in Englewood (2)
Estima ted Sa les Tax reven ues (elsewhere in Englewood )
Ann ual Sales Tax Reve nu es Ge nerated by Eng lewood Se mina ry Resi dents
3.5%
S 15,000,000
S525,0 00
11 ,800,llOO
1 73,500
1598,500
(1)60.000 iq.lt. ,USOptl'iqft., IO'>C ~"""'••Cttd noo,kl.fl bultnglewooddot1notU..unprtp,,fdlood. (2) 300houldlol<h~
UOO/rl'IOn«hon(J191twood~llly
Page 3
Other Revenues
Seminary residcncs will ~so comribucc co rhc broad vuiety of other fees , charges and r:u:cs collected
by the cicy. Exhibit 3 shows these fees and ,he likely impaa of the project . Some cicy revenues, such
as imcrgovcrnmcma.l transfer, ace unlikely ro be affected by the na, projccr and we have ass umed
that these residents will nor be particularly ;ictivc •ucrs of the cicy's rec reation services . Beyond,
propetcy and sales tax, the Seminary project wiU gencr.ire an additional $154 ,000 per year in
additional fees , ca.,es and charges.
Revenues
Property Taxes 12,◄25,000 NA calcula ted Independe ntl y
Sales & Use Tax 119,230,138 NA calculated Independently
Clgarttte Tues 1538,125 ()'I(, 0 10
Franchise Fets 12,029,500 100% llll.30 1◄7,355
O<her(2) 11 ,59◄,579 100% 1106.31 137,207
lnt~overnmental 11evenue 11 ,253 ,926 ()'I(, 10.00 10
Flnts& Forleitl ·•,. Sl ,461,◄86 100% 197.43 134,101
Charges for 12,678, 16◄ 50% 189.27 131 .2•5
Recreation 11952589. 25% ~ 111 390
Total Revenues 133,163,507 1<60.85 115 ◄,272
Expendllures (by Division)
City Administration()) 12,9 65,847 50% 198.86 13 ◄,602
Flnance & Adm in. Services 11 ,•38 ,639 50% S◄l .95 116,784
lnformatlon Technology 11 ,228,67~ 50% S◄0.96 11,,335
Public Wort.s $4,490,750 25% S74.85 126,1 96
Safety Services 113.1 72,325 7.5% 1229 .54 IBO,JJ9
Community Development Sl 6'9,667 100% 1109.98 138,•92
Library I C,1 57 ,822 100% 177.19 127,016
Recreation S ◄,961 ,◄SO 25% 182.69 128,9•2
Debt Service S2,261 ,21 ◄ 0% 10.00 10
Con tingen cy 1202,000 0% __ S1\QQ ... so
Total Expenditures 3•.128,)90 11 ,ll:'.ll 1266,705
No<tt (l)C-~lw:luscholJL 11,000
(l)O:tWJindudft5fl,ftlftc Q,,,nmnipl.._UcMM11ndPtffl\lU,lrlttml tndMitc._,.&O.,...,
{J) 'Ory AdmlmtrMiOtl' lndudt1 Lec)ltl,lion. IN Ciry Attotnly', IN COUl1. hi Oly M,ntg« Ind Huffl,n hlOUltn.
Sourct: OtyollnglfWOOdWt:Mllt
•
•
•
•
•
Page 4
City Service Costs
Exhibit 3 aJso shows th e project's likel y impa ct on ciry service del iv ery cos es . Agai n, it sho ul d be
noted char thi s projecc rcprescncs very modest incrcmcncal new cons to rhe ciry 3.5 it occu rs on an
infill sire md rep laces an existing use th at requ ired a variety of publi c services. Additionally, mosr city
adminisrr.nivc costs wi ll benefit from ec onomics of scale and the refore new development will demand
significantly less than cu rrcnc per uni c averages. Fin:Uly, the project's com pressed design, high•c nd
resident demographi c and sup pl emc ncal private sec urity , wi ll greatl y reduce per un it publi c safety
cosrs -the city's costliest serv ice. For publi c safety, we have liberal ly aJ locaccd 25 pe rcent of current
pe r unit cxpcndirurc. Simi larly, because the project wi ll add no new road mileage co the cicy and the
developer will pay for a.II onsicc road and uciliry syste ms, we have also a.llocaced pu blic works costs ac
25 pcrcenc of currcnr pe r unir averages.
In sum , we csri matc thac ar build o uc chc Seminary projccc will requi re approximately $2 66,000 in
publi c ex pendirures. We believe rhis is a li beral es cim are .
Use Tax
Use rax is a charge o n the impomni on of building materials th at arc used in buc not purchased wirhin
chc cicy . A large residential projccc wi ll ryp ially have 50 percent of iu building cos ts in materials . In
chis insrancc , we can expect building costs (net of a land , markcrjng and financing} to be about
$250/square foot The full project will have approximately 75 0,000 sq uare feet fo r a total cost of
$18 7 million. Fifty percent of chi s amou nt, or $93.5 million, will be materials subject co use rax . Ac
3.5 perce nt, the city wiU co ll ect S3 .27 miUio n dollars, which wi ll be ava ilabl e for any go neral fund
pur pose. It is expected ch at al l use tax reve nue wi ll acc rue in the first four years of development.
Net Impacts
Ac build ou r, che Sem in ary project wi ll presenc a signifi cant ne e posit ive impact to rh e Englewood
communiry. As shown in Exhibit 4, an nual gross cicy reve nu e wi ll approac h S 1.0 milli on per yor
while city costs will be on the o rde r of S26 7,000. The city will be a net beneficiary of over $700,000
~e r year. In additio n, rhe cicy wi ll co ll ecc near ly $3 .3 mi ll io n in use rax as the project is co mpleted .
Exhibit ◄.
Englewood Sem inary: Net
lmpacu
Annua l City Revenues
Annual City Expenditures
Net Annua l Impacts
Use Tax (Ove r Four Years)
1995,037
1266,705
1728,332
13,270,000
le should be norcd chat rhesc revenues are vi rtually aJI new receipts for th e cicy beca use the for mer
occupan t of the property was a not fo r profit in scicution rha c comribu rcd very little tax revenue co
local govcrnmcnc .
I hope these calc ul ations arc of value in your regulatory review process .
Sincerely ,
Ford C. Frick
Managing Director
Page S •
•
•
•
C
TO :
T y 0 F
COMMUNITY
L E W O O D
DEVELOPMENT
Planning and Zo ning Commissi on
THRU: Robert Simpson, Dire c,or, Community Developmen t
Tricia Langon, Senior Plann~I/ FROM:
DATE :
SUBJE G :
APPLICANT:
JVF, LLC
June 29, 2004
Case 2004-05 -Public Hearing
Den ver Seminary Plann ed Unit Deve lop ment
Supplementa l Report
John Forstmann, Manager
PO Box 7890
292 Holden Road
Avo n, Colorado 81620
PROPERTY ADDRESS :
3401 South University Boule va rd
REQUEST:
Th e applicant has submitted a Planned Unit De velopme nt (PUD) ap plicatio n lo rezone th e
prop erty from MU-R-3-B Mixed-Use Resi de ntia l/Limited Offic e-Reta il Distri ct to Pl anned Uni t
Development.
RECOMMENDATION:
Th e Department of Community Dev elopment rec ommends that the Planning and Zoning
Commission a ppro ve the pr oposed Denver Seminary Planned Un it De ve lop ment wi th the
following condi ti ons :
1. Ded ication of the Sou th University Bou le va rd continu ous right turn la ne shall be by
Major Subdivision .
2. Construction of the publi c improvements as proposed.
3. Prior to recording an y Development Restrictions and Covenant documents, the City
shall re vi ew such documents to assu re that the docume nts are consistent with the
PUD .
4. Applicant shall provi de two recorded cop ies of all De velopment Restrictions and
Cove nant documents to the City.
5. Clarification of Notes 4 and 7 on Sheet PUD -4 regarding enclosure of pri va te
balconi es and terraces to pro vide definition of "enclosure•.
1000 Englewood Pa rkway Englewood, Colorado 80110 PHONE 303-762-2342 ti\½ J03-78l-6895
Su nnl emen lal lnfo rmatinn :
Sev er .,I issu e:, and concern s were dis c usse d during lhe Jun e :!2, 200,1 Publi c Hea1111 g. "l hc fo 11 owmg t,,bl e provides a revi~w o f th e to pic:,
and additi onal com m ents an d/or resolutio n in forma tion:
I ssue/Concern Rcsol ulion/Addilional Commcn l s
Arapahoe Counly (Mr. H as kin s) rcq ues l for conce p1ua l D uring ,.1 jo int 1r,1ffic m ee ting o n Jun e :r 1 Mr. H ask in s reques ted th e conceptual
int ers ection d esig ns "l o be su re th e in tersecti o n \VO rk s" 111 ters1Jc ti o n d es igns. Th e applicant prov id ed th e ily and Mr. Haskin s (I)
Col orado D epar lmenl 0 1 Tran spo rlalion (COOT) construcl ion d ocument s o f
1h e ex iling in1 ersec 1ion and (2) ,1 f-e lsb urg H o h & Ull evig mem o dis cussi ng
ali gnmenl of 1h e lanes an d feas ibi li1 y of 1h e in 1ers ec ti o n. Public W o rk s Direc tor
Ross and Ci1 y Tr affi c En gi nee r Ves try rev iewed the d oc uments and concluded
that lhe int ersec ti o n's proposed conce pt work s and prepara ti o n of the
i nt ers ec tion d esi gn documents is prem ature. It sh o uld b e noted th at th e d es ign
and o perati on o f th e Hampden/U niversity interse cti o n are under the authority
of COOT. Arapahoe County may rev i ew th e proposal however th e Counly is
NOT th e approving agency. The PUD d oes not control the inters ec ti on
d es ign; rath er it is th e resp onsibility of th e appli ca nt to d esi gn th e intersection
to CDOT standards and requirement s and receive COOT approva l afte r th e
PUD is a1m rove d.
A rapa hoe County req ues t (Mr. H askins ) th at tr affic In for mati o n p ert ,1 ining to traffk qlleing at th e Floyd Place int ersec ti on w ill b e
si mu lation incl ude queing informatio n for the Floyd in cl uded in th e updated Tr affi c Stud y p rep ared by f-e lsb urg H o h & Ullevig
Place int ersec ti o n
A rapaho e County reques t (Ms. Conaway) 1h at a I O fee t The PUD is a re,onin g of land w ilhin th e City and es tabli shes req uiremen ts
tall so und w all is constructed o n th e eas t side of So uth o nl y for the new zo ne cli strr ct. Construc ti o n of any improvem en ts loca ted
Universi ty Bo ul eva rd and th at i t is noted o n th e !'UD. o uts ide of th e Cily of Engl ewood may no t lega lly b e made a condition o f
M s Conaway stated th at th e wall w o uld require a approval o f 1his PUD. The Cit y does no t ha ve th e au tho rity to make
va rian c e (current m ax imum h eight is 6 fee t) ho w eve r requi re m ents of an ap p licant to per form work within anoth er jurisdicti on . The
th e Plann ing Depanment would Sllpport th e va ri ance). ap plica nt may negoti ate an ag reem ent w ith ad 1acen t n eighbors to provide
improvements (i.e . wall). Tl1.1t agree m ent would b e a civil contract, o utsid e o f
th e sco pe o f th e Pl anned Uni l Developm ent. The Ci 1y has no auth ority over
d eve lo pm ent wi thin anoth er jurisd ic ti o n . Fur l her, A rapahoe Counl y has th e
abilit y 10 put conditions o r app rova l (1.e. wa ll rnnstru cti o n, wall heigh t varia nce,
tr af li c sicnal Dole in stall ati o n I o n nermits for improvem ents in their ri~h t-o f-wav.
Arapaho e Cou nty requ es t (Ms . Co11 aw,1y ) to work w ilh Th e Ci ty ha s b ee n o p en trnd mfo rrnat ive with ali o utside age ncies th rou~h o ut
th e Ci ty during pro jec t d evelopment/ co nstru c tion in 1he applica ti on and review process and w ill con tinu e to work w ith all agen cies
an effort to mitiJ.!.ate isj ues Ih roul,.\,ho uI lh e develo 11111 ent uh;-i ses o f thi s m o jec t.
• • •
• • •
Bu ilding H eight be meas ured fr om ac tu al grade rath t!r Pl ease see c1 t1 ,1ehed 111 e mu fro lll Dav id Owen Tryba Archite cts
1han fr o ,,, fi rs l fl oo r eleva li o n whic h co uld vary ,
r ·nerge ncy Access Turnin g ra di i .rn d str eets have Uee n reviewed and acc epted by Publ ic W or ks
and Fire staff for co1111>h,1111.:e wi th Cit y s1andc1rc.ls.
Handi ca pp ed parkin g (or 10\,nhomes Assi gn ed h;mdicap ped pa1 king space stJn da rd s do not app ly to sin gle unit
res id enl ia l us es . In ad di1i on 10 1h e 2 parkin g spaces proposed fo r ea ch of 1h e
45 townh omes, 53 addi1 iona l gu es t parking spaces are propos ed that co uld
acco mm oda te handi ca pped ve hi cles
M odi fica ti on sec ti on all ows increase in max imum The modi fica ti on pr ocess in th e PU D O rd inance perm its up to a 5°/u dt!V iati un
buil din g hei ght o ( 2%. Co nsid er eliminaling and using in building hei ght "w hen such dev iati ons appear necess ary in ligh1 of tec hn ical
only building height or engin eering consid erati ons". Th e appl ican t ha s vo lunlarily redu ced thi s
siandard to 2%. Th e 2% dev iati on wo uld rang e fr om 7.5 in ches (or 1h e
tow nh ome buildings 10 3.5 (eel (or th e tallest high-rise stru clure, i( th e
deviati on is co nsid ered ne cessa rv .
Shadow i111p ac 1s Appli canl to demons lra le Shadow Study anim ati on during conlinu ed Publi c
H ea rine. on lun e 29 '1'
Traffi c Study Pl ea se see 11pd a1ed Traffic Siucl y all ac hed to 1his re porl
Us e: Ca r Wa sh Ca r wash fac ility, i( co ns1ruc1ed, lo be local ed und ergr o und only as a servi ce 10
retail us ers and ·0 ,;id enl s. This is not prop ose d as a full-sca le car wash
operation . Such (aci lili es hav e been su cc essful in sim ilar mi xed-us e
cl eve loom enl s in th e metro area
Us e: Health Tr ea 1m e n1 Facili ty Per th e UD C, a health tr ea 1111 ent foc ilil y is "a fa cilily or inslituli on, 01h er 1h an a
/10spi1a /, prin cip all y eng aged in providin g oulpalienl services for healt h
maint enance, di ag nos is, or tr ea tm ent of hum an dis ea ses, pain, or injury "
lemoha sis ad ,l ed l.
Us e: Ke nn el/animal dav ca re as an acces sorv use Accessorv '"" wo u:d all ow "dogeie day car e" (or res identi al elemenl
Use: Mass age Th erapy Per 1h e UDC , massage lh erap y is" A fa cility 1hat is o perated fo r lh e pur po se o(
mass age 1h erapy perfor med so lely by massag e th erapists wh o are li cense d or
qt1 alif ie d in acco rd ance with Cit y regul ati ons and Co lora do st atut es. A
"massa~e ther apy faci lit y" does not in cl ud e a "mass al!e oarlor ."
Use: Wh olesa le: sa les and dis tribuli on The res tauran ljba kery po l'l ion o( the pro pose d foo d co nce pl may se ll pro du cls
to oth er res taura nt s, ren uirin e wholesa le sa les to be nerm ill ed in th e distri ct.
Clarifica tion of th e term "e ncl os ure" in re lati on to Slaff will work with lh e a ppli ca nl lo defin e th e ter m re lali ve to lh e a ppli ca nt's
pati os and terrace s pr evio us discus sions wi tl1 Sl1r ro unding nei gl1bor s.
To: Trio• Langon (do Get1ru oe ) Pa ge 2 of Z 2004-06-:5 15JI 2:ll tGMT) 17 196230605 From : John \o\laU1
06 1 24 /200< 18 : 02 30 3-9'3 4-5363
DAVID OWEN TRYBA ARCHITECTS
24Jtme 2004
Tricia Langon
City Of Englewood
Community Development Depanment
1000 Englewood Parkway
Englewood, CO 80110
Dear Tricia,
D, TRYBA ARCHITECTS PAGE 0 1/01
During the Planning and Zoning Cornmi&Sion meeting of June 22"" comnti9$ioner Wcllcer
RqUCSted we rcvioc the building bcighl3 dcocribcd on Sheet PUD-4 IO reflect lhe bcigllts
above an average of final gr,iditl9 along the prop~ li11es . We are IUlclear u IO bis
inlcndcd methodology but believe it was IO clarify !he building heights in relation 10 lhe
avC12ge finish ed gr,ide at each comer of each buildi1111, which is lhe typical method of
dctennining building heigflls in lhe Uniform Building Code.
