HomeMy WebLinkAbout2005-06-06 (Regular) Meeting Minutes•
•
•
ENGLEWOOD CITY COUNCIL
ENGLEWOOD, ARAPAHOE COUNTY, COLORADO
Regular Session
June 6, 2005
I. Call to Order
The regular meeting of the Englewood City Council wa.< called 10 orde r by Mayor Garrell at 7:34 p.m.
2. Invocation
The invocati on was given by Council Member Barrentine .
J. Pledge or Allegiance
The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Mayor Garrell .
4. Roll Call
Present:
Absent :
A quorum was present.
Also pre.sent:
Council Members Tomasso, Moore, Banentinc, Garrett, Bradshaw,
Wolosyn, Woodward
None
City Manager Sean
City Attorney Brotzman
Assistant City Manager Flaherty
City Clerk Ellis
Police Division Chief Vandennee, Safety Services
Police Lieutenant Sanchez, Safety Services
Fire Captain PattarrJlZi, Safety Services
Senior Planner Langon, Community Development
Director Gryglewicz , Finance and Administrative Services
Director Kahm, Publi c Works
Director Long , Library
Housing Financ e Specialist Grimmett , Com munit y Development
Director Fonda . Utilit ies
Director Ea 1on, Human Resources
5. Consideration of Minutes of Previous Session
(a) COUNCIL MEMBER WOLOSYN MOVED, AND IT WAS SECONDFD, TO APPROVE
THE MINUTES OF THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MAY 16, 2005 .
Mayor Garren asked if there were any co mments or correc1ions. There were none .
Vote results:
Ayes:
Nays:
Motion carried.
Council Members darrentine, Moore , Brsdshaw, Garrett , Wol osyn,
Woodward , Tomasso
None
6. Recognition or Scheduled Publlc Comment
Englewood Clly Council
June 6, 2('()5
Pnge 2
(a) Members of Eng lewood's Firefighter Comba t Chall enge Team we re pre sen t to address Ci 1y
Co und l rega rdin g the upcoming Firefighter Comba t r:hall cngc .
Roman Rede introduced Jason Hehn , Denroi!. McTa ggart and Reg gie Black . Reggie Bia ; is one of th e newes t
members of the Eng lewood Fi re Dep artm ent and our newest member to ·:,e Firefighters Cnmba t Cha ll enge Team, he
said. He is a great guy and a gre · t member to our team, whi ch brings us 10 why we are 1crc. Las t year, wi th the
assista nce of lhi s Cit y Co uncil , we. were able to travel to and compete in a World Firefighter Co mbnt Challenge in
Las Vegas, Ncvuda , A few months pri or to th at •\'C perso nall y fin anced an d sent three of o ur members to Fremo nt ,
Ca li fo rni a to co mpe te in the Reg ional Qua lifi er in order Ill ge t us to Uls Vega s. Thi s year we wo uld like to do th e
sa me thing. Hopefu ll y, with the City Co un ci l's help . we would like to se nd ou r en tire team to Fremont , Ca lifornia
and then fl y lo Deerfie ld Beac h. FJ orid a to represe nt th e City of Englewood as yo ur Firefighter Combat Challenge
Team . At thi s poi nt in time , we arc es timatin g the cos t to be rough ly in the neighbor rl ood of$9,800.00. This wo uld
be for meager acco mmoda ti ons and the cheapest ai rl ine that we can fl y. Las! year, wi th the ass istance of the City
Council, we did go to Las Vegas , like I said, and we put fi ve guys all in one 10am. I know we like each other very
much, bu! it was a little cramped for firefi ghte rs, bunker gc11r and we arc all too old to be sleepi ng on th e fl oor at thi s
point. We thank yo u fo r yo ur time and aga in , we would ve ry much like yo ur ass islancc 10 be able to represent the
City again thi s year. This would be our founh year inn row to trave l to World s and any as sis tance would be
fantast ic. Thank you very much .
Mayo r Garrell said thank yo u.
7. RecognlUon of Unscheduled Public Comment
(a) Daryl Estes said basica lly we just wanted to co me in once again and menti on th e G'J lf Tournament
•
that we are going to put on by Positive ly Englewood. We would like to as k Ci ty Co uncil and the City of Englewood
to co nsider joining us for that to urnament on Monday , June 131h. •
Jackie Edwards sal :I lhis is our logo and we were wo nderin g if City Cou nci l wo uld se nd ~ fo ursome or two to our
Golf Townament. We wo uld really appreciate it. We arc also sponsoring a blc ydc drawing a month . She i;howed
Counci l a copy of last month's pos ter. She said a five year old girl wo n ti .~ fir st bicycl-:. We ha ve had quite a bit of
response a nd so far we have elev en bikes lin ed up to give away ... onc a month . The chi ldren havr.10 write a short
essay on th e back of the se poste rs in order to win , but th e essays aren 't judged ,, .they arc real cu te th ough. Quite a
few of the businessr" in Englewood have alre ady signed up for spo nso rship fo r our Golf Tournament. Mos t of them
;tre th e car lots up a nd down Sou th Broadway , surpri sing ly en ough , and we have so me printing com pani es and a few
of the rest.1 urnn1 s. So, we ha ve had so me rea ll y good response and we are ex tending th e de ad line to th is Frirlay to
sig n up . So, we wo uld really appreciate it if the Ci ty Co uncil wo uld send a fo urso me or two 10 play in our Go lf
Tournament.
Mr . Es tes left some broc hures for Co uncil.
Mayor Garrel l said th ank yoi;.
8. Communicotlons, Proclama tions uncl Appointments
There we re no commu nications. proc lamations or appointmcms .
9. Consent Agenda
COUNCIL MEMB ER BRADSHAW MOVED, AND IT .'AS SECOND ED, TO APPRO VE CON SE NT
AGENDA IT EMS 9 (a) (I), (il) and 9 (c) (I).
(a) Approval of Ordi nances ,i n Firs1 Readi ng
(iJ COUNC IL BILL NO . 25, INTRODUCED BY COU NCIL MEMBER BRADS HAW •
•
•
•
Englewood ('lty Council
June 6, 2005
Page 3
A BILL FOR AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE ACCEPTANCE OF A VICTIM ASSISTANCE LA IV
ENFORCEMENT (VALE) GRANT FROM THE VICTIM ASSISTANCE LAW ENFO RCEMENT BOARD OF
THE 18m JUDICIAL DISTRICT .
(ii) COUNCIL BILL NO. 2 1, INTRODUCED BY COUNCIL MEMBER BR ADS HAW
A BILL FOR AN ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE 5, CHAPTER 5, SECTION 2, OF THE ENGLEWOOD
MUNICIPAL CODE 2000, PERTAINING TO ACUPUNCTURISTS .
(b) A~;,rovol of Ordinances on Second Reading
There were no additional i1ems submitted for approva l on second read ing . (See Age nda Item 11 .)
(c) Rcsolutt ons and Motions
(i) A contract to purchase and installati on of ti le 1ypc carpel to replace existing carpet. in the
Library, that is worn and torn . Staff recommends aw arding 1hc contract 10 the lowest re spo nsive bidder, Re source
Colorado, Inc ., io the amount ofSl21,826.32 .
Vote results:
Motion carried .