Because a final grading plan has not been produced, and is not a requirement oflhc
toning, we feel that we cannot aceuraldy determine those heights using this method al
this point in the process.. The determination of final gr•dcs at any point is complicalcd by
the existing silc slope, which is 19 feet in two directions across the site, from 5417 along
the sooth property line to 5401 al lhe oonh wt comer, and 5J98 at lbc nonh west comer.
Those heights are further complicated by the design, which p'.aces all buildings on
underground ,nucturcd parking. the roof.I of which will step at various points to follow
the site slopes. Because the buildings have not b ee n dcsi~ed, those step heights and
locations have not been dctcrmiru:d.
In an effon to provide the mos1 accurate determination of building heights possible, and
because specific buil ding heights are a roquirement of lbe PUD , we felt it preferable to
determine the height. from lbc ground floor planes and commit lo a maximum grade shift
of two feet The practical effccl of this is to have building heights o,:cunte within 2' of
the maximum heights given.
Sincerely,
(]Ll--
Dean Foreman
Project Manager
Cc: Jolwt Woll~ f 1/c:P/Orn Scmllloc:llm,nts/PIJIYe24-0<81dalf~ah~
16:t o Loran Sm u °""~r. Col or.do
&o:z03 .121ti
]0J·8Jt ,+o I0
•
•
•
•
CITY OF ENGLEWOOD PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
IN THE MATTER OF CASE #2004-CS
FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS
AND RECOMMENDATIONS RELATING
TO THE REDEVELOPMENT OF THE
DENVER SEMINARY SITE AT 3401
SOUTH UNIVERSITY BOULEVARD,
ENGLEWOOD, COLORADO 80113
INITIATED BY:
JVF,LLC
JOHN FORSTMANN, MANAGER
P.O. BOX 7890
292 HOLDEN ROAD
AVON, COLORADO 81620
FINDINGS OF FACT AND
CONCLUSIONS OF THE CITY
PLANNING AND ZONING
COMMISSION
The Public Hearing on this issue before the City Planning a nd Zoning Commission
was opened on June 22, 2004, in the City Council Chambers of the Englewoo d Civic
Center. The Public Hearing was continued to June 29, 2004.
June 22. 2004
Commission Members Present: Adams, Bleile, Diek.m eie r , Mosteller, Mueller, Roth ,
Schum, Welker, Kreiger
Commission Members Absent: None
June 29 , 2004
Commission Members Present: Adams, Bl eile, Di ekmeier, Mostell er, Mueller (left
early), Roth, Schum, Welk er , Krieger
Commission Members Absent: Non e
Testimony was received from staff, from the applicant tea m , frum representatives of
Arapahoe County Planni ng and Engineering Departments, and from area r es id ents.
The Commission received notice of Public Hearing, certification of Posting, the Staff
Report and supplemental ir.f ~mation from Staff following the meeting on June 22"',
which were incorporated intt .nd made a part of the r ecord of th e Public He a ring .
After considering statements of the ·vitness es, and reviewing pertinent do cu ments,
the members of the City Planning and Zoning Commission made the following Find-
ings and Conclusions .
H:\GROUP \Fil e Log \2004 -05 D,nvt r Seminary \OENVER SEM INARY FOF .doc
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. THAT appli cation fo r the Den ve r Seminary Planned Unit Deve lopment wa s
initiated by JVF, LLC, fil ed on February 20 , 2004.
2. THAT public notice was properly given by publication in the Englewood Her-
ald on June 4, 2004. The property was posted by installation of four signs on
the site giving notice of the date, time, and location of the Public Hearing.
3. THAT Senior Planner Trici a La ngon gave testimony regarding t he propose d
redevelopment of the Denv er Seminary Site, and the prc,posed rezoning from
MU-R-3-B, to Pla nned Unit Developm ent (PUD).
I
4. THAT testimony was received from the applicant team, Messrs. J ohn
5.
Forstrna nn, John Well es, David Owen Tryba, a nd J eff Ream r egarding pro -
po sed redeve lop ment of the s ite.
THAT testimony, both s upportive and in opposition, was rece ived from res i-
dents of the surrounding neighborhoods regarding the proposed red eve lop -
ment of the site. Concerns we re voiced about impacts anticipated from den-
sity, t raffic, building heights , and shadowing of adjacent properties.
6. THAT t estimony was received from representatives of Arapahoe County by
Susan Conaway, Manage r of the Arapahoe County Planning Department,
a nd Chu ck Haskins, of t he Arapahoe County Engineering Department.
CONCLUSIONS
1. THAT the proposed Denver Seminary Pla nned Unit Development was
brought befo re the Planning a nd Zoning Co mmis s ion upon application fil ed
byJVF, LLC .
2. THAT noti ce of the Public Hearing was properly given by publication in the
official City newspaper , the Englewoo d Herald , and by PJSting of the prop-
P.r ty.
3. THAT a ll testimony r eceived from staff members, applicant team members,
and the general public, has been made part of the reco rd of the Public Hear-
ing.
H:\GRO L"P\File Log \2004 -05 Denv er Se min ary \OE NVER SEMINARY FOF.doc 2
•
•
•
•
•
4. THAT a ll written communication , including co pies of e-ma il co mmuni cations,
to a nd fr om s t a ff a nd in te res t ed parties h ave been tra ns mitt ed to t he Co m-
mi s s ion a nd h ave bee n in co rporated into t he ca se record.
5. THAT t he Pl a nnin g Co mmiss ion cons id e red the Pl a nn ed Unit Dev elopment
Di s trict Pl a n criteria a nd the Si ,e Fla n cri te ri a , a nd found as fo ll ows:
A. THAT the Den ver S em inary Planned U11it Develop m ent District Pla n is
fou11d to be in compliance with the Dist rict Pla11 requirem e11t s and the
Comprehen s ive Plan.
B . THAT the Den ve r S eminary Pla11n ed U11 it Deve lopme11t Site Pla11 is in
compliance with the Denver S emi11a ry Pla11 ne d Un it Deve lopm ent Di ,-
trict Plan.
c. THATall required do cuments, drawings, re 'errals, recommendations
and approvals for the Denver S eminary Planned U11it Deve lopment Dis -
trict Plan and for the De11v er S eminary Plan ned Unit Development Site
Plan have bee n receive d .
D.
E.
THAT the proposed Denver S em inary Pla n ne d Unit Development Di s -
trict Plan and the Denver S eminary Planned Un it Deve lopment Site
Plan are con s istent with adopted and generally accepted standards of
development in the City of Englewood .
THAT the propose d Denver S eminary Planned U11it Developm e11t Dis-
trict Plan and the Denver S eminary Planned U11it Deve lopme11t Site
Pla11 are s ub s ta11tially consiste11t with the g oals, objec tives, des ig·
g uidelines, policies and any other ordinan ce, la w or requirement of the
City.
DECIS ION
THEREFORE, it is the decision of the City Planning a nd Zonin g Commissi on tha t
the Denve r Semin a ry Pl a nned Unit Developm ent, as proposed by JVF , LL C for
prope rty a t 3401 S outh Uni ve rsity Boul eva rd , be recommended to the Englewood
City Council for approval.
The decision was reach ed upon a vote on a motion m ade at the meeting of the City
Pl a nning a nd Zonin g Commi ssion on June 29, 2004 by Mr. Bl eile, sec onded by Ms .
Mos tell er , whi ch motion s t a t es :
Bleile moved :
Moste ller seconded : The Planning Commission approve the proposed Denv er
Seminary Planned Unit Development with the following
fi, e conditions ; the Commission furthe r recommends the
H :\GROUP \F1le Lo g \200◄-05 Den\'er Seminary \DENVER SEMINAR Y F'OF.doc 3
AYES:
NAYS :
ABSTAIN :
ABSENT :
proposed Denver Seminary P lanned Unit Dev elopment to
City Council for favorable action .
1. Dedication of the 8011th Univer si ty Boulev ard con -
tinuous right turn iJlle shall be by Major Subdivi-
sion.
2. Construction of the public improvem ents as pro-
po se d .
3. Prior to recording any Dev•topment R es trictions
and Covenant docum ents, the City shall review such
documents to assure that the do cuments are consis-
tent with the PUD.
4. Applicant shall provide two recorded copies of all
Developmen t R estrictions and Covenant documents
to the City.
5. Clarification of Notes 4 and 7 on Sheet PUD-4 re-
garding enclosure of private balconies and terraces
to provide definition of"e nclosure•.
Welker, Adams, Bleile , Diekmeier, Mosteller, Roth, Schum, Krieger
None
None
Mueller
The motion carried.
These Findings and Conclusions are effective as of the meeting on June 29, 2004.
BY ORDER OF THE CITY PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
H:\OROUP\File Log \200◄-05 Denver Seminary\DENVER SEMINARY FOF .doc 4
•
•
Tricia Langon
.From: PATRI CIA MONTGOME RY [pa lsymo nt2 @ms n.c om J
Monday, June 28, 2004 9: 17 PM Sent:
To : Tricia Langon
Subfect : Seminary Revelop menl
Dear Tr icia,
Since I am ou t of town f or t he Pl annin g Comm ission meeti ng , I will address
my r ema r ks to you. I live at 223 8 8 . Floyd Place, direccly beh ind the
parki ng lot and apart me nts a t the Semi nary.
Through the Archetectural Committe of Hampden Hills, we have worked with the
John Forscmann team and Dav i d Tryba for months. We have foun d chem co be
mos t cooperative and professional, and they've been very res ponsiv e to all
r es onable reque:3ts .
The main chages co the orig i nal plan r elate to traff ic . I hav e seen the
traffic pattern 'pro jection , and feel it will d o a lot to improv.e the
intersec t ior. at Hampden and Universi t y, a pro blem that should have been
addressed long ago. I have also studied the "s hadow" pattern from the high
ri ses . I would like to rebut a statemen t made at the June 22nd meeting. The
project will not thr ow the homes on E . Floyd Place in the shade most o f the
d ay. The s tudy s hows that on December 21st, t he worse ca se, my home will have
full sun from 10 :00 am on . It varies depending on ·,ome location, time of
day, and it improves dramatically as we move into Spring, Summer and Fall. I
can certainly live with t hat. The developer is a l so committed to b,Jild a
•
ma sona :-y s ound wall along the perimeter of his proj ect. That will help
me t.igate noise and dust for us.
•
I am ir: my BO's, a Denver nac ive and retired rea ltor , I am no s t:-anger t o
c hange . The goal is to make change beneficia l. I strongly feel that this
p r o j e ct will bene f i t the city of Eng:.ewood a nd surrounding are as fo r more
than any possible apartment complex, and I urge you to g ive i t your support .
Sincerely ,
Pat ri cia Montgomery
To: The Plnnnlng and Zoning Commlr.,lon
City of EnglewMd
June 28 , 2004
coi.o..1u'IIIV 0l Vll0P~·E"' OH\RU,'WI
EJ
EfltilE\'IOOD CO\.OillOO
We hove been residents of Hampden HIiis for many years ond feel we
must
vi g orously e•)ress our objections lo
t he proposed Forstmann project.
During oll of the meetings, we have found Mr Forstmann to be
Incredibly Intransigent and Imperious.
Developer explonotlons concerning traffic mitigation fall to address the
total Impact not only on our street CE Floyd Pl), but the entire ore.,,
Traffic studies seemed •n conslstent and vogue, the oddltlonol lanes
proposed will not only become• danger, but• serolus
health and noise hazard.
The slide show shadow representations were cosuot, without
documentation or references to the Hampden HIiis houses and street
elevations.
Dangerous wintertime shadowing of homes, yards ond streets were
passed off by Mr Forstmann as .. minor short term lnconvenlences11
•
Unreosonoble, vague depictions or sun angles and azimuths did not
account for the extreme shadowing of homes on both sides of Roce , Floyd
and University.
Mr Forstmonn hos refused even to discuss mo ving t he towers to the
south to mitigate shade Impact. He hos also odomontty refused to
consider any suggestion of towering their height, stating thot It was not
economically beneflclot.
Such dense urban development ts Incredibly Inappropriate.
We • ''"Ongty urge you to carefully consider the report Issued by the
planner for the Arapahoe County Commissioners.
The Seminary land Is currently zoned for Englewood 's needs. More than
odequote commerc ia l and high density resldentlol zoning Is In place. Any
occupancy survey will clearly show this project Is not needed , nor should
our city officlots be bowled over by absentee opportunists.
Elizabeth & John Matteson
2309 E Floyd Pl •
•
•
July 2, 2004
Tricia Langon, Senior Plar.ner
Community De velopment Departm ent
Cit y of Eng lewood
100(' Englewood Parkway
Englewood, CO 80110
Dear Ms Lan go n:
CO Ml,IUNIT Y OEVELOP MEN T OE PARTME NT
B
EllGLEWOOD . CO LORAD O
I am writing regarding the approval of the redevelopment plan for the Denver Seminary
property by the city Planning and Zoning Commi ssion on Tuesday evening, June 29 .
I anended that session, and have attended several of the other meetings regard ing this
proposed rede velopment. I wrote to you in January, 2004 , and to each oft he Councilmen
within the past few months . I have expressed my concern that the proposed
redevelopment is too dense for the location , at the same time that I support mixed use
redevelopment of the property.
I have some questions about the approval process . During the discussion on June 29 , the
members of the Planning and Zoning Commission had many question s for the developer,
the architect , and their staff. Some of their comments indicated that they had serious
concerns about the traffic impact , even saying at one point that the traffic at Hampden
and Uni versity is just going to get worse and worse, regardless. If thi s is their feeling ,
then why unanimously approve a proj ect that would make it immeasurably worse?
There were concerns voiced by the Commission , particularly Carl Wel l..e r, about the
exterior retail design . What will it look li ke , how far will it be set back from the street,
will it be dense-looking , or intere sting-looking, etc . It was mentioned that the developer
had not provided that information even though it had been requested, but then again
approval was unanimous in spite of the se reservations . There was also concern by one of
the Commission members that the proposed development is much closer to property lines
than existing Denver Seminary bui ld ings . Again , unanimous approval anyway .
There was considerab le discussion about a 10-foot wall that the de veloper had promised
the neighbors to get them to support the plan . Englewo od apparently has a 6-foot wa ll
regulation , but appro val was unanimou s even though the developer has promised
something that mi g ht not happen .
The developer has also promised traffic abatement that will include a light on University
just north of Hampden and south of Flo yd Place . I am told that Uni versity is a state
highway and that CDOT must approve such a plan . I have been told that CDOT has
repeatedly de clined to approve a light on Hampden (state highway) at Sunset. What is the
difference? Why would we expect that a light could be placed on University whe n one
has been repeatedly denied on Hampden in the same area?
A representat ive of the Buell Man sion nei ghborh oo d spok e of thei r concerns about what
the development would lo ok like from th eir area, and from Hampden and Uni ve rsit y
approaching it. They had asked for a model showin g what the development would like
from ou tside, across th e street , etc . I had asked the same question at an ea rlier
community mee ting , but none ofus ha ve received a respon se . The y vo ice d co nce rn th at
the extreme height of the tow ers will block views and create something that look s like the
Loews Hotel on Colorado Boulevard -a giant structure sticking up out of surroundin g
lower buildings . Again -unanimous approval.
In order to win their support, the developer has apparentl y promised some traffic
abatement to the residents of Denver on the east side of University off of Floyd Avenue .
lfthis is a state highway , what cou ld be promised that COOT wo uld not need to approve?
In my letter to yo u in January , I asked for information about what the expected tax
re venue to the City of Englewood was expected to be, and what advice and/or support the
City has provided to Mr. Forstman and his company durin g this application process . I
have not received any answers to my questions , and they remain questions for me .
After the vote , several of the Commission members spoke more candidly, expressing
concern about parts of the propo sa l at the same time they were expressing what tine
pe opl e Mr. Forstman and Mr. Tryba are . As a citizen, this all seemed odd to me . They
were applauding the traffic abatement planned by the developer, abatement plan s which •
might not be approved by CDOT , in which case the citizens will be taken adva ntage of in
order fo r the deve loper to have the development he wants .
This who le process felt out of balance to me , with the people who live and drive through
th e area coming out on the short end of the deal. Th ere will be so many walls, and so
littl e non -residential parkin g, that it see ms li ke few who li ve outside of the complex will
be using any of its retail services . What do I not understand about the Plannin g and
Zoning process? What does it take to delay or deny a reque st?
I am also sending this letter to each member of the Council.. I'll be eagerly waiting for a
repl y befo re this plan goes before the Council for final approval in August.
Respectfull y,
Nina Burford
3361 S Race St.
Englew oo d, CO 80 I 13
303-690-3575
ncbur fo rd !iil msn co m
cc : City Council Members •
•
•
•
'' C T y 0 F E N
C 0 M M U N I T Y D E
July 13, 2004
Nina Burford
3361 South Race Str ee t
Eng lewood, Colorado 80113
Dear Ms. Burford:
G L E w 0 0 D
V E L O P M E N T
I
This letter is in res ponse to yo ur letter of July 7, 2004 regarding the Planning and Zoning
Commission reco mmendation 10 approve the rezoning of the Denver Seminary site to Planned Unit
D eve lopmen t (PUD).
Th e Planned Unit Devel opmen t is a rezoning process that esta bl ishes specific zoni ng an d site
planning criteria to meet the nee ds of a specifi c development prop osa l th at may not be feasib le
within exis tin g zoning regul ations. Th e PUD provides an op portuni ty fo r flexibility and di ve rsity in
land planning and development through a unifi ed development process. The PUD implements
fle xib le site development opportunitie s through crea ti ve and inn ovative design and development
without sacrificing traditi ona l zoning objectives of health, safety and welfare of th e co mmunity.
The D enve r Seminary site is about 10 change beca use a long tim e neighbor is lea vi ng and the site
will be rede ve loped; change is inevi table . There is no doubt that any de ve lopmen t on the si te w ill
ha ve positi ve and ne ga tive impacts o n the surro undin g area. In re viewing a PUD the Planning and
Zoning Commission and Ci ty Council cons ider the proposal in its entirety, no t w hat may be single
issues . In any rezoning, tough choices and decision s must be considered and tr adeoffs may occ ur.
The goal is 10 ensure a deve lopment that mitigates issues, eases impa cts in the best manner possible
and res ults in an overa ll improvemen t.
It is anti cipa ted that the PUD w ill generat e appr oxi mate.ly $3 million in use tax and permit fees
durin g th e four yea rs of constru ction . At completi on it is anticipated that th e de velo pm ent will
generate S700,000 annuall y in additi ona l proper() an d sa les ta x reve nu es for th e Ci t)"s general
fund . The app li cant ha s not requ es ted fin ancia l assista nce fr om th e Cit y, nor has th e City off ered
any.
I hope th is provides insight into th e rezo ning de cisio n making process .
Sincerely,
~~~-
Tricia Lan go n, AICP
Senior Planner
/city Council
C.ari SH~. City M.Jn,1ger
Rob"r1 Simpson. 0 11K1 or , Lom mumty D e\·~opment
1000 Engl ewood Parkway Englewood, Colorado 80110 PHONE 303-7&2-2342 FAX 303-783-&895
www .,ngl~woodgov.org
•
DENVER SElv11NAR Y Ex hibi r /\ PLAN NED UNIT DEVELOP1v1ENT (DI STRICT PLAN )
ENGLENOOO, COLORADO AGENCY coN TACT usT
BACKGROUND ... ( sue.<cr Plll)P(P TY IS ••• 11 41 .I.CP( SH[ •• n-c -.011 1 .. ..c s· ((111',(II 01" • .. c
N T{/I S(C 0, ;:,51 ;,1,t,1 111)( .. A;fM/£ ,,o swn-~-.'-{11$1..,. l l)JLI ,..,.O 1--C Slit ..... s !K(', c-.ro • 1,,onun:o rCJI' "Oo"t'. -....,., •o -t .. s 1 , r .. r :io ,'.1:11 srw .,,...,,. 1"1: ou,,1:• so,-,..,.,. ><•5 01J 'Oll O""" .,._c cu,1>1.s • a.1..-.s 10 '!CLOC •lt re • .,c,. Sitt f\oC •PO\Jc •-.•
.. ,5 •COJ!IIC0 f>,(11 0,f'S 1011u11c .. ,sc T>-C ""0PC•"' r .. c SIT[ o s l ONC0 R-J
.. c,.+.O(N SIT"! ll(S(l[•1cc O,STII Cl 41 flit nt,1 ( Tl<( l>J,h<;(0 Uloll tl(\l[L()P"'[N ' I.Pflu c •nc,, O S
SVII'-' rrc o "'"' I'<[ -lDOP IIOJ-' or U'ttn(O 0[\1'.LOP"[~I cooc Tl-[ SIT[ IS CU ltA(N I\.~ l 0h(O
\11,1-11 -J -B Wllt D USC IICSIOCN T'-[ PL0 ,',{0 U"11
DC'JtLl)Pt,l[N I ''"'UC•r.oo. fll .C•BLC •ccuvno,.s st·
cooc or1oo•J or ri,c
SIJBu l'T[o
1.1.i.,n .. c;
-"MS1l£0 ,rct1C•uv Pl...,.,,..,c
Cl["°' •C11ts1Tt
10 .... ,ll<[N
r; TH( l'[P ll [fOt CY
SC .\LCO l>COCS!lb,.,
Cf;O'I UM..utSIT'I'
.o.N uP-TO-O•rt
csr011n-c
UI IIOC.Jri 4'4HU(.l.-.
~C [XP[ll!O,CC
lllll\o • V.\UlYCY
ES ._,'10 "1.0 witP
P()N[Nl ""lL
~KAI.IJXJ
•"'-'CU•l'l.••:.11U ,..-.,...,s._cs .-.o sc•..,et
OC•{l<()(-.'C"'IC
C"IU'"""'°"11 WU1(W[-.t 1)(1011
D,l[lll u,M[H I /
HIIJS(IJ[-.1 ,0,JIODC)llil """"o•:. -.snl\/n~
--.u. ... u
:~t;:;:-~~•~tS(II•, 11...,5:-.~ OI '"·"-''!i '1.0 -t•S. Cl"' -.u•~•• 51Qt,,,
-O((N',(1./0••CIJI(
-~'J'~ .. ~~~".,"!.?~!, .. 'L 0,, OJ-.t
••SY.ti!&!.> "AU. OI' 10,U,,w, • oU 11(-.Tt.,. ,o,, ll(l"l-.CS QII
SOO .t.i, OCC•$10HS
•W[\l&[IIS,.,P OII C4H11 AIIO,. ((~Cl.l D<hG ,• \JV )
-OCJl(H!){HI C.tJI[ cu.re• {LLS'S 1-..... l t.ROJ• C"'IC, ... ~ •Gt)
-•WUlt\1[1',l(SlfJIUSl<Wt.,I
-IIM'l'9C4 .,NSSctMtJ!fSP •
-1',Ultll, P'C!llf~OJiC[/CO,,,ct•T \\};Ut,. .,01 ,,-c l 0\.'1..1 (""
-«NUl"4 01,!lt!O()llll(CR£4 110h
·-c,,cc,c u.si,""o r,our,
:~z:g:t ::t ~~~· ·=~~i~~ou~~C::~ct ,ooo ..,.,: 11(•,ou « ·-c.f[lt[JI
SC•'ACC -\IICflOllll["(II Y :filI~rio~a~~~~i:: ~~~I MOOOA oPt•AT!OloS p
WCCIC.t.:.~"1C'ITll"C SOl'oict
0
:~ft,,iit[•n.ct<lr T'r
-l;OSPI T'-1.
.·V,BOIUTl)III T (l)(l'<l4.1., 11[0tC...._ORoP tC•\)
. :::: ~ ; \~~:>
l'[ lt{l Sal<l S ..-.l)SOll'a
(~SC,,,-..SL•'<IC(}
COI.I IIUNITI[S,
SUB1,t1TTt0 -SP.IJIT:lf" n< .. oPOSCOP.JO oUIC CO'lctPIV•L PCPsPCC Tl \l[ll(NO(Jlll'<CS
INO,C•TI!iG TI<CCht'!Al.L[\tl Of"CUAUTY,l'lfflSHES ,1J,iO I.I ATtltl .lt.S ·o ecu.c()lljl()ll,;m 1N r>4[
P -12). TI-,£ sPCOnc ocsi;,.;. 10 Ttltl4:.S. ,\,'IQ CQ..0111$ TO 9C 1h IN
~C i.OT BC DC IUIM:i.£0 Ui'<l1L. OC TAUO A.'ICM Tt CfVIU,L OR ••-"CS
Pit( l'!!CP.vt•TIOO.CY SUCHOC 1ill L£0 411
n1,1[ P'IQC[S!i n!U l!i l',QILJ!t[LY TO BC
BC[ II0',1[0 a, n.c 0 1'1' ,J>II UCANT S,.
U!il Of"P!UOJI Y WA TCl!!Al.5 ANO A C0.011 801,Jt!)f()II
}()DAYS PlltOR TO THC ISSY A.NCt r:, nit r!ll!ST 8U!tA
CONSTRUCTION SCHEDULE n-.c OCVCLoPtll Pll(IPOSU 10 COHS l'A UCT T1't£ P•OJCCI !ti 111,1,su n<E n~s, P1o l S( IIILL
lhO.UO( Fl[T t,I\ ol.Nl)c,ncc sPAct. A lil(I.I.IL P.1.!1.o>,[OR "'OIIE llt:SIOOln.lt.9~01H05, A,•
CUH!l,.CUSC /COl.l"'O'-'SBIJll.l»oG P •U.BC COl,IPLCT(D 11"i£.'1•51
""''-SC.AOOITIOH.lt.11:!SIDOITl .lt.9 •"G"'ll.9[CO,.S IIIUC ltD
LATtll pt;t.S(S ITIS .V.TIOP AltD \I H It(()"' AS[U\.Y AS
S[PT[llll(lt 200, A.NO n,.,u cOU PL(nON C\.llli.O L.A tt• TM ..,. [)(C( ... lt[• )1.
2PU0 stbEYELOPMENigSUMNMARY
1'1o[ 'PII\IC "-N I P'tDPOSCS TD DC\l[L()P IJP 10 J ~ •csrOCN n•.v-.rs AND UP ID 6~000
SQu4.11[ t [[T (ll" ll(IA.'1,/()IT\(( sP•ct n,.,c •CT411./omcc (C)l,IPC,,.t .. 1 •S PlloPDSlD r011 "'£
S(luT\,,(ASI COfl NCP OF n-c 1111cn:,m· """ /oil P,IJl o(II',(; LOC •Tt D [lfh(• BELO " SIii[[! LL'-1:L
011 !N U"'ll(D $Ullr ,cc sP •cts n-c ll(IA.fl./omcc IIVILDtHGS #LL SCll ([N l't[ su11 r ,cc
P.tJl "J"'G AR(ll !'I-( 11(5,ll)(N nA.t u,11s #U, t Oh SIS I CY Ul.ll!t() ,-cu:; .. , ll[S10Ch n11.1. IIUILD'9G5
(10W'<,.Ol.l [S).lt.0',C l"["'Dll l,.{ASI.N011r,. AHtl'flES1'[•'(901.lo;[.>,11 £s orn-[l>flQPtll l'Y •S
M'.U. •S CC,.l)Ot,l~"S1'Y'.(U"1 fStH \I ULTI-SIOII V ltUUIINCS \.OC A1'lD N fl-[1'1 T[fl~ori,..(
P~DP(ll lr fh( WL "'-SIOH r 9UILDWCS ""U SUIUIO.J "O , LAA CC ,1.'10SC 4J't fLE\ICHI ro; fl-(
C(NT[• QT , .. c Si t[ [rC[PI r OJ!uw,n:D ... SUOflPA~,NC:, 1,1.J.A(:>O('<n AL 11411'1!11,C •u.et:
11110..,DCDllCLO•SIIIC tl L.L',fL
pup PISJR!CT PLAN-DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
o..,OCD r 011;1,;r .. s11UO Oll;t.H"-"['•°"'t "'· l>II OC[0VA(5D(R TI N(N ITO ._,o;
PUO l0,,,[0,S~CTSI-UL COO,,Pp ,..-..
n,.,c o r-or CNQ.[..000 ..... o "ll•rtO
nOO-i5 flt.[0 #11-I"'( CITV
COt,TII Ol.,_CV'SLS ""ll<',""C 11\.C
ro...LO ""'"" TM[ \15£ l'l'D( Cl'C •n:s ..... H "'[ V'iC NP( s
scw.1011 •1>Vt1toi.r 01s111 c 1 ,a.,-. .. cc,L lhD<C An:s -..,1
"'' 01.lO~-.i; US[ CAl[G()!!,(S .-.o l•P[5 S,.l,U >t A\I[ I"[ 5"•[
'5Clt""S BYl"[S•l.l[fo ..... [5 CO'l l •1"'[0 IH T,•.c11 or .,.r
[HCL("°°°"'UH.CPA.l.(00[ l>(ll "'111[0 1J5[S ,IJl[51Jl.((II041.,.0 -..Cll4PP.JC IJl!.C
II{ TIOH$CYTl1".C •6 -U'-'1tO DC VlloP"'ENT CCOC
: ~,1NIT1f\/J'ICI01L \lJ(:s
0 -0'IOJ• U"'-"'-O C,;l'I'. L.tJIGC , sPfC!ilol.
-Cl'l l),/P u w.c '•OJ l"I', 5110,;.,
-SM '!L lll [•fUU,lC(N I"[•
'-1,1 1,:/0(III~ Ofl{u..-.c
•WU,IJf"l CI\IA[O '°"'l D.oSI~
-1.1ULn-u""1 l l)~r,
-O'IC -IJl>t •t1-o-t oo...:u.1-.i; -00f(-IINll l)(l4(),(0 0 ,i.i;
-OHC -Ufo!TOCl-0,,UI O"l:UJHG ON •SW '-U.LOT
-IWO-u._, Ofll:wi.~
.t,r,;:W,lL S><l,l[.P ·"01-1()11 -Pfl0,,1 A.'i U41, 'Sl-<lLI[•
cwc•u'<, n:..,. ,-.nrt1 ---wSI~ WLl"C•, •OOII ~tL l'tl!
GO \CJl"UCh ! ""° or, --.u Ol'IO .. cs ,.,..o r ,01,1 nc s ,-o • ~ cl" -.:ir• ""f
PvllUC s nn,i nC),4 11v, •·too-•
Llltll -.JI Y -P\JeuC
:~~v~~~~•ct ~J~S "ltUI
1'\181..(;.,_.!
~f~C,OJS '5~1181.•
"""" ~~~"' n(J,
=~~~-.r-G.tJlt(-.
P\.k ( •••.t -.·•• rt •l\/•t
·"[l,IC,0,,5 -.sni.,110,,s ·••C •SSOCu rto •CCtsSQII• VSC5
•(OVC A~()', IHS !'II\ITIQI-I
"L ltlll••n vt l0""[.II S1111JC"'.J•l
:~:"~~\( AA rt,,-.1,scc 101Ul[O DlM L '-•1P .... ,: .. 'IA)
f11 ,.,.SP0A h l!Oh ro01.1 r. :,;.i.;ri~;t.« tAOIJT',
-w•JOl'I Ull!JTY •t.01,Jl'I'
·"'oCll Uf\,IT',r l"f'(l 1 •"""C!l't.l.t.V Of"l.V.0)
•CT.ul s -.i.u AHO sc•..,ct .
{"(.l',-ill A."iO'l(NI~
~I 5"1.U •HO ~..,cc
(5A1.U )
1'I' rooo STOll[(lh CI.\JOli.C •u SAU:5 r:,
Pll(PAMD rooo r 011 o,,, on sin: co,,suo,Pr o,,,J
-UOJOIISfOR{
-P~W fll'!Oil~ .-Jl[I 5AL[1,cv«Jl'-!...CJIO,.Ati0,S[
SO+OO.. .-TIIACICOIIIUSIH[SS SO<OOl.{lh Q.Ul)jhQ [r-5ru.G sc1.1 .... AA ,usc)
11\0 0 • -,wiiolltL[..,5'/Jl'I lf'Q"°"'STl"iCi STVOIO,ll(CO'\Dtt.c:ftlUI 5TVt>o0
\(;<IC!.[ UIO[CVPl.l[M -'LlftM091.[PA""81t()((II
-t.U towonvc s ... 1.u,-a-111.1.