Ayes: Council Memb-:rs Barrentine, Moo re , Brad shaw , Garrell , Wol osyn,
Woodward, Tomasso
Nay:,: None
Pulillc Hearing Items
(a) Mayor Garrett said this is a Public Hearing I J gather public input on Counc il Bill No. 17,
approving proposed hou sekee ping amendments pcnai nin g to Title 16, Unified Development Code .
COUNCIL MEMBER WOLOSYN MOVED, AND IT WAS SECONDED, TOO PEN THE PUBLIC
HEARING TO GATHER PUBLIC INPUT ON COUNCIL BILL NO, 17, APP,lOVING PROPOSED
HOUSEKEEPING AMENDMENTS PERTAINING TO TITLE 16, UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE.
Ayes: Counci l Members Barrentine , Moo re , Brad shaw, Garren, Wolosyn,
Woodward , Tomasso
Nays : None
Motion carried and the public hearing ope ned.
Senior Pl anner Langon, being duly swo rn . sa id for your co nsi derati on tonig ht is Council Bill No. 17 ... proposed
amendments to the Unified Development Cod e. The fir st reading was on May 16111 and I have alre ady submitted to
the City Clerk no1ice or 1his Public Hearing, publi shed in the Englewood Herald on May 20, 2005 . The request
before you is to consider public le stimony on the proposed "housekeeping" amendments, as they have been known .
The adoption or 1he UDC last year was the first maj or rcwri1c or 1he zoning ordinance in abo ut 20 yea rs and it was
prett y well undc .. stood, due to 1he vo lum e or material thal we considered and wo rked on ... nearl J 300 and some
pages, that with the refo rmattin g and upda1in g or the Code, that we would ha ve min or o versights and errors to
co n1end with, and 1his housc!,:;c:cping measure is 10 addre ss the omissions and cla rificat io ns thal we have idcntill 1.:J 111
the pas1 year. In addition . there are three areas 1hat are new topic s or new nrcas ... each one or them being small and
it was deemed that they were not large enough am;:ndmcnts to stand on 1hcir own and ca rry eac 1t one indivi dually
through the process. So that is why those three areas ... addition of inlcmei sales 10 the all owed uses, projectio ns into
1he setbacks and fopsc of upp rova l or cases ... are being added in and amended wilh llus "housekeepi ng" amendment.
We have reviewed these a numlx':r or times ... at fir st reading and at Study Sessio ns. I will be happy to addre ss any
qu es1ions .
Mayor Garrett ask ed if !here we re uny que sti ons kr Ms. Langon.
Council Member Woodwa rd sa id I have one quc:slio n. On puge 2 1 un der 1he Mc1.h:1nicu l Eq uipm en l, a citize n hi d
as ked me a ques tion here in the last co upl e or weeks re gardi ng a swamp cooler th at was being in stalled in the si de
Enclcwood Clly Council
June 6, 2005
Page 4
yard or a property next to th eirs. Would a swamp coo ler be included under I or 27 Ms. Lan AOn sai d it is n small
sc:i le mechanical, whether we ca ll it Mair conditioner or a swamp coo ler. Th e idea is we have always allowed them
and what we arc doing with thi s ame ndmen t is codifying what we ha ve handled by policy in the past. Mr .
Woodward said okay, thank yo u.
Mayor Garrett asked if there were an y mhcr questi ons for M~. Langon . There were none and he thanked her .
Mayor Garrett said no one has sig ned up to speak at I.his particular publ ic hearing . Is there anyone who would care
to address this issue? There was no one .
COUNCIL MEMBER WOODWARD MOVED, AND IT WAS SECONDED, TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC
HEARING TO GATHER PUBLIC INPUT ON COUNCIL Bll.L NO. 17, APPROVING PROPOSED
HOUSEKEEPING AMENDMENTS PERTAINING TO TITLE 16, UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE.
Ayes: Council Members Barrentine, Moore , Bradshaw, Garrett, Wolosyn,
Woodward, Tomasso
Nays: None
Motion carried and the public hearing closed .
(b) Mayor Gorrell said this is a Public Hearing 10 gather public inpul on Council Bill No. 19,
approving amendments to the Unified Development Code pertaining to front setbacks in the MU-8-2 Zone District.
COUNCIL MEMBER WOLOSYN MOVED, AND IT WAS SECONDED, TO OPEN THE PJtiUC
HEARING TO GATHER PUBLIC INPUT ON COUNCIL BILL NO. 19, APPROVING AMENDMENTS
TO THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE PERTAINING TO FRONT SETBACKS IN THE MU-B-2
WNE DISTRICT.
Ayes: Council Member s Barrentine, Moore , Bradshaw, Garrell, Wolosyn,
Woodward , Tomasso
Nays: None
Motion carried ar,d the public hearing opened .
Senior Planner Langon, being duly sworn, said this public hea ring is fo r Council Bill No. 19, the proposed
amendments to the MU -8 -2 zone district front setbacks. I am filling i.1 this evening for Senior Planner Mark
Graham who is out of town, so I will do the best that I can in answering your questions. May 16ui was the first
reading on this issue and I have also submitted , to the City Clerk, notice of the Public Hearing which was pub'.i shcd
in the Englewood Herald on May 20, 2005. The issue beforC you is an amendment to the UDC to amend the front
setback regulati ons for the MU -6 -2 Zone Disuict. The original se tbacks adopted in the: DC in Fe bruary of2004 in
the MU-8-2, were established at Oto 5 feet. That was based on an Urban Design Team recommendation to create a
stro ng development edge along the co mmerci al corridor by using buildings to create that edge. Ove, ihe pas t year,
si milar to the UDC "housekeeping" amendm ent, we recognized that the "o ne size fits all " concept does n't work with
every situation. So with the help of the Plann ing Commi ss ion we ha ve developed four si tuati ons where the Oto 5
foot setback can be relieved , provided that the appli cant creates a strong development edge .;sing tools that we have
generated through either land scap ing or fencing or so n,e type of vertical element that would create that edge that the
building would not. And those situ ati ons th at we have ide ntified , are deep commercial lots ... lots tho.I o.rc greater
1han 250 feet in depth; existing buildings that are setback more th an thut Oto 5 foot that want to add on and incrc11Se
the size of their builc.Jings ; or si tuations like a sidewalk caf6 dining that would want 10 have caf6 seating in front of
lhe building and the other would be dri ve-through uses. Those are the o:1ly four ureas that lhis amendment adtfrcsscs
and only in the B-2 area . The reli ef woul d be in the Oto 5 foot se tback , only prov ided that the d~velopment creates
a stron g development edge and. again, by using land sc ape features and tree features, fencing or so me other type of
venical element that would be identified . These are not being identified individually in the Code , because we felt
that there were myriad ways of addressing this and rather than putt ing in hard and fast rules ... that it must be this,
this and th is ... we would ha ve a po licy where there were more options, that each individual development could be
considered on a separate and case by case basis.
Mayor Garrett as ked if there ere an y ques ti ons for Ms. L1ngon. There were none and he thanked her.
Mayor Garren said no one has signed up 10 speak at thi s paniculur public hearing. Is there anyone who would care
to addre5.) this issue7 There was no one .
•
•
•
•
•
Englewood City Council
June 6, 2005
Page 5
COUNC IL MEMBER IVOLOSYN MOVED, AND IT WAS SECONDED , TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC
HEARING TOG THER PUBLIC INPUT ON COUNCIL BILL NO. 19, APP RO VING AMENDMENTS
TO THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE PERTAINING TO FRONT SETBACKS IN THE MU-8-2
ro~·E DISTRICT.