-t.Ul(ll,IC)n','[ SCll"'a !Tl£"ui, "'°-.IJ().,.C. aoo , 01t 'ViDCII '°'91
-•UT(ll,IC)n','[S(lll'C(/'l{P.tJ•,HOIIHQ.UOl"'C 800•01t rcNO(JI WOII•
-'LI IOWOn ','[$lJl ',IC(5!6MO,,(C•S<U,t r oeiul'r)
:~'-'(~~k •t~8,i ~~•;t&,~BL1~;•ou1T CM ')
-'\JnDo5PC"S"C:
•Plll~ll'tC: ''-OIJ IY, 519'.l CTV•t (Ollt:h lllt ~5), »..i.C,,,Al \JSC
.=~~~ft'~~~ .\io;t:~. Ultlik ~,~r •L \I',(
0'\11011 •CCOl,l"'OQ An(); -8(0 ... ~) 8'1[M H SI .... ,u
..o.LS><l -S-'1.CS •i.oa.Sl'tBUnoi.
WNU".v;MWte~utU
"Ol.i1""••l SCJl~C •ll'lll\lSflll-.. SCll ._,CC. uG><I
.•INDUSllli AL SCJl..,C[,.,[•.,...
"'l.'I\I UC~J IIWC:. ,,.cu,cu,c -II A.'l'JfAC T\.•-"C.. uc;,-1
"110C(S'SMO.rlll'tC•IIO'<. •II ONV'"ACI\.Jl,N(,.oo(AI'
0"•55Cwt l •
••ft0o0\l$l/5l()11 •G(
........, ....
.. o,,,tc.t.,11[ ,ccn so11>
~ .. 'J'..iet~~io
OfllUJIIIG .15UOHl.r) o•,.CII •ctnSOII Y usts
-'Vn 5IOl"•GC
-1.1 .-SIQRAC(r•c,ur,
-uo....,.c;oJi0 5TOfl •ct
-IJUT1)00IDS TOll l GC
-Sl(IIU GC UJll)r()ll ','['RCIJ:5,[0U,""'0-T"'•"Dll -'1., a,.DjoaWD<I\JU
-UJIOoOUSlf,G 4. .. D/olt 51()11 AG(
~.%,r5ll,.~AG(Yl,.DQ
•s n: .. ,i.ou .. c
11,no,,; ............. ocusi-.GOCC\:•5 •"""t"CI.OS(0
•uno,,., S0Ml ()II •U l>Jlc..ct:S51'-G occu•s OJT5Dl
!i !ltuCTV"f:
. "' -•"-<lll fll&l,51'(JI 51 ,nc,, ( .. o· ,-.a.uo.--~ Rl /•l'OOJS .. .sTt)
-'-IIIA I OU'tl'IOCl'i !CA,11[
-t lll(•C,,..OC,l,11£ _...,.,...,/fOOOI.C• "°"'r
-~CC C,.tl)CfJICol011 [
-CAlltl>J<tll'S QU AII TtJ
·Cl\J81<CUSC/COll"'ON58\J1.D'"C -OO,W,-011 ~
-cun1,cc01.1 .. 00,nc,.r011 .1ste•111s,•01ts10 1tCS1 1)(ti nA1.AIIC •
(SU~O-•t()ltOCI l .>tOW(OCOJPA !\O'-'
-~CN Nn /""'"'"'-on c 1J1t •"'fiOl!unu r,r l'l'(•s •ccusoa•11,;,co,t •NDJ :::g ~:J~H.&tt)
•5AltlJJt[ 0,$1-, a,.ttt,~•
-S(Jl \1([\Jlilll'!i()llrac..J "' -s1C1t •0t('01t .. ....,,.,v,..,.,cc .v.o •cCflt•l!{.hJ
-5Nw "'-.Cll0DI.
•IC""'5 (0<J'II
-C"'I •
-[lPlHSIO,; OIi Jl[P\..ltlll (l'<I r., ["1Sl't~:l roouncs
-t ....,,c•s "'.._."'c ' -•ooo \lt!iOOII c urs
=~~,~~c;·~~;; ~;~~ (-..~ ~l ..owcsi
•OIJ !OOOflSAllS([C ,Tt ,.l!AUS,•~l 0 1 5Al£!i,5('5()0o '-l
5ALCS. .... osi-no ~PA.II, ~ALLS ntt,,, ~Cl \l[NOQII (J RTS, CIC.)
-sPtO'-l t'<'l/111 (c c . r.,11,-;i v"l.. ,,zu.11. f ""•I
-10.TS.~01'1[5
C Y"llSl[0 1J5(
D•.X:UlUl!E S l()P ~DPIIOl .lt. or USES .. o, uSllD 1H !Nf •BO','[ 1-!ll ( QI •LLO --.;o VS(S 5""-1.l
EiC CO-.OU,,i'.O lt l nru: T6 P•O~SaOM r()II UIIIUSl"CO usu
0 Cl£\t:lOPl,i [.t.l 51 ...... DU 0S
""{ D[Vll Ol't,l[ .. I ·•u.ac ... P.[w[-.1(0 •5 • 11 '{0-\J'il .-1...>r;f "-COAPO'l •"''-C•tu1..ou ,cr ,.~o 11cs-oc,.,1,,1. rwc uses
1 .. ,11:': .. Ull t\lll.l)l'IC:"[IC,.l S[(ll!J0••'0-l)I NC-.[1C,.l 5Ul,llllJtY
l "IA'I[ T()ll p(51oco;n,lL UNIT S Ohl1<N()R ll1[AST, .. ()ll;ll,At<O 'lll';Sl [Oct5r:l"!I,(
SIT(. C,C(P" 10 n.c IJl.l •'tO CHtN I s,.o .... ,o; 11<( B'JLJ PON(0,Ac;ll 4M5Ci"IPuD-• ... o
l'OIIIIOHCY !1,'[9IJIU>tNG55".t.tL OTt..,0 9£'<0hD o.t.f ~UC'9l C B\AJ< "'[5 SH
P!JO-,r()II U'PU<:"81..C auv l'l...,.CS
J WA (;IIUW Rf SIOC Nn.lt. UNITS l ~
•1.1 0 :tuu ... 101 l.[,1,S(A81.[!"L.OOII ~C•Sl,'-l.l.,.,Ol (I C([D U .000
SOU .tJI C ru1 U5C (;ll0SS Lt •SUOlt 'lOQll "'1(• S,,l U.>;01
£•CU D 1.U'O omct sP•C'E CSTittu9tCD ..,"'lj u;, llt ""-'I.
Sf'JCts .U., IC,$U(),ll'[IA•L Ol"C••no,;
~P.vtiOHC 5(£ C Pl.AN to,, 0(14.1...
6 511.N-CC 5[[ PIJ0-11. PlloPOS[O Sic.H AQ(/ f(HONG Pr.AA rQII OC lil!L
H ["ICCS ..,.0 w.1.1.1.s . S([ "U0-11 PlloP05tO SICN •ct /f OIOhC"LANf()ltO[flo.'L.
BV,HOSC .t.PINC 5(( PUQ -11 PltoPOS(DLANDSC.I.PtHGl'I..ANfOl'OCIJJL DC l.1'.LoPtR 10
PIIOl'DC Lol.NOICJJ>C ocs,o,; P\.,f.N5 f ()II All£• AOJAClN I 10 .CST P~Ol'{Ht, E 10 ,([HI
\o1l.UG£ usxi,n()tj l ND P(CO ',I[ COII .. CN15 ("'0' APllll0Vll.)f"IIC,..,([hl \1UACC
~•nO'I
E "'ooiric ,no,,..s,
111[ •Ot.LO'll'NC w001n c,n0N PIIOCCOU~CS ,.P[ COHSIST(t.l ~"" DUO IIOOfrlC ATl()f'i DROC CDU ~(S
or Till( ,a Zl)P,l:t+G ll{CUV,T1 0NS (•S 1.100lll{O BCLOW), U'-OCII w..c,. fl;( P!JO •P"LJC •noo, 'oll l S
sue111nco
, OISTIIICI l'I.Ah fl,4( T[fl..,5, COHD.noM . fl;{ •DOP TCO PUO Ol 5TII CI PU.., ""O DOOJ4,1£'1 1S
t,I AY t [ O'l/!GCO "60/0fl OII IH DIJI T •s rouows
a IIIN ()R W00lnC,lll0N5 I Pl.AH , 11-t( Ql'Y 11>..'IAC[R 011 0[!.(;H [[ "'"
a,.QtlCJCHTorSl'IIUC IIJ PCS OI"
II Sl o1.N ctS HOl rOl![SC[N U Tli[n11c
(NT 1)15TlllC1 Pl.AH WA$ APP1t()\l[Q SOLOhC AS N0 W00111CATl0,,..
lltGUt.•not. V T •OR T>; 1H SCCTION 1e-•-1~ -zo,,...,r;
~ II TM( l'\JI) l)ISN•CT Pl.AN, .... .()It 1.1QCMnc ,nON5 1/AY BC W,OC 10
11-l[ •P•110.to DLt.HtltO Uhl! DCV£LoPll(NI DISTRICT PLAN PIJl'I SU •'IT TO n-c s , .. c
UWII H IOH!i 1,.o;I) R(QUIR[ll[Nl!i 9Y -10, SUO, Pl.AMS 4"0 00C:W[H IS "IOI[ l)ltlGIH "-1.l Y
4PPIIO',l[D.
2SITt PI.AH,
c W!N011"'°°"1C•T!CfiS ro
ltlUI 1/AY •Ul'MOllll[ I.IJN()II
APf>U.R N[CtsS
OC..,•ncws $>< AN r C, It;( t OUON.'IG o •cu11SUNCU RtSUt.T 'l 'O<c ..,.C{ IN O(V[l,.()Pll[N I, OIi 2 l O,O,,.(;(IN
J '°'1 '-"CCIN OR
' ol.N isatc,sc IN 111[ 1/A/Dt,IIJl,I .. oi;.., ()II •"'' 9vlt.Ql."i C: <T "'OIi[ l"it,t< 11\1[ P(IIC[NT (~111)
[XCf'D I n,u r ()R 9U,U)I NCS CR t ATtll ,....,.,~ !00 n:CT IH .. [!GM T. su o, •NCll(•SC s,.+•u
HOT [tct[Dr,,o pt_llCCN l (?:11), DA
~) AH INCll[•SC 1H 1'ltt 11\NB(II C, D.CLUNG UHl1'$. ()11 lH 1)1[ u no or 11,[ GltOSS f\OOII
ARC •,::, S!JtUCTURE5 TO fl;[ V,.'i() .vtt,.. Oii lHCR[ASCS ~ .. Tl;[ PII OPDSlD c;,ioss tl.OOR
&'1£A "'lWN AHY PU1 nOJL .,_.LANO USCOl'II OR(l'l-._,'lf'IIO D(•co,1 (1!11),0I"
6) • il{DU t no,,, IN 11-t( S(f'll •CKS nlOl,I P"Ol'CIITY UN[S, ()II
1)ol.N INCll[lSC Ol'II OR[n-..,.r,,oPC~C(Hl (211)1N c;ll 0U NDCOVER•CC BrSlllUCIVRESOfl
SUM"aC,:PA,RIIJH(;,Ofl
.,,, .. t r,uc nc,,,i a , ... Oll{~ ..... l'lll()P(ll((hT(2111)11,r,.(l U.O Ul[,ot$GN l TtO r(lfl
l.4.'IDSC.IJ'IHC:. OIi
,, • 11coucncw IN 11-tt ••no 01" OfT-5111[[1 D,l,Jll(IHG "1<0 ~0,l()t'IG Sl'Act TO Cl'l0S5 'l.OOII
A.IIC A CIR HWBCR <T OIO{tUhC UMIS IHSTIIUC IVllt:S. OIi
10) •oo,,.O( AT T[CTI NC n-c •ca:ss r •ow alNO niR l)JQ-PUBLPC RICt,T S or 'oll u , 1'110"1)[0,
>+Q\11,(\{P. TM l T CU~9 CU I LOC ArO'-'S 11 '-Y S1-1n !Jlil.[$$ sP(OflC AU 1 ESlllllJSl,4{0 9t
11<( Ql.~'lb(I pt.l,H
t> $1T[II\J,.',....,(H[ll,l[Hl5 lU.D00 51 tc l't.ANS4PPIIO'<ro"IO llf O(O "''-•Q>,'l,1 9[
1U10.()(0 11UlfSU .V.lrOl"{S,\l,l (PJIOC[OIJMAHO SUB.CC"TO n-c5 a1,1[U,,TIAll()II.S •i.0
ll(Olnll[l.l{"'fS Br 111111c1o wo;Pi.o1.NS .CR[APl'IIO'oUI
GENERAL NOTES
1 l'I-CD;,,,p[p1""150 .... [08Y0EM1:II 5C WNUl 1, A "0N•DII01110RCtMl ATl()O;
2 r..c •,.Ol'(ll r-1slJfilOCII COh lll •CT 9Y l"("lANS[01J .. llO[V{LoPWUl l -.f"LJC "'l l ... o;l)D•OA:c1
DlYlLI.R'U
J 1T 1S 11NnOPU l O n-,1 n,(l)(l'<\'(II SCl.l!f<.tJl t iltitl !IS •SSOO •lC O USC 5 ,_u at "'"'"''"'
OPCJh l\ONO,,, A DQll no,,;01 '"[ Pll ()PCJI IY n.11ouc;,. 11 ... 5[ I ()f 1'115PL•t,o;[O l/'11 1
0£'.1.t oPV[!O !
.... Al.lA LJ,.',I) TIit ( 51J•',I[• u s PR(P.tJl(0 8r nt()O;n{it5Ul'\[ft.'tG,,-.c .-.01SP41!1 0/f i,.s
SU91,1il!AL
~ • numc ,.,,.,,c , u.11.1.YS15 u s D•CUJl(0 tY •t1.Sbu•c -,o,_1 a uuc-.ic; ..,o;O s 1>411 1 OtT n.,s
SIJBlllllAL
6 l P'l(Lu,uto P• Ol>AIN AC,," R[PQII I ... s PP[PIJl(O Il l C•J•OU It L6NC[, u,: ·•,o ,s PAIi! ()f"
l't!S SU911ill"-l.
l'<t,S PlloP£•r, DOC S NCI U( MT\,,'t A •00 "t•J! tl.000 PL'--" st• unur,[s si,,u, 9E D'IICII CU NO
All CONCll[Tt ,o()lh ; 00,,,( ~ n-c PUBLIC llC:,.I or ••• Si-•u ltC <N CQlff()lltt,l l ti C( .... , ..
·co.stll\Jc noo, 51 UiOARl)S •-.o CONC!l(Tt sP(OJlCU0,,5 rl)II fl-l C\!'!' or [Ntu\ltOOO,
l:Ot..OII AOO"
10 ,-;cw nu "!'Dll ol.N TS s,, BE 10 Oil r:, ENGU sPtonc,ro,. 111l!E.o.CI si re
11 ..,..c 1"11£ .,..s, w nnc•tt r:, cc,· P..,.c• rDl't 1'1t: Pl!O.(Ct. 1"11l oc,n0PC11
"#!l l l[N :)£',fioPWl)il P(S llt,CTIC,;~ .\NO CO\ltN ..,_fS. l!C C0RD£0 ui,.OCR o>,( Cit
ACll([t,1[H !S.C0',l[II-C W.tJH llNAHC(l)f TM[l>lloP{JI TY ...-.O PCIII T•INlHC:10
10, ISSUE S SU O, AS COIIIIOJ< ,IJl[A IJr..i Nl"CHol.N C[, L>..'IOSCAPt I.I A'l lth".o.N C[ '-NO
~[I.I OYAI,. ACctSS Cl $0,l["-!S AND t,l il!Nl[HU.:ct Of' 11111~•11: U T!CS. AN D
N[OCl'E LoP"[Nl ll(SIRIC"ONS'-NO CO\l[!iAATSCO~c:n.c o...,:UJNcs AOJl cc .. , IO 1'1[ .CST 11•Dl't•1, 1'-l Sl-1,U Dlt[CUJOC 1"11( use 0/f ,.,., t ilol.CO-.CS IJIO',{ n-c
LOlll[SI UW.C 'l.00-f QII nl(OIJ ISIOC $!0ll•Gl or ... 0101t1 tmOII NO'l -1.1orO'lllrtlVO,,O.CSOR
r (IR l)JIDOOII 5"0-.IHC/c;ltuJNC [OtJlf>\ICIH
12.SU IN)l..,510h<:,T1,,[S,!tS,.t.1.i.ll[COll l'I.Cl"CO U!10[II SCP .tJ!Aft DOCUll {N l
IJ lU. 110,o·u '!'S ,l,l "'fiH l'M( 1>110,LCI Sr.lt.~ 9( IIRIVAI"( SIIICCTS "-ND SHAU NOT 9( ll .tJH1 il!i.(o
B• ™£ Oil <T tNGt.Cllt000
SirutTV•ts ANO PftOA:CllONS 9'All 8C CONS ll!\iCTtO ~TMl!j NC M.O<f<C (l'<\l[l()PU
IIIJUI Pl.AMES. U.O llllllC)lh C. M[IQ,I Ul.l!f1 l'UIIW.\N I 10 AHO ucc.•1 •s 1'>0 Tt0 O'I INC
~rrZi~0
J~011\.'-;J~~Rl'v"'-~:-\\~ ~ !~t i"'~~ ~~~~f ~~:Cei'4'.o n,c
P.1..11 110.IL41! 8Vil..Dl.'oC: S[IB AC,,,: UN(.