Ayes : Co un ci l Membe rs Barrentin e. Moo re, Bra dshaw, Garren. Wolosy n.
Wood ward , Tomasso
Nay s: None
Moti on carried and th e publi c hearin g closed .
(c) Ma yo r Garrett said th is is a Pub li c Hear in g to gather publi c input on Co uncil Bill No. 20,
approving amendments 10 the Eng lewood Mu ni cipal Code Hi storic Designati on.
COUNC IL MEMBER IVOLOSYN MOVED, AND IT WAS SECONDED, TO OPEN THE PUBLIC
HEARING TO GATHER PUBLIC INPUT ON COUNCIL BILL NO. 20, APPROVING AMENDMENTS
TO THE ENGLEWOOD MUNICIPAL CODE HISTORIC DES lt;NATION.
Aye s: Coun cil Members Bnrrentinc , Moo re, Brad sha w, Garrett, Wolos yn,
Wood ward , Tomasso
Nays: None
Motion carried and th e public hearin g ope ned .
All witne sses wen: dul y sworn .
Senior Planner Langon said Council Bill No . 20 is ame ndments to the Hi storic Preservation ordinance, whi ch is a
repeal of 16-6-1 1 and the adopti on of 16·2·20 in its pl:11:e. The issue-was first considered at fir st reading on May 16.
2005 as part of the UDC ''hou se keeping" amendments nnd at that tim e Council votr.d to remove the Historic
De signation section from the "housekeeping" amendments and consider it separately. I have also provided the Ci ty
Clerk with notice of thi s Public Hearing , which was publi shed in the En gle wood Herald on May 20, 2005. Just ns
backgro und, in 1999 the Hi stori c Preservation ordinance was establi shed and that was a method to designate land
marks and districts and, with tha t ordinan ce, no restri cti ons for ahera tion m demo:iti on were attached to the
rcgufo.ti ons. In ?.004 an issue of ambiguity was identified . The ambiguity was in the two terms ... appli ca ti on and
nomina ion. and spec ifi ca ll y who had th e authority to initi ate an ap pl ica ti on. Th at was in late 2004 and in ea rl y
2005 Co uncil directe<l staff to condu ct a co mmunit y meet ing on histori c pre servat io n. Th at meetin g was co nducted
on February 23 rd of thi s year by Lau ri Dannemill er. On April 4111 she present ed fi ndin gs of that meeting at a Study
Sess ion to Council and as a re sult, Co un cil direc ted us to prep are amcnc1m cnt s that addre ssed the ambiguity of the
terms . Appli cat io n was th e ter m th at was chose n 10 be used and al so C'orcil re iterated that no restric ti ons affect ing
alterati ons or dcmo huo n woul d be co nti nu ed . Co unci l also directed th:t : we reform th e re gulat io ns to be consistent
with the UD C and th at is wh y Secti on 16-6·1 l is be ing repe aled and the sect ion is being move d int o Sec ti on 16·
2 ... beca use it is a proce<.l ural appl ic ati on. So pe r yo ur directi on, we did mu \'C the wh ole hi s1oric desi gnati on prol'ess
in1 0 Ch apter 2 ... lhe proc edura l l'hapler . We refrn 11mt1cd to mat ch other procedural proc esses of the UD C. We
clarified the ambi guit y and chose the term "applic ati on" :md we prov id e(; consiste ncy wi1h all other UDC procedural
app lic ati ons regarding \\ho ca n in iti ate an appl ica ti on and th at is consistr nt now with all others in 16·2·3, so th at an
appli cat ion is able to be sub mill cd by the reCClrd :1ror.:rt y ow ner or someor:e des igna1ed by the pro pert y
owner. .. such as a pu rc ha),er who has auth orit y to do so. an agent of record of :he ow ner or if th e ordinance
dcs:ignutcs a pani cuia r part y as ha vin g th at autl1ori ty. No other subs1an1 i,c chJngcs ha ve been made and thi s is jusl
basicall y a clean :tp r an update pe r th e ;--t ious code with out subs1an1ive changes.
Mayo r Garrel l as kc..! 1f1hcre we re an y ques ti ons fo r Ms. Lango n.
Co u11c il Mc mll-:1 il arrcnti nc said who arc yo u referring to wh en yo u do th e commi ss ion revi ew , who is the
commi s~ion'! Ms. La ngo n said the Plannin g and Zo ning Co mm issio n .
Co uncil Member Toma sso said if tht: prope rl y is owned by an in suran ce tru st, who would be determined to be th e
ow ner? Ms. Lango n said the trust woul d generally ha ve so me offi cer nr whoeve r would have that authorit y.
So meone would h::i ,·e 1hc aulh orit y. Mr. Tomasso "aid thi s ord inance docs no1 all ow ci tize ns of Englewood to
parti cipat e in the de si gnati on as nn indivi dual ci tizen . only th e prope rt y owner? Ms. Lango n sai d 1hat is correc t.
And , Mr . Tomasso sa id, ii gi ves no protecti on 10 the Cit y from out sid e/out of stale in tere sts th at have no con nec ti on
Englewood City Council
June 6, 2005
Page 6
to the Ci ty? At th at poi nt , if an out o f s1a1c corporati on owned a property that wa s deemed hi stori c by th e citizens or
1hc Cit y, th at property co uld not be prese rved 11s his 1oric propert y if th e corporat ion detcnnin ed th ey had other
fina nci11I interests? Ms. Langon sa id th at also is correct.
Ma yo r Garrett as ked if there were any add iti onal quc s1ions for Ms. La ngo n.
Council Member Woodward said under 16-2-20 (A) (2) it say s "deve lop a nd maintain the appropriate environment
for such building structures, etc ," What exactly docs devel op and maintain mean ? Ms. Langon said agai n thi s was
original wording from the 1999 ord inance . I am not exact ly sure of the intent of "devel op and maintai n the
appropri ate cnviro nmcnl of ~ac h buildings." It is proba bly just the general co ncept to preserve and protect th e
buildings. Mr. Woodward !=0
•1-:l okay, but I guess it still doesn't clarify tha t for me. He sai d under age critcri.:1 , (H)
(I) (a) ... and this I understar ) 1s mo,.·cd again from the current 1999 ordi r.;mce ... what is the importance of th e 50
years? I mean I unde rsta nd 1t1:i.t fo r a building, but for something of hi stori c significance, a happening or something
like that, I don't understa nd >A1hy 50 years would be important. And just as an example and putting an examp le way
out therc ... the sile of the 9/11 terrorist attack certainly, in my opini on, would ha ve hi storic sig nifi cance and I don't
understa nd why we wo uld wait 50 years to proc laim that. Ms . La ngon sa id the 50 year mark was patterned after the
National Register of hi storic places . They use a 50 year mark and I think prob ably when thi s wa s written in 1999,
the idea was to preserve a building or a di strict and perhaps not farsighted eno ugh to sec what might happen in
historically significant areas maybe less than 50 years old . It is a number and cenainly so meth ing that can be
adjusted . Mr. Woodward said here is another exa mple that I wou ld throw out th ere . The site that we arc currently
on, when it was the Cinderella City site, Cinderella City being one of the first large shoppin g ce nters built in the
country ... at on«: time I believe it was the largest ... without ha vi ng any type of thoughts to preserva tion or anyth ing,
I can certainly sec where thi s cou ld be a histori c site , a site where a plaque or whateve r wou ld say that thi s was the
site of Cinderella City, now in its third generation ... from the Ci ty Park and then Cinderell a City to City Center
Englewood . So I guess the 50 years is what I have opinions abo ut Thank yo u.