1~ N( llCV(LOll{!I 9'.I.LL COl.l l'I.Y ~n,., 41.L •PPUCIJII.E 01 f COOCS. 'l(GIJU. S .V.0 SIANl>l R!lS
1i.AIIOI IION.OC "1:Lc,>(.•Sr ,.0 1 50tlDIJll:•N fOIJ ISDt:OC."'0u no>,()11 (0-.5ntUC l\o>,
•Cn'o1 n Pllll()II; 10 G .)0 .... 011 IJ"ltll 6 }O 11\1 II ONOA'!' TNP()JQ< Jl'll()ar OIi BCOtC[N 1.)0 '"'
'-'•O , 00 DW DI" SAflJl'IOAY, sui.o•v. OIi ,,v ,..110'-',u v IICCOCMl'l:O MO.JO U . PAQ',10(0, .. o·•nt =t, .. 0 01,i lS,0( oc110t.1nON OR CONSfJIUC hON ACII ..,!) S>t -'1.l llCOJII ON suo;oo OIi AM ,.,nO"IAU , -cc 11rn ,.0..ID ., u w, •s "'l:a ss,.p ~ 10 wu c uP co,.s1 11uc no., so,rou1.r
DC LAl'i lltSIJI "-.c; r 110,., "ll[A °"(I' [~IP("'l5 0111 N•l\/11,1,1. QI.SAS ![!! QCCIJ'ljt(NC(S
16 TJ,o [ O(\l[L ( JY-4Pllll()\{I) PU9L)( IJU #Oll~/(NIR • f[l T\111{ Al I"(
soun-c•ST Si n n,.,c or, S,,ll..L Pl!ll'AH{ • S(PAJI AI'[ ~I ll\ ACJl[(l,l{i.l
•tG.I.JICIIHC 0 1/AlNft Nol.N C(O,!lf[r[J.!\IP[
•1 CYCCP!f -l0H!HGl'l!Gul •IION5 1i. 111[8A0,.(;1101.N OSCCTIO,.
•90 'o'['-HO GCf[.IIUlctSCON l .tJHCDINTMIS l'\JOIO n ll.(16""1
10 n nc 11 -nco DC\'EL OF INC CJta.C<tOOD wu"'°".1.t. coor •s w tN oco
18 Jl,,([V[ .. T Ot •CCHI\IC T sP(QllC D110 ',ISl ()h 50,Tl<,SPJ.t)ANl)nl\.£•6 114(
SP[Ot'IC PRD..,SIO,.S r:, Tl'IS PUO SH •U C()tj!POL
19 0(',{LOP\tlNT IIC STJIICTIOHS ANO CO>,O;'-H TS fO 9( DltOVOED 9 f 0C "1:lOP(II AR( MDI
["l ()ltC(Alk.[ 8• IN[ 01'1'
~ 18$S()J'11<U"-·l',"!I .W ,51J•l[I~
CA!olll OU. 6-LAN G{ r'<C LA~[ , COi.OU ~ &021 8
$"£1ho[o;1o ......... o,.:. !JO J )980-0200
~ ,e:o.oc:,-.510££•
0•..,0 0 ..C" T'lh'!I • ••C,.f{CIS O[o;,{•. CCl.()II A!:C !020.!
oc.-.r011£.,...,., ,}OJ )a .1 1-,010
IBt:N'ffflU.PPliHUI
rrLS81J "G "0.l .t lJI.L["'C
19 ~• C "'"'L[ :i A\1:. SI. re 200
c •cc.. ..,u ,c:c . t().Oll •oo aom
c M"S"O"-tC" r AscM-.c \OJ) n1-•••0 ..,....... 2i2 R0l0[1111D D,:I 90 •7!'10
J\'l'LlC
SllE....P.AI.A
O[SIO(N-•~ uses
,vr,. COI.OIUCC !'62D
<;t()IISl\ll',',
c01.1.,.t 11c,,. u ses
CLIJ BM0U S(/C°'""°"9i.,l0 ',C \J !-£
IO M,MCU S[ CA'I AC:C 9$,99J •I • 9'99J
CON0()1,1 ',lJ" GAP AC:C •,~.1J.! ~ 1 • l'Xl,•H
ll(U 't GU•GC 7~.$•e • 2 • ,~,.09e
L'>iDSC "''E /OP EN SP •CC
PIJ9LIC ll•C,,I C,.U>l l>i 0SC J P(
BlJIU);-.r; ,.CICI-TS
SURVEYED LEGAL DESCRIPTION
(910) 1'8-1100
,91_0•1sr
J P •o BOO.COO St
uP 1a n .ooos•
UP TO 2t000
11P ·o 9~.HJ sr
u1>•0 1;0.,e1 sr
uP •o ,,1 .096 sr
·9a.J 10sr
1,a 1,s r
S(( $1( PL4."
... PAJIC(L or L,\, .. O ~OCAl'[O Et. 1"11[ SOUl'<[AS' 01.J •R Tt R or llt[
SOIJl11 [AST OU A.II TCR or SCCTI Otl J,, TOMiS>I IP • S(),Jn., ~.l.l,G( 88 v.c s, or
lltC Sl lr,. llll tHOP AL l.l[R O!AA. Cl l'Y OI' (HCU:WOOO. COU NTY Of" A.11:AP,1.i,0£,
s urc or c01.0R.I.DO.ll()ll'[DA.II TIC\JlAAL"DCSCll19t0 •Sr01.LO WS
(C)l,l t,1 [!iO NC Al 'fl,[ soun.c .1.51 (011.f'i(R or S,\,I) SCCnON J~: n;o,cc
Hoo,)5'•2·,,. '-l,(lf,;lj n,c lt(Sl'UH E or nitSOUTl-£A5l OU A.IIIU! or SAID
sccnON J ~ • OI SIAH CC or 90.01 rcn. i-tNcc Sll9~?'•J"W • O,S U NC( Dr ,ooo ft[l •o Tl'[ Nl)ll l\,o[A$T CORNtfl or fl,( c as t .. ,1,1,j PD[N .l.\'{N U[ (SUit
;~t•i} ':lJ,~C:; t c·:~~ 1 ~~~tci~~ 9~ ~~~t'~Cfsr'~0...,~:,r
•..U.u£ fie;,;! or ""'" AS OCSCIIIBEO ., SMD 90(),( !l ~!il. PAC( 5!il0 n-c
f OLJ.0 1111'1(; Tt;ll [t (.!) COUIIS£S:
l)!h[HCCSllll"$7'4J 0 11't l)!ST AN C[Ol'.!805JfE[T,
l ) TH[NCC N87i o·o ·w, OI Sfl_~CC OI' ,oo,o r [t T,
J) 11-,[NCE SH "$7.4J "fll A OI ST .... 'ICC or 1,110rcn TO A Pl)l"II ()h l\,o [ 'lt(ST
UN[ or TJ,o( CA.S T "'-If or fl,;£ soun<t •SI OJARTt O or WC 50Ull-EASI
OUAATtP or S.1.10 SCC TIO'I .!~.
n<(NCt hOO"O''J!il""' •LONC Tli[ "'{SI Ut.( or n,[ C'-ST .. Alf r:, n.c
o;ou n,[ASI OIJ AATOI or n.c 50\JTHC •ST OU APIUI or S.1.10 SECTION ]$ •
()15fANCt or 191 e, r((T TO • DO,NT ON IW[ sou r .. U't[ r:, BLOC• '·
..l ll l>OC N "ILLS SECOND l'\.lhC •s l'ILCD IN n,c All .1.P A,oO[ COU'tTY CUii~ >..'ID
'IC COAotll·s orncc .I.I ll[C[PTl()N NO ,16657. Tl{[•,t ( se9·,a·0 2·c ll.OhC n.c
SOUTl-1 UM or $Al() 91.00< I A OIS h .NC[ 621 lO r e c , TO Tl-1( S0U "'1E •S I
COAt.(R or S.1.JO BLOC!( 9, SAID P()IHI •LSO 9[1hC Oh !WE "'{$1 111(.1-ll Of
"HY UN[ Of" soun, UH ~SIT'f 90UL[VARO: Tli[NCt S00'0~'•2·c AI.ONC nae
"11{5 I RICI-I r:, WAY UH( or sou n-UNJ\'[RS1T'I' 901.iltVAIID .1. OISTANCE r:,
&000~ r([T TO I};( P():H f Of" 8[G.N"''-G.
S_,.,'O PAIIC(L CONU">S •97.011 SOl..f.R.E f[(T, ., •1 •~ES "'CA[ or LCSS
PU-1
ll!Jo-,
PuO-J
l>\iD-•
PUD-~
PUO-e
P\.1 0 -7
PIJ0-G
PUD-9
l>\iD-10
P\.10-11
PU0 -11 lol 2
2 Pl1
SIGNATIJRES
APPR OYED FOR OENvt:R SEMINAR Y, A COt.ORAOO NON-PROflT
CORPORATION FOR MERLY l<NO\IIN AS CONSCRVATI',{ BAPTIST
Tl4[0t.OGI CAL SEM INAR Y
Sl~•TUD[
S U T'{r:, COL.011 •00 CO\J Nl1or ___ _
T\o[fOll[CO,-.cf•,5 111111.1(-.T y,•S •C("'Q..-,EDGC0 B[rO'l ("'(""S--D" "'---•O. ,o __ ,, ___ _ ., _____ ,, ___ _
... ~ to1.1"'S!>ON c ,11111cs ____ _
•OO'ICSS
APPR OVE D FOR TH[ CI TY OF [NGLEWOOO
"'A'OIIOf'E'ICI.£
ATT[ST!D
.-.-.---m
:===:: .---~
flo( tOll[GOHC APPll()','11.;. ·o s •C-<NON .. [DCCO 9[1()11[ 1,1( 1"1115-0••
c, ___ AO , 2D--B•----·----·
o f'!' o.c~.-
ClERt< ANO RECORDER 'S OFllC[
T'MIS P~l.',',(0 U!ill O[\l[l(lPll[N 1 IS •CC[Dl£0 r (lll r Ll t-C /1-j n.c orncc or
W[Cl[lh.' 6',Q ~(()IIO(PC, •PAPl ,.
C ·o. COLOlt .1.00 ., ___ o· Q.O()(."' ... ,s ----
!'.'•• t::, __ • 20_
qcccPnc,,,-.u "'ec11 __ ,
CL(P~ l ',:I ll((()IIO(P ,---------------,
DISTRICT PLAN
OOl'«R SDMARY
~'\Xlt _._..l"Rf:.-.....n ... !"l ""ll,~0,,1Z/200I 0159l!oPU.C-,.._.lrc .......
I
rl ~' --_--_-_---1~------------:~==:----_-:---1 I _t
I ,/
: !~/~;~~-
: !, ~
,.
I
I
I
I
' :
I , ,
I
I :
I
I
I
VI I I
0 I
C I 'jl I I
C I : z I ~ ' i
Ql 1' : =< • I
~ J :
rs I
I
I
I .·
/
Jl I l--
___ ,
;fJ2?,_
.1
_,/
=i:r . " l= 1' : ~ ·'
"' ' 0 I I //,--'
' i
~ '
~-' ,.
I :
L.
' ,-
-.
:,,.,-..
-.........
, ,
:,:,
~(,I
f_"
EAST HAM PDEN AVENUE
t -(i
'H '.ti
~1 ~
,,,------:-~
:·,1 : ::
I
I
J · -· · · · _>,;:._.,,-,;~_j--,-.:-.!_ ---_-;,--,
t
I
j
I
I
I
I
I
0 I
I
I ,.
: i IL..-_
------------, --;.;_-_::_-_-_,,,
.... -~
.,
~ I ·, l
-(
l I l I
I
! I
l I
I
I t I
I 1 \
\ '\\ \ ., . ' \
•f l------1-1-1-1-1-1-1-1_......,_.1-1 -1 -1-1-1 -1 -1 1 -Ls-1-1 -1-1-1-1____..__,_, •-s-
ca<.
i j!~
11•,f@M ,.@:~
;•h Mi• 'I'' ~I~ §I ca<. i ··I
~
~ i ~ a i ~ I .. : i ,,, ~ ◄
i ~
• ~:::1 ! ~~ I ;!a
~;;j
~"[)
~ r >
"[) ~ z
C
0
,!, ~
f • i
'
I
I
I
I
DENVER SEMINARY
~ -ES -
• ~
N
PLANNED UNIT DEVE LOP ME NT
ENGLEWOOD , COLORADO
,,,
'-.I~
~ Car roll & Lang e ~1 .,..v,o OWl!NTRY ... ••cH,YECTS
~~=i'....e:i'~'.~~~ =-~
~.Col-YN0&022& '".,.""' (3031 980-02'01: ,.,..,,_,.,
• IIC'ASCOSITtUiTOJ!
3 A[',IIS(0$1T[U,'101JT
2 RCWSCD SITtUTCIJT
1 fl£"'5CDSITtUTOJ f
Mo. Jt.-.lslon,
l n ~ I I ~ ' • • ; i i
"' ' "\ "' ' ~ g
i a
I I (l ) '~ : I I I
I s :
I
I
I
(1 2)
ii ' l ) .
-(12) ====~~=~' ' ~TYIOUllYoU!O (12) ~ -'!22..-c==:5<.!.o)_ _______ L __
I
E&
r------,,-7.,
i~--J ~;:~ ~
I IUU>IHO L,
I (l) I ,,
: r---7..,(ll I <•
L. r-I r----,-------------
c•>l J
1
'"'""' B(Q:NNalG
(1) \ :--(2)-
1 I (1)
I
I
PHASE I -SITE PLAN
---·--------__ L--
1
E& PHASE II -SITE PLAN
wm,
~PM.t.SCl9.II.DNGS
~PltAS[IIIUIIJ)INO$
[;:] IIKAY.•M.ll.CINCS
......,
E&
1. OOIOJSH .W. OOSTIK\, ~tO,ltY IIOIU)llfCS DCCPT AOMHSntAOOH 8UIUllHG ,I: AH Y
OTHOI IIUIWNCS ltCOIMED f"Olt $0,W<liJIIY COJll'tlUINC oPCllATIONS
lt[t..,_Uff11HG'CSTP.waNCLOTANOl/20TOQSTlNCNOIIITHPAl'IKHGLOI
CONSTllUCTOCCCWt A"<»I /MXXUIIA~l,l,HCSA/«I ATTAQ1COSIO(WAt.ltOH
I..N\OISITY IL'oti, • MA Y,o[H AYL, N['lr CUM! OJT'S, ANO A l'tllnoN C, INTtRNAL
""" 4, CONSTRUCT T[UP0IU,l'IT •.I.US TO IOJNTAIN .+.CC(SS TO OCIS1"'G IUllDl'IG/SITl a
aLJ,.OW'"OllnlT\lltCCONSTJIUCf)()t,
~ COHST!IUCT IICUJL GAIi-'« ,I: IUII.LINOS
•• C0NSTIIJCTP.utflALlttSIOC.NllALCWl.t.ClC {2fl.00111$),1:0N[OlllolOlttOflltAJlltC1
0,Lr ,l:OJAIHOJS(
7. C0NST!IUCTPAllllALM'.SWJOlllALCAll:AOCS.,1:iltCSIOCN1LAL.IJ,l[Olll,l(fl(0,9Ul.CtHGS
1,2 ,1:JN()ftO WAII.KJOSk
.. C0HST11UCT TtWOll:.utT LOCI' DAIVC rOR nll( muoc ACCCSS t . CONSTMJCI UHOSCAP£ r011 PH.UC I IICIAll ,I: lt(SIO(Nll,\L IIIADlftCS
I0,CONSTllUC I HC'lr5N)N,IJJl[UINTOl$(Cn0N•IICDIAHS
II. IIO..OCAltMStCP
12. CONSTllUCT 'IICS T AHO NOlll1"' POllnoHS Of 50..N)/PII \IJ.CY •.W. fltJI ~I[ !,, I , 7 a,
PUO-l1""°AU.OIIP011ll0NC'IIIOIUIIHC 'II -.U.