Mayor Garrett asked if there we re any oth er question s for Ms . Langon. There were none. He sai d thank yo u very
much .
Don Roth, 2830 S0 1·,h Sherman, sai d I 100 have a problem wi th the 50 year iss ue . The whole ord inance really
doesn't do anythi n t, ultimately . It doesn't even, as far as I can sec, give you the right to eve n put up a sign to
designate yo ur prr,pcrty as hi storic , but it seems, with the 50 year rule being a requirement. plus some of th e others,
it doesn't make any se nse. Yesterday was history yo u know, as Council Member Woodward pointed out. I think if
we keep the 50 year rule in . it should be demoted to being one of the criteria. This is what I had sugges ted once
before ... that you have thrct other cdtcria ... now tech ni cal ly fo ur ... and that if it meet s two of those, it should be
good. I don't think we need to be th at sting~• with it. Any applica ti on is proba bly going 10 have to survi ve two
Publi c Hearing s a nd two vo tes by two different bodies, so it seems like there wou ld be plent y of room to weed out
a:~_ J nworthy canJidatcs.
Mayor Garrett th ank ed Mr. Roth .
Diane Wra y-Tomasso. 3058 South Cornell Ci rcl e, sa id 1 am here tonight to urge Cit y Co uncil 10 vole agai nst th ese
changes to th e ordi nance. We certain ly don 't have an ordin ance or nny meanin g at thi s point in ti me . I think we ca n
all agree on that. It is empty . It ha s no functi onali ty in practica l lerms or in any kind of c uhural terms or co mmunity
terms. However . the one thing it does hav e, th at the proposed new ordinance doesn't, is some ambiguity . And I
think !h at th e be st thing we can do at lhi s point , ralher than go in and vote in a new ordinance that is co mpletel y and
totally usc le s~. that at least we ca n prese rve an ordinance that has so me ambiguit y in term s of who ca n submit an
applica ti on. I thin k everyo ne knows th at I am 1hc individua l th at submitted the ap plic ati on fo r the First Fede ral. now
Commercial Federal Bank . The ass umpti on th at came out of th at process is th at no property ow ner wou ld ever be
in terested in hear ing a Public Hearing on their propert y. Th at is the ass umption that Coun ci l made whe n they made
tha t recom mend ation to staff 10 remove th e abil ity or any ci tizen, wh o is not t1.n owner of a give n property , to submit
•
•
an applicati on. I don't th ink th at that ass umption sho ~ld be made of all owners . I think . fo r c:itamp le, if a citi zen or •
a gro up of public cit izens came together and pre sented a local landm11rk appli ca tion for the Colonial Bank , for
cumpl e, or our nBti onall y sig nific ant Federal Post Offi c:e, fo r example . or any numbe r of interesti ng di stricts ... Arts
and Crafts Di stricts , indi vidual home s 1hat we mi ght di scove r th ro ugh research ove r lime . I don't necessa ri ly sec a
situati on where every si ngle property owner would run sc rea ming to th e ba nk Iii:: Commercial Federal did . I think
there is an opportu ni ty in our community fo r so meo ne like Co lonia l Ba nk to say ... I want to li sten to what the
•
•
•
Englewood City Co uncil
June 6, 2005
Page 7
co mmun ity has to say. I am in1 cres 1ed 10 see th at citize ns of th e communi1 y in whic h we arc a membe r have co me
fo rward and sai d, the buildin g that we own is im po rtant to th11t co mmunity and we arc intere sted nnd anxiou s to ha ve
th at Public Heari ng so we ca n hear from the members of our community . Th e exi sting ord inance , though bankr upt
on man y le vels, docs maintain th at opti on by allowi ng both 1he prope rt y owne r and th t ·itizcn 10 bring an
appli ca tion forward. Now it also cont inu es to main tain that that property owner may refuse to have it posted ... :is
Co mme rc ial Federal did ... which complete ly elimimlled the possi bility of des ignati on, becau!ie the Pu bli c Hearing
could not be held . But it also holds open the oppo rtunit y that a sensit ive propcny owner, who cares about thei r place
in thi s co mmun it y, cou ld parti cipate in a public co mmunit y process th al includes a hearing and pos sibl e designatio n.
So I would urge yo u to vote against thi s change in the ord inance, whi ch my und erstanding would lead me 10 believe
that thi s would allow th e existing ordinance to stand as is, until such time in the fu ture that we make some progress
as a City in better recogn ition of what historic properties mean to our future, to our chi ldre n and to the comm un ity at
large. Thank you.
Mayor Garrett thanked Ms . Tomasso.
Mayor Garrett sai d no one else has signed up to speak. Is there anyo ne else who wo uld li ke to address th is parti c ular
iss ue durin g this Public Hearing? There was no one.
Council Member Wol osy n sai d before we cl ose. I wonder if we might ent er th is item fro m Alex Habeni cht into the
publi c record ,
Ma yo r Garrett snid there is a letter we received from Alex Habenicht oppos ing the proposed changes to the
ordinance that we wo uld like to en ter into th~ Public Record .
COUNCIL MEMBER WOWSYN MOVED, AND IT WAS SECONDED, :o CLOSE THE PUBLIC
HEARING TO GATHER PUBLIC INPUT ON COUNCIL BILL NO . 20, APPROVING AMENDMENTS
TO THE E:lGLEWOOD MUNICIPAL CODE HISTORIC DESIGNATION.
Ayes : Council Membe rs Barrentine , Moore, Bradshaw , Garrett, Wolosyn,
Woodward. Tomasso
Nays: None
Motion carried and the publi c hearin g closed .
11. Ordinances, Resolution and Mo tions
(a) Approval of Ordinances on First Readin g
(i) o :rcct or Kahm prcscn1cd a recom mendat io n from the En gle wood Tran~portation
Adviso ry Co mmittee (ET .h.C) 10 adopt a bi ll for an ordinance increa sing member terms fo r ETAC fmm two years to
fo ur years and to increase ,,fficc r term s from one year to tw o years. He sa id I nm a.n cx-o fli ci c m~mher or
(ETAC) ... Englcwood Transpo rtati on Advisory Co mmince. Counci l establi shed that Co'Tlmittec in 2'1JI and thi s
commi ttee ha s ac lu 11l1 y become very effect ive in dea lin g with tran sportatio n iss ues in the com munil•. And, I am
kind of exci ted to be here 1his evening l,ccausc in Janu nry of thi s year the ET AC commi tt ee mcmb;rs voted
unanim ously to pass mo tions to ask to have terms fo r members and fo r orticcrs incrcascd ... mcmbcrs from two years
10 fo ur years and offic ers fr'l m one yea r to two years. Th ey th ought !he longe r terms would provide more co ntinuity
for the projects th at the}' arc work ing on and s1aff sup ports that very much. So this eveni ng we arc aski ng fo r an
ordina c th at wo ul d incre ase those members term s 11nd offic ers term Ii.nit s.