, .. _
CCltSTIIUCT N'.t,UJNOCJI r, SOUNO/'l'lllV-'CY WM.L "°' C0NSTllUCTt0 IN l'tl.l![ t
00>ANOOC1Dl110HSl1 TO,I TOACCOl,IM00ATlTMCIIOIAN-IOOC\C..OPWC.NT
COWUTl frlT(Jtf,jAI,. L()(fl IIIOAO ..rtOI urunts COMPU:nll
COWLl:Tl AU. I.NIOSCAniO IN l"UOUC III011 C, WAY .. CIJtSOt SOJHO /'°"'YACY . ..,
PHASE Ill ·-SITE PLAN
...............
A. MD(mOJIP l'UoHS 10-.D ntCP!tO.lCTtllil!JlTW"I.Cl'tlASCS. IIIS
AH l'IOPAffl) 11,(AT TWC 1ST PttASC ~ tKUU IICTM. • oma. SPACl AHO A
11tt""-,A0,0NC OIII WOlltltN4HOUSt:lt,lllDINC1(8LOG.l,JNlf!J/Olll),OHC
01t 1i101t£ IICSIO[pjnAL. -.owes (k001. o.c AHO/OIi n AHO 11otc
Cl.18tWSC/C(MION91A1111tO,ASICU.A$0Jll((III WOlll(L£«1.SC,IICIAIL.
'AIIIONCG.IJIIA1%AHO~SCCTIO"ISSCltWll;Tl10S[ro--CIJS[IIUI.DINCS
COW1'UTt0 ti MPH.UC. NCW DCTtNIION 'ACIUTa • ~ Ull.l11CS
SHAU.ICCCtlSlltUCltO.
0. ST[ IV,H l"t!ASHG ...o..usrvo,n WA Y ec lil AOC ., WIUAI.. A(jll([l,l(NT
8C MOI lHE 0£\nDPOI Alt0 TMC CHY MANAGO! 011 DCSIGNIL
C. ~91AU.l.l'GltADC ntl SICtO,LAT 1MC MMll'OOl /\lf'll loOtSIY
1Nl'DIS(CflC),jfOACCOl,IWQ)AT[DU,q_L.Uf1\,ll!NS'0IISOU~
UNI011TY. Tl€ T!WIMC ,011 uPCAAOINC 1W[ n u .me Sl(;H,q_ CAHt+OT 8C
iOCHnnc:D UNTIL COOT H'Ut '1-1() APPltO VAL. IS OCIT"INCO,
PH &.YDIHfDCCM'ING·
A. Pt1AS[ I 15 TO tlQ.U0C LAHOSCN'IHQ AU»1C 50U1W UNI VVISITV ll..O. "'OIi
TMCH(JIIUHCASfCOIIN[JIATTHt:""'ll'CIIIYlHJDMH.wPJCNA',(,
1,.rro1sccnONNlfOTOTMCSCU"4[11LY[H l!IA/olCt 10T)f(PltC'..(CT.
I . IN A001110N, l'tlASt 1 ~ttCUJOC ~ rOII IMC ll[TAILCU)WU'!i AS
ICU. AS TMtt.ANOSCAPINCDCSIGNCDr0111WOSCIIUIUJINCtC:0r""l:1t01'1
l'kASCI.
C. ,0111 SIJeS[CIJCNT l"t!A.."CS. 1.AHDSC ......... '1111.J,. 11C IMSU,U..ltl AS JIIP!ICIP'IIIATt
TO ~t AOOITIQHI,,. IIUIU)IHCS .U COWltflD . -A. ITIS[XP[CTI.OIMATl'WASCICOHSTRUCIIOHlill,.,T ICGIN4S[.IJIILY AS
S0'1tWIDIJ0.'40ll4SL.Alt 4S ~.IJIIYtoOI.COHST!tt.lCTICJlltt/F~
'HASt ONa: ■Cl.l'I IS ,.,,.naPAffD HOT to uc:ao '"-1' t,IQNTHS.
COIM .CTION ~ AU. '"I.SU a, ntC l'ttO.l'.Cf Alt( CN·lCrol TO OC0JII HO
LA1DITHAHOCClWl(llll,200t.
PROPOSED PHASING PLAN --OCSGNCD BY: DT SCA1.L: ,•.!IIJ'-o• SHCCI:
OII AWN BY: ,P DATt: OJ/10/04
04[0([D l 'f'l o, l'ltO.(CT . OJlOOO PUD-3
AD.IACl)H lONINCW•ll•J•B
OTY or Ol<UllOOO
ucr -•· 1r-r ~ 10'-tr; _, l t•tl'
·..,,--,--------------------=....,...="-----"':...--------------------r.~ ------
~'
! D
-~-::; -
I i i 'ti 1
~ :!re
~I
~
5 '
2 I 11M -i ' -~
i KR
~ •·-•·
"°"" 'amct
W...X.H0(>4T AIIOI'[
CflADC • S7 f1:tr
" CC)
111-4' ~-~·-
11ts:00tn"I. ACSIODl nAA.
Wt.l.ttDCHT AIKIK
OIIADC • 121 rttT
t1-o"
a.J.a~~ _,._
WU HOCIH T AIIO\'C
OIIAOC. '° rut
,-8UIUIU,j00UA1'
SU&JECf'O
-'l>J,t,CCNT
ZONIHCfOn.t
SQUfl,I UST
11-JA YAA!A8l[
l OT ll(S10CNT1-'l.
CHCRII YHIU.S
AOJACOl l?C,.IN011-2 AIIAP1,t;OCUlJNTY
DQSl'ftGZOHiHG
TOntCMOIITM
CAST ll-2 .. ~ ....
""'"
,.,, ....
(l(Vlll)I VMICS •111 GIAIQ'.. ·--........
'""
LHcraul'IM(
+1,.1"-(1{1i10'1{11tSIAA)
----'--------------'=::J..-+..::'--(V.-:S •IHCUl[G'-J1 ---~TAAD.fY.
_, 10'-lf•/.:.._!_ V"'6
,.,, ....
lll'WOI VIMS
tn11 r.1r111«•
uc:craul'IMC _,,,...,
~11)111..\lVlrlll)
-11!'01:IJ IICO'l'IIOI _,,,. ..........
~TY~
f'IIS!fl.CI» I
:C:l~ l
~l
"""'"
+4f'(l'(.iil0\(11tSII\A.)
+'lJl'(l'(lilO\l[l1tS!f\A.)
=~ ,1G'-0"·1f/-o"1:-1t +/
__ __._,_-------------==:::i..-+_""" __ ~ t:::a~:~G'·J1
It .()"•/· _,_-1!::E..._ •/;_! 1 ~ V.-:S
1"2~-~N=OR~TH~L~'lt£=S~T~/=E~As.~r~PR~O~P=E~RTY~=Ll~NE~B=U=LI<~P=LA_,,_N,:E~~2~ST~O'.'c'R'-cYc-'cUNI T 3 . NORTH /Vt£ST /EAST PROPERTY LINE BULi( PLANE
NOT TO sc-;:;}
3 STORY UNIT
NOT TO SCJ .£
_use _
II[~~~
I\OAD!.ATS
O!'UUP.Mt
~ IIIJ)9,,
OCCOCO 110,w.
~IH ,J_1g _ .,,.
2,1)1
---,,. ,,1,2!.J 100
11.4I ACRCS !'IIOJ[CT sn :
11,\ICIWl,IW OCNS,ri (IICSIJCNTl"I. UNIT'S PClt ACltr) )Oi7
IC .. OUl.lOl'OWIUJNOUNfl'W
1 ll<[Mt.lOIIIJWNUUe(IIOlf lt(!JOOITl,\L UNITS Wl!lLNOT(lC([Otl,1[1,iAIOIIUM UHl TSSP(Ol1lOIN n,c LANO US( SUWW .IJI Y l"81[.
2.IH[NIJl,l9(11 0/f llCS10CNTIAA.lJMlfS lll lklN [A0.9UIU)it+C,IH[NWKIIOf"8EOIIOOl,ISN,jQ
On10t IIOOl,IS •MH tt.O. At:SIDENTIAL IHT lo.NO TM[ U YOJT Of" "'4C IICSIOCNTI"I. UM fS SHAU.
8C OCTEIIMiffCO BY t'4C PIIOPlllTY O'IINCII SUM CT TO COlolPU~ ""™ Af>'PUC.fJIL( IIUIUllNC
C00CS
J . ™CNWIIE.IIO/flltslOCHTI"I.IJNISOOCSNOT INQ.UOCPIICIP05[I)CUCSTt.CCOlolWOOt.nOHrOII
OUCSfSO/flttSll)OjfSOf"THCPIIO..CCT.SUOtsPt.a;SSH.W.NOTOICCC0too S.r,,v,;oNO
UOII[ ~AN r;,o SUCH SS'i.Ci:S POI 11i.nU11NC (12 TOfAA.) $HAU. ac PAOV.OCO.
NOTtS :
0 1, SW.t.M: roort.et MCA INCUUS BOTH IUIUIINC C ANO l!Ull»IC r
•2. sou.vitroouoc .uttAINO..UOCSBO™lkM.DINO0 ANOIIUILCMH0[
1. rntSTn.00110£YATION: IH[nRSTn.OMDLVt.OONSrOllet.O.IIUIUIINC.v!tAPPROICllolt.Tt
ANOSU&.(CTTOWOOIF1C A1IONl'l'IHCPl'OPCllfYOWOOU[100C'inOPlolCHTOf"flH"I.
Of!AOINQ~ [L[Yt.lKWS.vitBASCDON USCSDLVATIONSPCIIALTASIJll\'CY,
2. W.oJOI.IUI' H[l()11: WUllroll,N HCIOHTS All[ l,l[J.5Ult[l) ntOol THC '1lltS'1 1'1.0011 [U\'t.n(IN.
J . ICC.I.USC .W. IIUILtllolOS Alt[ COffSTIIVCTtO OH BCl..OW OltAOC PAAIONC c.t.AAOCS, rOII TM[
P\#OSES 0/f Of:T'[IMMNO BIADINO HOOHtS 4S CSTAIUSHCll IN MS PUO, .W. l!IUUJINO
HOt'.HTS All[ WCASUMD FllOM THC ToP Cf THC !WIAOC Pl.NI[ -..CH IIILL Y,\111' •ll-1 '1NAL
S,T'[ CftAOIN<l (2", •/-).
4. ON RESIOOt TI.l.l BI.I..OIHCS .1.,a,c.o.c.r HOIIUllDl'tC SHAU.. O:'IOIO K"IONO THC M.ultolUW
BI.IL.DIHO Dl..noPC (AS OCSCfllBCD IN THC PIIOPOSCD SIT'[ Pl.AN DflA-..C AHO nt[ IUIJ)ltC
HDOMT SUlll,INIY) CXCO'T r011 n!IST n.0011 1t111W::tS. .. :--ti! n001t IN.CONICS (7",
OJS Ft.l.lUM;S SM), .u OCOOIIATI'ot: COINCCS. c,.mars.
MCIIICWS'ol:OT.W.POlUAHCNT SllllJCTVIIESSUCMt.S
To\lllllllA1' OtCl.OSUll(S, ANIOIHAS, IIOOFTCI'
tkD11 ASSOOt.TtO SCMIH ll'AU.S • t.l'IOIT[CT\IIU,1.
~ ON IICSIOCNT1.t.t.81JUW,ii.5 1,1.),4,S,e, t.NO 7, NO 9UIIJ)INOOII IAl.COff1CS SMAU..[Xl[HO IIC'l'ONO
THC NOllnl/lll(ST l'IIOPOIT'Y UNC BUI.K Pl.AH( (O\IIIC 2 ill 3) O:CCJ'T r0111111sr n.0011 PAIYt.T[
TCltRACCS. IK#UltllS t11 n< ,,uroows. llRCPLJ.Ci" OWNEYS t.HO lol!SCClLAH£OJS -.£Hrs. n.ucs.
""
9, AN Y a:w.vJI ICU~ [OUIPW[NT PUCCt) ON AN T SIRUCTIJltC WU ONlY 9C INCOIIPOII AT[0
UtlJllNQ'STtALN'O[S,C,,,T[QtNIQUCS.
1, tHCl.OSullts 0/f IUIIIACCS ANO /OIi 11'1.COIIICS t.SSOCl t.11'.D 'fllfl,I RCSOCNTI"I. IIUIUINCS IN !Hf
"1JO SH.W. IC uwnro AS set r011TM IN M S NOit 7, ,011 P\Jll1"0SCS or 51.101 Ut,IITA1IONS. A
0 !VIIIACC.0 1SAN O:Ttl!IOIISPACCCOffN[Cl[0TO A!ll oc:noPUN1l:Jlll:A UHIIONntCMSI
n.0011 or t. ll(Sl0£N T1t.L BUIU)jNC: .I.NOA 011'1.CONY" IS lo.ff EXIVIIOII SPACC.CC,.NCCTtO TIJ
ANY UNIT Ofl,f[R f)!,l,N t. '111S T f'I.OOII 011 AoorTOP I.NT t.HO t. ·a.1.1.co1O· WA'I' BE [UHOI
tHSCI OIi PIIOJCCTI!ICll!OM nit 8UUIINCCll'tOIIOII. r011 IO™ "tCRllt.CCS" t.HO "81'1.CONICS",
NO CCII.INC OIi IIOCf'TOP 5"ALL 8C PEllll!nrtl •TM lltSPCCT TO AN Y R[SIOIJ'jTIJ.I. IIUILDIN0.
l~r~~·~r ~J.IE: =J: ~~"~1Vt6s i:,~~~~ ~"~""..ao-..: TH(
LOll'ESTWVt.TIONOT™C IVIRAa:.
~~r~~"~f =~::t: =r~ ~!':'~:.o's :,:~~C:'~~~ n<£
LO WCST CUVATI()lolor n◄: 1"[1111.\CC.
(c)r()R 0 E1"1.COl'll[S"NO\-VIOCAI.STIIUCT\.IICOTANTl<NOSM.AU..B[P(R1,llrT[0TMU [XT[M)S
1,1011( """"'2INOICS"801':: THCnOOIICT TI<B"I.COHT."
I , ~~'':'..,"J.~~o,pl,l[HT SHALL 8[ sat[[lf[CI 110tNO BUn.DIMC PA/It.PCT W.W.S ,\NO
! ! ! 1 ~<l'UfU!!_~-t i
t:r<r =.:---H-...i <<r:
l'Ufl1'C ,wufl'1 CIIO'III ~ 'i°~ l'I.IIIIIIC (IICl(WU ,ow , , ...... :111['1,tU
Ir •f'UIIIIH J\D'ILN-7
r<r , 1J<r ~f
4. ILLUSTRATIVE ROADWAY SECTION
C RESIDENTIAL LOOP DRIVE
NOT TO SCALE
PROPOSED SITE PLAN
l)l'JMJI........,
OCSIQNCDB'flDT SCAl.[:1"•50'-0" SHCCT:
:;:;~/ DI' =c~21200:00 PU0-4
c=..-=-:----
-----1-
LEWill
l'ttOf>OSCO nftC HTORAIH,
WATUt UH( A.HO CA rt YAL\.1:
[XISTWG W,.IUI Uf,I[ I.HO YALVC
PffOPOS[D S.t.NIINl:Y SOUi 'Mf'H MAlflQ.[
-s---•---l' [»5flHG SAHIUJl'I' SOIUI 'Mnt WANHClt.£
CXISTWC S!Olb,I S('lll{II ll(P
l'ttOPOSCO[,l';(l,l[HI
.-, PftQP05CD !.TORM INl.[l
(XISTINCSIORl,IINL(I
UJ T
SCAl.C: ,· • 100·
-OlP!"'"( I
PROPOSED OFFSITE UTILITY PLAN
DOt'tf:R SOINNtY
OCSIOICD BY! • SCAll.: 1• • 100' SHCtr:
0111,.-.. ev: • DATt: 01112/0' PUD -5
OtCCl<tO I Y! PRQ.ICT J01S
CONN£C 10
CXISTIHG ti " WAIUf
"""'°"'UHOSCN'C DRofJN 11111)1 ARD! MCTS
EAST HAMPDEN AVENUE (US HWY 285)
l
R(t.10"1:
SANIIAftY
I SCIIYla:
COHH[CI 10
(XISIINC e•
SANITARY SC"IIOI
cx,snNc JO" ACP
""""'' Flll[H'l'tlRAH I
CONH[CI 10
UlSTINOS"WA lUf
'1111 TH PRCJ'OSCO I[[
""'"" nRt N'lt>RAHI
CONNCC 1 10
""""""""" """"'
T
---1-
N
~
-(!)-
~
~ 'f
SCAL£: i-. so·
OIIO!lil.Cllof"<~
PltOPOS[O f'IRC '-O'Dff ANI .