Mayor Garrett as ked if there were que sti on:, JUr Mr . Kahm . There were none. He th anked Mr. Kahm .
Cou ncil Member Tomasso said thi s basica ll y wou ld allow th ~ current boa rd members to sec pr ojects through th e
lo ng term , si nce a lot of these projec ts take fairl y long or they had up until Rick stepped in to fill th e vo id there and
so metimes now, they onl y take days .
COUNCI L MEMBER TOMASS O MOVED , AND IT WAS SECONDED . TO APPROVE AGENDA ITEM
11 (a) (I)· COUN CIL BI LL NO. 22 .
COUNC IL BILL NO. 22. INTRODUCED BY COUNCIL MEMBER TOMASSO
Englewood City Council
June 6, 2005
Pagc8
A BILL FOR AN ORDINANCE AMENDING TITL E 2, CHAl'fE R 12, SECTIONS 3 AN D 6, OF THE
ENG LEWOOD MUNI CIPAL CODE 2000, PER TAINING TO Tl-IE TERM OF Tl-IE TRANSPORTAT ION
ADVISORY COM MITTEE.
Mayor Garrett asked if th ere was any di sc uss ion. There was none .
Vote resulls :
Moti on carried.
Ayes : Co unci l Membe rs Barrentin e, Moo re, Bra ds ha w, Garre tt . Wolosy n,
Woodward, Tomasso
Nays: None
(ii) Housing Finan ce Spccialisl Grimmett pre se nted a rec ommendatio n from 1he Community
Development Department 10 adopt a bill for an ord ina nce approving Amendment No . 2 to th e Int ergovemmenu1l
Agreement for the HOME In ves tment Panne rship s Progra m between Arapahoe County and the City of Englewood .
She sa id that program funds speci ficall y the housi ng rehab program . Amendmen t No . 2 is just going to increase the
amount of dollars that we are receiv ing fr om the original amount in the contract of $100/X)().00, that wa s re vised by
Amendment No. I, to $150,0CX).00 , now to be revised to a total of $300,000.00. thereby increas ing th e total num ber
of home s that we will do under that agreement to a total of 25. We have alread y completed 13 , so this will just
approve an additi onal 12 and we will have 18 months onc e w• h;f ,e recei ved the funding to com pl ete th ose projects .
So that is rea ll y 1hc onl y changes to the agreement. Everythi .:.. ,se stays in pl ace. The contra ct will be extend ed to
accommodate the additional ei ghteen months , once !he amendment has been approved.
Mayor Garren asked if there were any quest ion s for Ms. Grimmett .
Council Member Woodward said I have a questi on. I certainly support th is . Under the Projc-.c t Budget , attac hed to
Amendment Number Two, Column A here "the administrative expenses and the line item in Column Bis
$100,000.00 ... so we ha ve $100,000.00 of administrative cost. as I understand this , and for the 25 rr:habilitnti on
loans totally $420,000.00. So as I understand it , ii costs $100,000.00 to admini ster $420 ,000.00? Ms . Grimmett
said what it is doing is identi fy ing the staff costs that we have ... our complete sa laries, benefits and everything th at is
involved wit h the entire program. So, primarily for the two staff pcrsons ... mysc lf and the con struction specialist
and e-ny internal support s1aff ... th c secretarie s, our Direc tor, that type of thing, is all kind of estimated and lum ped
toge1h'!!.r 10 represent that. It is rio t intended i.O be an exac l doll ar amount. It is just representative of what,
approximatel y it would cost. 1t is an annual budget . We do average about that amou nl , so it is roughly a good
esti mate for what th e total administrative cos t wo uld be to ope rate the prc,gram. Mr . Wood ward sa id okay, that
clarifies it. I gue ss on the surface , fo r me , it se em s that that seem s to be a hi gh administrative number . Ms .
Grimmett sai d the administrative numbers arc tota l fo r the entire housing rehab program . Mr . Woodward sai d okay.
She sai d it is nol specifically just for th is $300 ,000.00 grant. The additi onal admini strati ve cos ts also sup po rt the
lin e of credit that we rece ive fr om Vect ra Ban!-:. It al so is includ ed in administering th e Community Devel opm ent
bl oc k grant fund s, plu s any other fundin g th at we might r('r"ivc , So it is just representati ve of what it reall y cos ts
administ rati vely to rough ly accomp li sh 15 projec ts, whic h 'l Ur annual average . Bui with that , reali sti ca ll y. we are
proh ably producing close to a mil li un dollars in rchab ... nOl J-3 1 thi s $400,000.00.
Co un cil Me mber Brad sha w sa id so you can add those totals aero s the bo ttom. Ms. Grimme!! sa id 1ha1 is just
repre senting what wil l be done wi th thi s parti cular projecl . Ms. Brad shaw sai d 10 per cc nt ... l do n't know wh o ha s
admini strati ve costs a1 10 pe r ce nt. And Ms . Grimmen sai d, what we arc showi ng here is just pan of the
budget ... reprcse ntin g that we arc asking fo r the $3 0,000.00 in ad ministra ti ve fund s 1hat will be rei mbursed to th e
Cit y to support the total grant of $300,000 .00 . We will draw dow n the $30,000 .00 anrl Lh osc monies will be rel urn ed
to the General Fund .
Mayor Garrell asked if th ere we re any ad.:ti1iona l que stions . There we re none .
COUNCIL MEMBER BRADSHAW MOVED, AND IT WAS SECONDED, TO APPROVE AGENDA IT EM
II (o) (II)· COUNC IL BILL NO . 23.
COUNC Jc. BILL NO. 2:!. J:,TR ODUCED BY COUNC IL MEMBER BRADSHAW
•
•
•
•
•
Englewood City Co ur •II
June 6, 2005
Page9
A BILL FOR AN ORD INANCE APPROV ING AND A\J"l i-iC,UZ ING AMENDMENT NUMBER TWO TO THE
FEDERAL HOME IN VESTMENT PARTNERSHIPS ACT AGREEMENT BETWEEN ARAPAHOE COU NTY
AND THE CITY OF ENGLEWOOD. COLORADO.
Mayor Garre n asked if there were any commc nls or discussion. Th ere wa s none.
Vote results :
Motio n carried .
Ayes : Cou nci l Members Barrent ine, Moore, Brads haw , Garre n, Wolosy n,
Woodward, Tomasso
Nays: None
{b) Approva l of Ordinances on Second Reading
(i) Co uncil Bill No . 14 approving ame ndmen ts to the Englewood Municip al Code pertaining
to Fences, Wall s and Vi sual Barriers of the Unified Devel opment Code was considered.
COUNCIL MEMBER WOLOSYN MOVED, AND IT WAS SECONDED, TO APPROVE AGENDA ITEM
II (b) (I). COUNCIL BJLL NO. 14.
COUNCIL BILL NO . 14, INTRODU CE D BY COUNCIL MEMBER BRADSHAW
A BILL FOR AN ORDINANCE AMENDIN G TITLE 16, CHAPTER 6, SECTION 6, OF THE ENGLEWOOD
MUNICIPAL CODE 2000, WHICH PERTAINS TO FENCES AND RETAINING WALLS .
Mayor Garrett asked if there was any discuss ion.