WAl(A UN[ ANO CAT[ VAL~
[XISTIHC WH [R UN[ .o.HO VAl..C
PROP0510 SAHi I A.RY SOICR YUH 1.U.HliCU:
(XtSflNCSAl'flltJIYSClllCA -~ WAHlttl.[
PRoPOSCO SIOAM SCYl(II RCP
CXISt'IHG 5101!1,1 SC'lll{A RCP
Pllc»"OS(O C,tS[W(H I
PflOPOS(O SIOR\I H.CT
[ldSTINC STOflW IHL[I
E&
........ -·
PROPOSED SURFACE f . ,.,KING PLAN
PARKING LEGEND -SURFACE
TOIMt0UII: !UST 'AIIIIJIIO
>01STAHO.fJIO T ,20' P/Jl:ALW.
0C11DCYaM (AOl PAIIICIMCI
2t 5TAHDAA11 T ,:zc' PA.RAU.0.
U UTOTAL
IIITM.PNDIIO
OT'f, m>C
Td O' PAll"Lill.
IS? a.lOTAL
"""' 1. • VNf ACa:SSIIU SP4Ct$ SHALL IC PIIO'AOCD F0111 ACTAI. 0N SURf'Aa: POI A»OIICAHS
'111TH DISAlllUTO I.CT .t.OCCU.UT'f G..IICtLHS 2002 (AD.UG) M.OJIIOICHTS.
1. HANOICAPP[DPAIIIONOSPACt:S(t"-O" • 11·-1•11H. + !,'-O"A1Sl.t)9lALI.ICP1'0'MlCO
rOII MTAI. ON SJN'AC(: -.rlO W ~ G.utAGU 'flt AWCIIICAHS 'MTM OISAIIUl'ICS
~~~CV~ ~~-1.2, 2002} AT t Sf>ACCS POI 40H,OO SPACU
J . ~r':.i~~~~~~~-g,.,.~o:oi~:ni
:=r,TOS'ms.ACa:~~~..:•~=•.J,2c:='C:'11~~
PAltlONO SPAClS AM P!tCMXD AT OIWI( FOIII M:Sl'IOtnAL IHT1.
4, n:>WtOOSCS HAY[ O'oPSIZID PIIVAT[ QNV.0($ 90.0W Gl'lAD[ '11TH Dlll(CT ACCC'.SS TO
[A04 UNIT. ~DCSICNAT[O HANOIClrl'PC0 Sl'AC(S 'MU.ICP!ffl'AOCO F"Ofl T09IHOIJSC ......
~ lOCATIOHSOTWM. IUOSK?Ot,itSIIAYVM Y OP'OIOINOONOt5CIJS$tON'MTMUSPS.
I . SURrJ.CC P~ WT!-ef M ACSIDtHn.trl LooP OAl',I[ IS OJCST/"'31T'Olt PAIIIQHO OH\.Y.
AU.lt(OIMC)~TIAI..O'IIIN[JIPAIIIOHCIMAUICID.O'lrOlltAOC. sttPU0-1.
7, IICT0..[ PAIIKNQ SHAU. I[~ Pflt DtO..LW:XC WUNIOPAL C0Dt SCCTIOH lt-t-t,
I(. IIIC1'CU PNIKfo!O SMALL K l'tlO\«IO) RIii M$1D011\At. ca«>cUNIM IHTS .U OHC
SPACE l'C1I fW:) \MIT'S (~ Ull1'/2 " 153 SPACtS) Al OIV« 0111 t,I '-'40CIICltOJNO :.u::,!lf'. 9 CTCU '"AltKWtr. SHALi. NOT K Pll()W)(l) ,011 TOWtOUSC IHni AS £A04 INT
HAS A Pf!IVAT[ 041tNX.. 11,<::YOJ: l'NIIONG SHAU. K PltO'AOCD rOII ltCTAIL AT ~ U
ONCSPAC(POI I0l'olJIIKH) SPACU (460/10., .. S,,ACC!).
a. SMCIW Sl 0111A0[ -"'£AS MC APl'!.'OIOW ATt. ruwo,nott Of SNOW •MM THC Pf!OJ[CT
SHAU.HOTK 1WC liltSPOtl9flluT'f<S lliCOlY utO SHAU.I[ MaJLA'IU> MtOIJGH M
c<M'.H.tJfl5, OOl'a'10NS AHO IICSTl!ICtOIS CO\UINC THC ""<ll'OITY. HO PUIIUC lt!C»ilS rs""" SHAU. II( ustO rOA SHOW STOII...CC.
PARKING LEGEND -TOTAL
10NWa:(........a40)
l)TY.lf""1:
llllSURrAa:(oucsT)
l(J j CAAAct
mjn,,,.._ --
0Qtl)CINJM(ADJIIIIO*)
QTY. I 1"YI'[
~:~(MST)
" IN l '1lTAL
fll'TM..(Aa.lliMOU.011081")
QTY.In,>[
57 l su11n.a:
405 I CN!Act
~
QTY. I MC
1,,ulm.owat.a:
111 1 ... ,a:
PROPOSED SURFACE PARKING PLAN --DCSJCH[I) IY': OT SCALI: l"•,o'-O" 51-UT:
OIU, .. I YI ,I' 0Al[: 02/l()/04 PUO-7 ~ PltO.ICT OlJ0,00
I I
r ,--.. --.. --~--.---.---.---.-,
t I I
~ ~-µ:_ ·•~ --· ,-·_____,..+' .; .;. ,~·
~-I , 11 ] 1 , I 1 1UH"U-
I I COCIOlaalf I I
21.L\C.PAAICNCC • Sll,t,\M'1.00ll 'lATtS.IHQJJ0[2PAIIIUNCSP SPOIUNt l05 ;:_ I~_: •--SUII.J[C:T
:1 "-'f TO 0Wl0C
,-~
ij I I j_ ~, I ,_ I
I.... fl I I f ,_
~
PROPOSED 81/82 PARK IN G PLAN
SCALE: 1 • • 50' -o· --I IJ M
PARKIN G LEGEND -81 /8 2
~ ,......., (~ 41 INft)
143 -...,,OTM. J.JSJl,1,C[S/\,NT[Sf.-(1/\NllollH,)
Cl0ICl0lalllll PMIGMCI I ......... )Of I.Nff a 12 Gl.e _O~"'~"'~---
OTY. I n,,,c HOTt
11ols1NtOA110 WI, t 'o11' IO' "(2 SPMXS/\NT WIN.). H()t[ I
,,7t< i.lH, t 'o!I" to' W/ 5' NSU., HOlt 2
12ISTAHO.ut0 wi.,·.,,·wcwcs, .t.CCCMIOOUIOHSPACCS)
U, Ml'OTM.
OTY.lmot: NOlt
400fsu,HOMO IIN, l 'oll' IO"•, HOit 1, HOf[ •
a lUTOTM.
1,11,,J TOTAL la.OW __,,a P.--0 la.
N01D I) SlltlJCMCO l"ARIONG DaOISOIS fASG CH 1"[ "OM>QJlrlCS r01t
PNIIOHGGCOl,l(necs"ITJMC NATIOHAI.PoUICINGo\SSOOATIOH(Hf'A)
"""""
IIWL.fAIIKllll
Al LUST 1 SPAC:ts POI 1,000 s.r. (n,ooo s.,, COt,a,,IOtOAL. / 1000 • U X 7 • ~1:1~.,•~s::r:to:c::c~~: ~ ~ 1M(
SUllf"AC:C. !Ht: CM AQC 5".-U IHCLUO( ru:vAfOllt t, SIIJIIII CCfttS • WISal.LANCOJS
VCOtAHCAl./[UC:TRIC AI. • Pt:.W.N0 St'ACn AS NCD)(l), M GA/1:.t.CC SHAU. 8C
nJll T 51'11N<W!(Q .. t,l[(>O,NIC.t.U.1' ',Olfl.Af(D AT lOCAfl()toS TO 1K O(Ttlll,ltNC),
PROPOSED £1..(.B~KING PLAN
DC9GNCD I V: 01 5CAI.[: 1"•,o°-0° SHEEli
011:Aw,,i l 'r. , DATt: 02/20/04 PUD-8
OICCXCD 1 1': Of" PRO..CCT OJl0.00
E& PROPOSED PEDESTRIAN CIRCULATION PLAN
SCALE : 1·• 50'-o· --
CO'INECT H[W
CONCIIIC1tSIOCWAUC
JO OIISTHO
"""' ,_,..,.N«JClACT LOC,l,TICIHNCISl lCOtlilAillKJOSl;SJOIK
D1:TOIWICDro.J.OW.COISC'US1101(S 'M fWUSPf!STA.LSCJl'ACt
1.0:.U'OI or [NTII T c•tts l,IU Y-"11'
,COUn14'1 Lll>ll'tlO IN IICSUHTIAI. 4ll(A!J JO K ,Q,J: 1,1(),1,jfto
nnu111r.s WfW WCTAI. HAUOC (~ (OIJAI.) I.MIPS -~ OJT-orr
SJIClDS OH l'-10' HIOH ~SU IS'-:,o' S"o\CING.
PCD(StJIIAHUGHl'INOINIICIA,ll.ut[ASTOKPOlC lilOUNftD'11C1\JIICS ~,;c~ H~ ~ ,~~';) ~~'" cu1-orr MCI.DI OH
CA04 COftOOWNUI LHI WfW • llol.CCIN1' JO H.t.~ O LLAST ON[ (1)
IMCNClC~T Ollt rtOIJMSQ)IT 01:COII ATI~ UOHT. CA04 1DlftACl
t:'~~n~~~~c:.==~~~~k
IW:90lkJIA.L '1TI\.lllll JO . a,cu)[II TO 11.lNZ[ INCllOHA.L OOHT
Al.c.toG NOlllfW ANO ICST "'°"°'TV I.HS.
At.l.SDl'M:lLIOHfSJOICSHClDCllrllOlil AOJM:OtTPltOl'DIT'ICS.
IJIICll4" WNt!MO UOHn TO CCH'OMI TO .... Al.,,.,,_ MCM.ATION~
CACH IWIAGC CNTIIY TO t..l-.t. 1H1W1CD SCll',la; UOHT fll1\Jlltt.
CA04 OITII T c.J.lt / ~It .O"'C nJ N,\~ 9«lDCD !iQl!'ACX UC>IT ,,.1'Jl(1.
PROPOSED PEDESTRIAN CIRCULATION PLAN --l)[SIOJrEll'l':OT SCAl.LJ l"•,o'-O" SH[trl
01tA• I V: , OAT[: 02/20 PUD-9
ococm I Y1 r, l'ttO.ICJ OJl0..00
LANDS CAPE LEGEND
0 PlANftO flUITCII ZONC [:] ~::,,~ .. ~~~ Sl~~~~s.,=r
~[HntY l0JC CJ ~:s.~TIW:~~'?°Uf.H~~
,OCWAUIS (AT Snitt!S)
<!)INttlllOlt LAHOSCAl't [:J ~•Ynte~'~~=~c:.::t :':i:
(!>"°"'vATtltJ!!IACCS
(!)~1sr,Ul[WA~"OW)
ntt,ll Olntl' STOOl"S, W.\10! rtATUIICS. IUIL IOO»<S
§ill] =,w;yCll~;~s~s;@MN~"";,.';;IK
f'tA11Jf1Ct,l'OOL,HOT 1\19S/'SP"5
~~..=:"c::;~~rt.~Ut.Htl
~ ~~~~~~~~.11s~luc»1rs
nm:s ~
MCMIICD ""'°"'°"°' MOUlltD ""°'40CO'
'" ...
~~-~~~24~~)J,,1AD c,t IM.A.Tf'.....,_Y RCSIOOH!At)
IIUMN M:IN LMNC UH>SCAPC MCA 12t.UJ I (lal} • ~-V
OOSTJrlC TIU am>lf'S • 0
HIM9(JI at rRa:S (Ill.A / 7:10) • 124,2" / 1:IO • IN IC 1.2°• IN 'IMIS
MUWIDI rl9IIIUIS(IIIL.l /7:IO) • 5 • IN I 5 • IJO IC 1.2'• tN 9tltUIS
MICATION: AU. ~flON TOK AUTOMATIC UNOCIICIIOLINO S'l'STl'.WS (OM'Mf'fl:A'1
""""""-""' .... ....
'll~IOIHIMY atMOl'(IITT.
l'flOHIIITtO TIUSI. IOX WO, COTTON WOOO (ffilM..t). ,-,il.-lil DJ,I
UHOSI..N'CPI.ANTNOS • MIGAllOH ~ TOK ._...TIUI 4S iJA.111
OTM.DNOll'OlltlfM'fl'UCA110HS r011[ACMCOIISffllJCTION'Hltl.
CCMKIN All(AS to HA',( '"4E ,u,NTM) "-»IS,
Pt00tCl0$&,IN:,XMVATtTDIIWXSl"OIWll'lm.
""' ....
001'Tl'ON( I.Ill SJ,
1t,t2Js.r.
21,m s.r.
n,t4Js.r.
1,11 4 1.f.
IM..)10 S.,,
PROPOSED LANDSCAPE PLAN --OCSICNCDI T: OT SCAL£: 1•-~-0•
011:A._ I ~ ,I> DAT(; 02/l'OJO-
Ot[()((O II ~ Of' ""°"CT Oll0.00 PUD-1O
r---------------------------------------------------------------------------------,
"""" AU.9Ql<ISTO MCCf 0f'rOICNC1DIIOOO~CODC
-· -...... , ,._...
E&
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I I
I
I
I :-------
' I
PROPOSED SIGNAGE/FENCING PLAN
rtHONOI.LCOC>
(I] Ufl TO 10' WCl,IIJlr,I 111.t.S(l;ltY
SOUND/PAI YolCY WALL
(jJ '' TO 10' WN\N MolSONflY
!IO.IHO/PAIYACY WALL
ONntCltOIITH ltQ1[l, ...,..,., ""'
CI] t-10' IU,SOlofllY WAU. .t.T1'f!OLCTOUltlCS IUU.S U[Hnl(S TOYA/t.YINH[K;HT,011
Stl'IA«. LNC>1CN"W'IG. AHO 111:SICIDlftAL UNIT
L.L.. ______ ...J... ____ ..c .. ="e:"',·. ------~
HOT[:
OIT!tY WAL.IC LOC-'noHS TO OCU'I.Y '1111TH Clf't' 9 1[ 111!1AHQ.[ Jl[ClMOl(NJS
Ci)•~
(j) WAU. OIi OftCUNO
"""'"" NIOHMIFOOI
IOrH510t:OI
DHltTOll:l'oO
(i) WN..1. 9CN,lll.Ml( 'SKl/4/ MJllliO IIOJNTtO
CAHCl"YSIQN/ol'#IIICS
@ WALL 1111!1/IU,0[ IIC»I / ~ WOUNTm
CAHCl"YSIOH/A-...CS
(i)-..OOWSIClN,'\£T'IDIHO N!IIC1Aol.WIOOWS
1ST, 2NO a lll0 n..
SCCONOM Y TOIAHT
IOOITITY-LOOO ...............
()I CIPOtolnoH
@WM.lSIGH/H~SIOIJICTM.CNtAGC •ltCSIOOITIAL ,-"IIONCWO. 1/DUl f 2,l
IUIUJINC(ACADC'S lf004TUWl1ol110HS
Jl(SIOOITU,l, llADl'IO IUIJ)INQ H0..