Mayor Garrett said my discussion has been consistent. I am opposed to hnving it required to be o ne foot back from
the sidewalk . When I tour around the City, we have a lot of what I would call nonconform ing properties and I am
worried that all of a sudden we could have so me additional cx~nse if we made it at the one foot le ve l, which is
recommended by thi s particular ordi nance.
Co uncil Member Brodsha• said thal is on page 13. It is (H) (2): Retaining Walls Adjacent 10 Pu blic Sidewal ks: All
retaining wall s shall be Joe: ·ed on the appl icant's property , but no cl ose r than o ne foot behind any publi c sidewalk.
She sai d that is a mai nten~ ,,..:c. headache. I just wondc red ... 11.nd I ce rta inl y am not taking our City Atto rney's
spot ... but some type of wordin g like ... thi s may be wai ved by the Director of Publ ic Works, with a sig n off by the
property ow ner for da mage caused by street and si de wa lk repair or so methin g to th at effect. Mr . Garre n said more
like th e case ment agreements we have been exec uting . Ms . Bradshaw said right , so I don't know wha t ver bi age we
need there, but that is what wo u!d meet my needs . If the property ow ner is willing to say .. .look if yo u have to come
in and fi 1 my si dewalk and I put this wa ll up to th e curb. I will assume any respon sibility for damage to that. I think
we have so few properties that th is is going to affect 1hat I would rather sec that, 1han a foot of weeds ... or what
so me people do is put Oags1one dow n. bu t that doe sn't help if they are n't puttin g in a fl ags tone wa ll. It is al most a
takin gs. is what I am seeing ... lak in g a foo t of their propert y th:11 they co uld use fo r so meth ing else .
City Attorney Brot...man sai d arc yo u loo king at just the retaining wa ll s at one foot or arc you also lookin g at fen ces
at one foot ? Ms . Bradshaw sai d both.
Co uncil Member Tomasso said the problem I see is wit h the Holl ywood c urbs and you have a pickup tr uck with the
big mirrors, parked next to th e curb, and a fence up agai nsl th at si dewalk . yo u've got a foo t between th e mirror and
fence to get down the si dewalk . Ms . Bradshaw said Hollywood c ur bs were nev er mea nt for people to walk on, 1
don't think. M:. Tomasso said yes, but 1h01 is wha t you hn ve ... you have handicapped ramp s leading up to that
si dewalk , so meone wit h a scoote r goi ng dow n the si dewalk on th eir scoo ter, they ca n't get be 1wec n the mirro r and
th e fen ce and you have created a barrier for the handic apped pr.rso n. If you have a kid riding a bicycle on the
si dewalk , he has the sa me prob lem .
Englewood City Co uncil
June 6, 2005
Page 10
Co unci l Member Wolosy n said ca n it be pro vide d that the sidewalk meets ADA req uirement s, bec au se aren't there
ADA standard s fo r sid ewa lk wid th s and thin gs like 1hal? Ca n't there be another prov iso?
Co uncil Member Bradshaw sa id so pro vi ding th e sidewa lk mee ts the ADA requireme nt s? Ms. Wolosyn sa id th at's
ri ght , it has to meet ADA req uir eme nts.
Mayor Garre tt sa id what I worry about is th at we ha ve a lot of propc ni cs th at are rig ht on the side wa lk lin e an d these
retainin g wa ll s or fences have bee n th ere fo r a long time . They co uld go at an y tim e, as we know, as th ey get older .
S,l then all of a sud de n we say yo u ca n't rea ll y re pl ace it anymore. yo u have 10 c:1 1 ba ck all yo ur propen y in ord er 10
make thi s one foot barri er.
Counci l Member Tomasso said yo u are going to have to cut back lhe propen y m.yway to me et the new st andards of
re tai ning walls with lh e drain age he hind th em, with the grave l beh ind th em and th e new slope s ... because they arc
required to have a slope to th em, they c.:a n'1 be rea ll y straight up and down anymore a nd you have to ha ve the grave l
placed behind them with the drainage and the water flow ing thro ugh the wa ll.
Mayor Garrett said that is anoth er extra foot th at yo u take to make th a1 happen .
Co un cil Member Tomasso said so anytime you replace one yo u have a bi g headac he a nyway if you've got to meet
the new Code on this .
Mayor Garrett sai d I wo uld move to suppon Bev's amendme nt on so n of what I caJI the ''owner beware" ... if the y
would choose 10 do th at th at they unde rs tand the co nsequen ces of th at action.
MAYOR GARRETT MOVED, AND IT WAS SECONDED, TO AMEND CB 14 BY ADDING AN OWNER
WAIVER FOR F-'' AND H-(2).
Council Member Brad shaw as ked City Auomey Brotzman if he had the words fo r thi s. Mr . Brotzman said what yo u
arc loo king for is an owner waiver for f.(c) (4) and H·(2). Ms. Bradshaw said that is right.
Co un cil Member Wolosy n said are th ere legal standard s fo r th e width of si dewalks ? Mr . Brocz man sa id we ha ve
va rying sidewalks throughout the Cit y. But , Ms. Wol osy n sa id , th ere aren't any Fede ral ADA require men ts? Mr .
Brotzrnan sa id except th ose arc as they come in and as we work on th e sidew alks. The problem is we have a lot of
old si dewal ks that wo n't have to mee t th ose requirements fo r quite some time. Ms. Wolosy n said isn't that the same
wi th retaining wall s?
Mayor Garren sa id, as yo u replace one little sec ti on of a sidewalk , yo u aren 't goi ng to change the entire sidewalk
throu gh that enti re Hne. You are pro bab ly going to put it back pretty much the way it was. Yo u will , then. ha ve one
piece of sidewalk in the mid dle of tl,e bl oc k that is wider 1han everyt hing el se. I don't think we arc doing th at. Ms.
Brad shaw sa id th at is a bigger hazard . (S omeo ne stated we are not doing that.] Mr . Garren sa id our sidewa lk s are
what th ey are . I don't thi1,g th ey are go in g to change a who le lot.
Ma yo r Garrett sa id we have :m amendme nt on th e tab le and just so th at eve ryo ne knows it, if we pass thi s
ame ndme nt thi s again beco me s fir st re adin fo r th is pani cular ordin ance.
Mayor Garrett ns ked if the re was any furth er di sc uss ion on the ame nd ment. There was none .
Vo te riS ults :
Ml'li on carried.
Ayes: Co uncil Members Barrentine, Moore. Bradshaw, Garrett, Wol osy n,
Woodwa rd . Tomas!;O
Nays: None
Counci l Member Bra dsha w saiU I have anoth er thin g. She sa id aga in we are talkin g abou t less tha n 16 fee t ... and
Tri ci a maybe yo u ca n help us out on thi s one . So if th ey arc repla ci ng picke ts and pos ts le ss than 16 fee t. they do n't
need a permit. Wh y did th ey decid e on 16 feet ? Ms. Lango n sa id 16 feet was based on th e lin ear lengt h o f two
fence secti ons, since th ey genera ll y come in 8 foot sec ti ons. Ms. Brads ha w sai d oka y. Ms. Lan gon sa id yo u co uld
•
•
•
•
•
•
Eng lewood City Council
June 6, 2005
Page II
easily buy an 8 foo l sec 1ion at a Ho me Depot or such pl ace. Ms. Bradshaw sa id so ii could be 24 fe et? I just
wond ered if anybody had an issue with the 16 fe et. Some of our lots arc 37 feet wi de .