'ACAIIU #~ 1-+------1-------~ @ WM..L/Qll0UNO 1,1cunm 91t DUIIICS
""~ [H111YOA1ts
L@__,_""_'°'_""_""" __ _,_ ...... __ ... _"'_n ___ 1 ;Q ltf'IC.l:'ICH
"""" ,. AU.ltCT-SIOHI !IHAU.. fl COWOMIAHCt '1111TH TH[ SIQN wcno,,.,: 1,tC(XIIMJtCIAI. DISTltlCt
STNC>AIIOI OF" ntC CM0L£W000 lill,INClltM, 000[, AS MIDC>m.
2. ~T=SSHsc~r~C:W,: ~~~"=.~ ~-
l. NUWM::lt OF" SIOHS ()I ol l"/llt!ICUI.Alil 1"'l1't, ~ U11[!), 15 AH [Sl'll.t1[ Otf..Y, CV.CT Ht.MEI TO IC
DC10ltdlED_.,.51CH,t,C(P1.»11A.N0 SPCC,,C,.TIOHSAltCCOllPlCT(D,-.J1HOTTOoc:ca,,
4. Pf10119Tt0 90MS: 91.aOAIIOS, POltTAILC 90HS. ~ AO',Oft-.0 $IONS, IAU.OOH S. ,tM,iAl[O t:
fl.ASHING t: ~ ~S. ltOO' 90HS, MUl!JrU.
S.HCY 'lll"STWM.L:
Al.OHO ntC -.CST PltOP(IITY UH(. D(',(I.CPCJI SM-'1.1. COHSTJIUCT (TH[ 'MCW 'lll"St WN..I.") A 10'-0" +ICiH
=T~~~l~~~ ==-= ~~:S'.C: ~~°"AHO
DCSICN FtA1\MlS ON THC 'lll"SmtH-'ACINC rACAOC ()I M WALL {lNO..I.OMG PI.LAl'IS) TO MATO+ M
~si:o"':v?J::::i. ~ll~oJ~,.!_:J:~~=n: ()I T
~n'Ut[. ntCHCW '11€STWN..I.SI-IAU.HA'<€S1'0HCC-"S()IA _,.,,.OIIAY ()I™[
NC'# CST WALL SHAU IC DC1'Dtl,lfffl) 4l M OIIAOt IW[OIATtlY AD.W:Ol1 TO M T to0t Of
"nlC HCW 'lll"ST WALL NC> SIJ04 HOCHT .U SCI OCTDMHCD SHALL BC NOT LISS TMAH A: WAY ucao 10'-o" W?H ,VUSSIQN or KCN I WU,Q£ AUOCIAIIOH.
l. N(W HOIITM WALL:
,.,
SllllAA TO TH( H(W WO.I Wo\U. '11111W HDGHT f'O I( O(ltJIW,l[l) IT THC DC\O..oPOI AntJI CClJfSUL TATIOH •™ IW£ "'°'°'TY OtHJtS TO ntC HOltn4 or IWt HOIITHCJIU PflOll'CltTY Ll'tC SHAU. I( ..._, Al.OHO
n;( HOIIITHVtl.l' PlloPOITY !,.ti( (THC "NCW NOIITH W.W.").
1. CONSTltUCIIOH ~ ,0111 NCW CST A: NCW HOIIITM WAU:
THC HO, 'CST 'flAI.L IHCl.UOf,IQ M 'lltSICIIH-rAQHQ ,.1.CAOC AHO THC STOHC CU> (8U T HOT IHO..UOINO
THC U.SmtH-rACIHC rACAOC) AHO THC HCWNOll?H 'flALL. IHCWOIHG THC NOllnoL.Y-,ACINC 'ACAOl
;a M ,:f=~~n'.:~~C:&,.~,tbQIII
1'0M< NC> f THCHCY111CST WM.! OIi THC NCWHOlt1M WAU. OIi AS
OIMOtWS[ A"IIOH '1111TH llltSPCCT TO IW£ HCW 'lll"Sl WALL OIi n,c
HAWOOI -.,TH "CSPCCI 10 THC H[W HOll?H WALL
OC~[t)IIT: OT SC 'tl: 1"•50'-0" 91CCT:
0MIN I T: I DATE: 02/20/lk
O<CX[D I T: 0, PltOJEClf. CW0,00 PUD-11
CONCEPl\JAL CONDOMINIUM PERSPECTIVE
Th~ PUtSN:cmt: IIOCOINQS Mt«
C0h AL ANO ARE tO.UOm TO
INOICAlt 11£ COOAI. l£WI. aF QUAUTY,
'1fllStQ. ANO IIA 1UIALS CN. Y.
PERSPECTIVE RENDERINGS --
DIIA'IN I Yl , 0A1t 02/}0
CH(O([D I Yl or PlfG.lC T OJJ0,00 PUD-12
TITLE COMMITMENT LEGA L DESCRIPTION
IIC WI K-ftALJ' or M SCUl'<AST CN-OJ""mt or TH( SOJIMCASI
C,C:•QU""l'Ot or SCCTOI J5,, mo.,-. I SCUD\ ltAHIX II 'll(SI or IMC 1TH
, .... COJNfY or ..,rl:4'Mt0[, S1'Tt or ca..OIUllO. OCCP I M NOll llt I JO rcu
nt(Jt(O, .VC, Oa:J'I M LUI 60 mr TM'.ltlO, I..S IIO,f 0, .,_,, r(IN SUI'[
,tQ,<W,n NO. ,n (SCUTM UNl\£ftrt IL\().) AND DCCPI IMC SOJfl,4 JO m,
T'<MOI' u ~, or 111n r011 sun: u NO. 70 (tAST 1to1MP0£1t •"Ll
'-'Cl O::CC,I I tu('.1 CCN'oOUI 10 'It£ DO'IIINCHT OT HICH •Al''S '" IIUD
1!(0Clll0(0 OCIOIIClt I. II~'" ao.)( 11 ~1 If PIIX !lfO AS M~ !IIIC)tl 0,
u ,r0111 sr.n:H1CHu,H0.70.
8UAYEYEP LEGAL DESCRIPTION
1 PIJtQl. or 1.A/'10 LOC-'llO '" Tit( SOJMAST QUllllDII OT M SCUTHC.AST
QU IIIT(Jt or SC~ .'-!, Tl)WI,.. 1 so.int. 11..X Ill WC.ST or !"I: 51.•TM
..a,11,. IIIOtlOIIN. OT'I' or l:.NQ.EPOOCI. COJHTV or-~ SIil'[ or
CQ.OIUllQ. »OM PIJIIIICU.Nll Y DC.5CltlltO IJ f W.OW,.
C(liW(NCtoC IT M SGITHCAST COltNClll OT SAO 5CCTI04 »; llt(HCl
N00'05°12°W 1iL0NG ntC 'IIUT UC or TIC 50.Jl'ltO,SI OJlltl[lll or SIi> SCCllON » A DISIIHC[ or 10.0I ftCl: nQICC -~ru··· A DtSTAHCC or 10.00 (t(I
~';4'=orW:1~'ocC::0~1~Ufi~~~ ~•~'?C:"' JI!)
KOi-a; nl[HC[Al.CttCntCNOltTMLMOl'MWf~A~IIICHT or Wl 'I' AS DCSClbllCD 11 SAID 1101)( 11~. p,1,C[ !lee) M r ~ MIC[ (l)
""""'
I) flOiCC $ff~T1J"W I DIST~ or 380." rttT:
1) 1ltQICC Nl7'10'1TW I DtSTNCC or 100.10 rttl.
~~11tt~1f'it~~Dl~~~l~'J:I'IDll'°rJ:r~fl1(~T'fL'ST
QJ~ltllt;11SAIOSCCnctl~
nt[toa:N(IO,:M")t"W ~ONO M WCSfUNl' 01' M U.ST NA&l"OT TH[
SOJTltCASTOJ-.lll[lllorMS(.\lnt[A510UAltl'OtorSAO,CCnc,1»1
OIS'TNIQ: or 797.6',t['I TOA PONTON n£,OU"4 LM or a.oac I , HAMPOOI
11US SC00ND n..tte; AS ,UO IN M ~w«_ COUNfY Q.DtK AHO RCCOltDCll'S
~,.~~'?'m~,.k"',l,~msi:":"c:}~nv,s,==~
SAO IIU)0( I: SAO Potll M.50 KJNC ON THC IC.ST IIIOII or .,.,. UN( or
SOJTI+ UWI-.USITY 901JlLV,U!O: IH[HC£ ~'U'l: ~ M 'CST l!l(lt(I 01' =,U: :~ Ufril'•Ot5HY l!l0UU'IA.Ml I DISfa.Ha: or eoo.oe rm re JHC
SA10 ,Al!Cn IXJN TIIHS 117,011 SOJAIIC ro;t, 11.11 -""CS, WOii[ OIi LL'IS.
8ECJ19N CQbJA~
II.I.lE. COMMITMEN T EXCEP TI ONS
Tit[ l"QJ.(IMNO ARC DCO'l!Oln; USTtD IN SO,COUU. 1-2 or n TL.t COWll\l(N!
H0."8C8P01tk~ll!CDIIYLAHOnlUQUAJtANrt[CO,.-IM1'.0 ATt00CIOIICfl
J1 ,to0l 1T U IO P.M Tlt["""4(MICl.0--COIIM:S,0.l)T0 TltC~
snl'OI\ISCDINSAIOnTL.tCQMN On nt()l11(JISUJl~Q.tr!C.DIONOI
AOOlltSS OIi l'.XAWI( ITDl5 1-l NG •-1.
iu ,~S. ~~ic, "!~~~~=«, ~~!Sl::.
UJClOllllClPTIONMO.&.tOOl.»
SUll'4.1'Cllt0S NOm ™I LUOICNIS AS ll(JCJll9ttl I/Cl SlT rlll!T,_ 1 1 SAID
INSTIIIUIIOII 0,1'1{ IIU.N ~T $HOM IC.Jl(QN
11 } ![RIIS, CCIOno,IS, ~S. IIUIIOl.NS AHi> (IIU(;IT!Cll'IS 5£1 rCJ1111< IN
W(i,IOIU,Nl)Ul,l c,' Clr'IIOl ltllLASCIHO!lll[lLASC IGl'l(Ojl(Nlll(COIIO(I)
rtlllUAll1' I . INJ VNOOI MCCP1ION HO 110UMJ
fl
--.. --
-·-·-·-
(J
~
□
~
CD
""' " fl
•
a,
<>
l;(
GI
llllllll..lW. □
IIQiil
CCINSllllJ'l'(IJlnLsc.utc:H9Tf'IION~
QU .+JllA/flU CDIPAN1' nTLL CCINIMHT IIO.
.)1,2002 AI IJQO,.Y.WASS(Ul'l'MUUI
n:o:Tr.::::-:::::IIOlts-0,-H 1'AIIO
2.1 M LOCATION or UCEl(ll(lN) ,ua,c: uruncs AIID~ rt.QJna
Slt09I +tOIC0N Alll aA5CO ON lilCCOIIO PUNS NG~ "'58.L oUICM
c;,tOUNOAl'P\.IITDIANCU. TltC l OCATION 01' AU.I.IClCIKIIO..INUJlJllCSOII
r,\OUllCI ~ A.-: NO T CUIJIIL'I' ~ $1,!ALL. 'NIJG IY onos
,_.TOnotO..~OIIIOONmlUCTMl~tSON()IIIK-"! .......
J.) IIOTICC: MXOIIDIHC 10 COI.OIIIADO U W 'l'OJ IIU$T c:o.iCHa 111,
~=~~~~~&~~.':~~,.,..11~!")
ACTIONIIASCl (lt J'!'l'OUCCTII MS U\ICY K CCMICHClDWOltClltNt
!DI (10) 'IUltS ntcM M DA it or WIMCAllON lttQW,I tUCON.
C.ll.S.1J-IIO-l~lX•).
~) fHCSLIMYmD '10111( TOa:Y'I.C Mtf'OIIMATIOI USUIN MS
SUll'<O' WIS COIA.t.TtO ON DCcoa:Jt 24. 1002.
I .) M AOOlltSSOI M S&CCT PMPCIIT'rlS.)6()1 SOJTltUN'oOtSITY
k\O .• l)IQ.CIOQ0.CO.
U~~-~~ ~~~~-~l~ ~,=,-s Cl
tldlMWICl II.AP (,_) ~ oeoo,o,1u J IIC"'5CD: IUOJST II, IM~
(,""'1. IU OT nll) POI SAO Ml#.
M Tl000•9JIIIA.NC£11Al[Ml#"IS HIIIU!CNIOYHISIIAINCTltC
NI TIONII.. noo0 •SIJlltAHCl ~ IT l)O[S NOT lt{C:CSSW.T St1()W
IU. All[AS SUl.l[CT n> rux:io.,,c:,. Plllncu.Nll'I' ntOII UIC.Ai. $0l.lll((S
OI' Sl,i,W. SHI -.CH C0JU> II( nOOO(O I T SC',tltt. OOl«XHTH TtD
IWNIAU.C0U'Ull lll fl.41NAIICOJITti.OCALOIIIAINMXS?STOtS.n€M
MA'I' K OntU Sl1ttAIIS. CMtXS. LOW .I.RtAS. 0111-o\QC S1'Sl'[l,IS OIi
ono suitr...a: 011 ~,.a_ coo11CN1 on!IMG °' 011 ICM '"'
5U8.(Cll'l!OPfJITYIIHICMM(NOT5IIJDICOC.IDOl!(SSCl>IS,1111T
0, 1"t "n.0oo N9,,IIIAll(t It.I.I( .. ,.,. •• ~~=,,•=: ~~,n:111~Y[cir~=·1r\:t~~u,
P.11.IICMDl!}l[f'WHIIWOHIJliCNtS I SSl~HCl![CJ,4,
M 1~r~~:gi1.:,~,0~~~,.::~
OIM'. or n..oTO A'l{MJ(AN0l.MY[lt9T'l'91,.WSClltlTltC , .. .,,
[UVI NCW 11111
~~=-i.t~ol.i.~~n:: ~P~l~~:r NG
l!O,INOSISDC~IYlnntl-1,iQJfUWOITtDUW:V.
l.l)n<11Ct<Tor w1,r01ttASIHAUPOOl l "°"'ASCALUDrc.•
MICCAlDC508P!Djtt,UIC[NltOIAltOOO"Oll0•TCOJH1lllQ.OOClll51:
nt(II llt[ DUD U CAl fO TM( ol.i.lA $UII Y[1' l!JCAIIINO lftffM.
□
MONUMENT LEQEND
/1 ~!)~,:.l~~~~,,:,~~eo~~=
.)$,II S,ltll'IIIIIIP.11 •
& ~ r;:.;:~ ~$~f"'CLII'" Tit( CONCl!CTt
& =:~~~irH'"~=~~ & ~it~T'l'~c:~~:!!l:
I.MN lltC10P0rM:CCINCll(l[CUftll
& ~a:e,.,-.: ~' ~1Vlc,u,0J' -:.,~~~ ll_AWl'ltll '" &_ro.,,,r,11•01.-mtllOJAII
8 ~~~~it.~=== & ~:=~~ ~ I ~ At:11111 SIIMP(D
8UBYEYO R'9 CER TIF ICATION
AL TA/AC811 I.All) 1IT1z 8IIIVEY
,:::i====i==============~=j 91\JATED IN r 11£ ~/4 SECllOI .l5, TOIIIII' 4 SOOlH
1---1--+---------+-----l RANGE 68 WEST or THE SIXTH P.M. ~=t===~::::::::::::~::::j cxum rE -IWS.. stArr rE CWlOOO
I OI flW.DIA..C DLL
NO. 0A DCSQNP OOH " rue 1 (12
1--~---
fROH'OER SURVEYING. INC.
352 NORFOLK ST.
AURORA, CO 80011
Ofo. 303-340-0113
rax. 303-340-0114
•
•
•
"' ..
"' ..
~ .,
"' :,
"' :,
>:
'0 · , __ -,,,,_
~ ', ,, ---
"' ~
>:
"' " ..
"' ~ .,
...
"' ~
"'
-. t i ,.......... ........... ........... J ., \
' _/
_,,/ _,,_,,o1,~,,--.. --.---,,---.. -i
/
SCAt.C•l'•JO'
LOT 7
.,
~
C z:
C ..,
LOT t .. .,
/ -f", LOT t i/
i,-,/
1/ ~ ~ -
'/ I!.
/ -: / ; • /, i ,
/, LOT 4 ij i /,
~
~~
LOT'
i I
,:, ....... l S O U TH U NI V E R S I T Y BL V D. t
w-.-----L_ ---------___ L ____ ------------------------------l\!J!!,Y£¥1 ---------•H•• .. ---------_ _l_ -------!t