Council Member Wol osy n sa id I remem be r in th e mi nules ... during thi s parti cular di sc uss ion in Pl an nin g and
Zo ning ... and everyo ne was n't in fu ll agrccme m and th e fir s\ thin g on the table was 8. Am I ri ght ? And then
so me body suggested 16. Ms. Brad shaw sai d arc we talk ing abo ut th e fr ont age. ri gh t across th e fr ont •vit h thi s or an y
fence? Ms . Lang on sa id any portion of the fen ce. Ms. Bradshaw sa id I wou ld rather sec somet hing such as ... i f yo u
are repla cing more th an 50% of an es tablished fence.
Co un ci l Member Toma sso sai d we ll thi s all ows yo u 10 de;, 8 fe et one weekend and 8 feet lh c next weeke nd and 8 feet
1hc nexl weekend . Mr . Wood wa rd said it all ows you to do 16 feet one week. Mr. Toma sso sa id it says less than 16,
so yo u can do 15 feet ... one 8 foo t sec tion eac h weekend .
Council Member Bradshaw said I don't kn ow what Council feels , but J think we can over r"~·1:•,t rr
Co unci l Member Wol osy n sn id so yo u think a perce ntage wo uld work ? Mr. Bradshaw said I'm thi nk ing if they arc
doing more th n httlf.
Co un cil Member Woodward said 1hat would be a lot of fen ce if the whole backyard was en closed.
Mr . Tomasso said thi s allows you to replace a small sec tion, if you have a wi nd tc;,rm or a tree lakes o ut a sm ull
section, without httving to get o permit for the entire fence . But , if the wh ole fenc e goes, you can on ly do an 8 foot
section at a time , without getting a permit every weekend. You know, e nc sec ti on a weekend until you arc done.
That's the loo phole of it
Counci l Member Brad!i ha w said it was a though!. One of my neighbors was questioning me abou t thi s. Mr.
Woodward said you know , I agree with you Bev , I would like to see more th an 16 feet. I don'I quite know what th at
num ber is ... 50% seems like an awfully large nu mber to mt, but having just very reccntJy , within the las1 two days,
replo.ccd fence posts .. .I would be more in favor of three sect ions or four would e ven be better. Ms. Brad shaw said
we ll I j ust looked at what was taken out and it was very ambiguous ... if it says substantial altcra1ion or
expansion ... and we are going from replacement of all, for a com ple x repai r. And wh y wa sn't that good ? It is just a
questi on, she sa id , because that is pretty specific.
Mayo r Garrett sa id I think they were just goi ng to assure meas ure ment standard. because that is ea sy. Ms . Brad shaw
said I know that is easy, but I am also thinking that putting in a fen ce is ve ry expensive and to add a permit fee on
top of th at. .. if it is just a replacement Mr . Woodwa rd said espec ially if yo u arc just replacing posts . Ms . Brad sha w
said do yo u have to have 16 feet of posts? Mr. Woodwa rd said it says such as replace ment of indi vid ual pi ckets,
posts or less than 16 feet of fencing mat erial. Mr . Garren sai d you · 't need a permit to rep lace posts . Mr .
Wood ward sai d ok ay . Mr . Garren said it says when you don't neCL ocrmit and that is if yo u are doin g posts, yo u
don't need a permit. Mr . Wood ward sa id oka y, I'm sorry. I mi sread mat then .
COUNC IL MEMBER BRADSHAW MOVED , AND IT WAS SECONDED, TO RESTORE THE
ORIGINAL l,ANGUAGE TO 16-6-6 (B) (2) (b) AND ELIM INATE THE NEW LANGUAGE.
Ma yor Garrett asked if there was any discu ssion.
Council Member Moo re said I would like darifica li on nn whal wa s th ere before. I want 10 make s ure I'm reading
thi s right. Eve n if you did replace an 8 foot sectio n of fen ce wouldn'l you th en be subjec t to the review , under
number 2. Ms. Bradi.haw said yes the review bui not, oh I se c ... but thi s says a pc rmil and zoning site plan review .
She said sec 1hi s adds the term. permi t, the new wording and 1hc other was just a site re view .
Council Mem be r Moore sa id do we agree 1hat eve n if you did 8 feet under the old wo rdin g you would be subject to
at lea st the review . Mr . Toma sso sai d yes, yo u wou ld have to have the revie w if yo u replace 4 feet. Ms. Brad shaw
said ri ght. so 1hat is th e relief. If they do le ss th an 16 feet , then th at is the reli ef...tha t they don't need 10 have a
zoni ng site plan revi ew . My co ncern is th a1 we as king th em to ge t a permit and we want peop le 10 keep up th eir
prope rt y. We want them 10 improve their fences and main1ain th em. It almos t so und s like a pena lt y to me when we
1alk about a permit.
Englewood City Council
June 6, 2'I05
Page 12
Ma yor Garrell sa id th e troubl e I hav t is 3n)1hing you do requi re s a zo,ing si le plan re view and th at 10 me gets 100
burdensome ror a small sectio n of fe nce , to go ba ck 10 the old language, or i1 could be in1erpretcd tha t way . Ms.
Brad shaw sa id then co uld we strike "a permi t and" ... just say "zo nin g and site plan revi ew is not required fo :-,;i mplc
rep airs" and just ge t rid of ''permit". Mr . Garrett sa id so you don't want a permit for any fen ce? Ms . Brad shaw sa id
no. Ms. Wolosyn sai d then what aboul enforcing the fence m:nerials. Ms. Brad shaw said I don't know, it jus 1 see ms
pun iti ve.
Co un cil Member To ma sso sai d it is th e sa me thin g as a bui ld ing permit . You gel a buildin g permit to build a fen ce,
so yo u build a fence in an app ro pri ate manner ... your footin gs are deep eno ugh 10 hol d a post up in a windstor m of
60 or 70 mil es an hour. so th at they don't fa ll and hi t somebod y, so it is the sa me thi ng as geuing a building pe rm it
or pouring a concrete slab , 111 th al point, if yo u arc going 10 build a whole new fence, replace the entire fen ce . This
sec ti on here is givi ng you relief if you have one rolled pos t and yo u arc re plac ing one post, you don't have to get a
permit to do the whole job. If you have a couple of sections th at are rolled or fo iling out or one major stringe r board
that is go ne , you ca n repl ace that.
Ms. Brad shaw said on page 2, (2) (b) ... "pcrmit and " was added to th at. Ms . Wolosy n sa id yo u kn ow the one
practical truth about this is that you can do 16 feet and then 16 feet...or 15 , 15 .999. Mr. Moore said an ahernative
that maybe works for me is keeping the wording , but chang ing the 16 to 25 so that it clear ly has three panels in
there . That gives us a linle more latitude . t thin k the pe rmit has so me val ue in that if so meone is going to inve st a
sub stantial amount in th .: renovation , al least this en sures that they don't waste th eir money. 1 know th e review
mi ght do ii , bul the idea of the permit actually may help rai se aware ness and if they are red oi ng the ir whole yard,
yo LI want to make sure th at they arc not doing so methin g that th ey shouldn 't.
Mr. Tomasso sa id and also if somebod y is puttin g up a 10 or 12 foot fence and tl.en findin g ou t they have to cul off
the top 4 or 5 feet of it , taking it t-ack down to mee t the zoning stand ards and also requires yo u to f:le the plan if you
•
are doing the comer cuts. If you have a cvmer lot. doing the al ley , you ha ve to have that comer site plan so •
somebody comi ng out of the alley will see other cars. If you don 't file for th e site plan, if you don't ha ve to go in
and get the zoni ng approval , you could ge t away with puttin g a sq uare co mer on th ere .
Ms. Bra dshaw sa id your honor, I ca ll the question .
Ma yor Garrett sai d on the tab le is an amendment which would restore the orig inal lan guage under 8 and elimin ate
or not use lh e new langua ge that is underscored.
Vote results:
Ayes: Cou nci l Mem bers Barrenti1 ·e, Bradshaw
Nays: Counc il Members Moore, Garre tt, Wolosyn, Woodward. Tomasso
Motion defoa1ed .
COUNCIL MEMBER MOORE MOVED, AND IT WAS SECONDED, TO CHANGE 16-6-6 (B) (2) (b) "OR
LESS TBA l\l SllA'EEN FEET" TO "OR LESS TH,\N TWENTY-FIVE FEET,"
Mayor Garrett asked if there was any di scuss ion .
Cou nci l Member Brad shaw sai d th is mak es more scn c:e.
Vote r es ults:
Ayes: Counci l Membe rs Barrentine, Moore, Brad shaw. Woodward
Nays : Council Members Garrell , Wulo sy n, Tomasso
Mo1ion carried .
Mayor Garrett asked if th ere we re any other amendme nts. There were none.
Ma yor Garren sa id we now go 10 cur ori ginal 11otio n "
wi th 1wo amend mcnt s ... one deali ng with th e waiver an
"'is to app rove 11 (b) (i ). whic h is Cou nci l Bill No. 14,
,c other dea ling with changirir the 16 to 25 fee t.
Ma yo r Ga rrett asked if there was any discuss ion on th !~ part icular i1 em. There was none .
•
•
•
•
Englewood City Co uncil
June 6, 2005
Page 13
Vo te results on motion to approve Co un cil Bill No . 14 as amended .
Motion carried .
Ayes : Cou ncil Members Barrentine, Moore, Bradshaw, Garre n, Wol osyn,
Woodward , Tomasso
Nays: None
(ii) Cou ncil Bill No . JS gra ntin g a ut ility case men t to Public Service Compa ny of Colora do
fo r in stallation of new overhead hil:., vo lt age power lines at 2900 South Platte River Drive was co nsidered.
COUNCIL MEMBER BRADSHAW MOVED, AND IT WAS SECONDED , TO APPROVE AGENDA ITEM
II (b) (II)· ORDINANCE NO. 19 1 SERIES O.F 2005.
ORDINANCE NO . 19, SERIES OF 2005 (CO UNCIL BILL NO . IS , INTRODUCED BY COUNCIL MEMBER
WOLOSYN)
AN ORDINANCE GRANTI NG A UTILl1'Y EASEMENT TO PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY OF COLORA:)Q
(d ba Xce l Energy) FOR INST ALLA Tl ON OF POWER LINES AT 2900 SOUTH PLATTE RI VER DRIVE
(Li ulcton/E nglcwood Wastewater Treatment Pla nt).
Mayor Garrett 11Sked if there was any discu ss:on . There was none.
Vote results:
Motion carried .
Ayes :
Nays:
Co uncil Members Barrentine, Moore , Bradsha w, Garrett, Wolosyn,
Woodward , Tomasso
None
(iii) Counc il Bill No . 18 approving the License , :·•· mcnt and Temporary Connuction
Easement with Qwest Corporation for install ation of PVC conduit for a ~---~• optic line for i:1temet service was
cons idered.
COUNCIL MEMBER WOODWARD MO VE D, AND IT WA S SECO NllED, TO APPROVE AGENDA
ITEM II (b) (Ill)· ORDINANCE NO. 20, SERIES OF 2005.
ORDINANCE NO . 20, SERIES OF 2005 (COUNCIL BILL NO . 18, INTRODUCED BY COUNCll . MEMBER
BRADSHAW)
AN ORDINANCE APPROVING A LICENSE -CITY DITCH CROSSING AGRF.E MENT BETWEEN THE CITY
OF ENGLEWOOD , COLORADO. , .ND QWEST CORPORATION FOR A 2" PVC CONDUIT CROSSING OF
THE CITY DITCH.
Mayor Garrett asked if there was any di sc ussio n. There wa s none.
Vote res ults :
Motion carried.
Aye s: Co uncil Members Barre ntine, Moo re, Brads haw, Garrett, Wolosyn,
Woodward, Tomasso
Nays: None
(c) Re soluti ons and Motions
(i) Director Fonda prese nted a recomme nd atio n from the Lillletff j ngl ewood Wastewater
Treatme nt Plant (UE WWTP) Supervisory Com minec to approve, by moti on, a co ntra ct 10 construe ! a sto rage pad
and roadway improve ments at the (UE WWTP) Biosolids Farm . The Committee reco mm ends awo.rding the
co ntrac t 10 the lowes1 res pon sive bidder, Technology Constru ctors, in the amo unt of $451.573 .00. He said we ore
reco mmending this project In ihe pas t we have been able tr store the solids on site temporaril y durin g inclement
Engle" ood City Council
June 6, 2005
Pa;e 14
weat her. This is a project that we have had on the drawing board fo r a long time , but wit!l the cons tru ct io~, of the
new facili ty we will not have adeq uate space to store on site and so in preparation fo r th e winter we would like to gl'l
these roadway imr,ovcmcnts made . When !here is foul weathe r we simply c·an't get there. It is 11 very hea vy clay
soi l. And also build ing th e sioragc pad takes the Slf'ragc ou t of the City of Eng lewood and therefore would eliminate
any potential for odors .
Mayor Garrett asked if there were any que stio ns for Mr. Fonda.
Council Member Woodward said this is a paved ro:td and a s1oragc i::AI? How long is thi s road? Mr . Fonda sai d it
is 1600 feet . Mr. Woodward said it comes offHigt,way 36 th en and it j w t goes to thi s storage facili ty? Why do we
need lo hav.:: that paved ? I mean as opposed to a gravel road . We arc lhc only ones ulil izing it Is thal correct?
Mr. Fonda sai d the paved roa d goes to th e storag~ pad and the grave l road, I believe, goes to the maintenance ham ,
but the trucks arc cxlremely heavy and so I am not sure th at lhc gravel wou ld be adequate .
Mr. Woodward sa id okay so that is why y0u arc ~king for paving , because of the traffic that would be on it. I sec .
Mr. Fonda said these are 18 wheelers.
Mayor Garren asked if lherc were any olhcr questions fo r Mr. Fo nd n. There were none.
COUNCIL MEMBER WOODWARD MOVED, AND IT WAS SECONDED , TO APPROVE 11 (c) (I)· A
CONTRACT TO CONSTRUCT A STORAGE PAD AND ROADWAY IMPROVEM ENTS AT THE (IJE
WWTP) BIOSOLIDS FARM. THE COMMITTEE RECOMMENDS A WARDING THE CONTRACT TO
THE LOWEST RF.sl'ONSIVE BIDDER, TECHNOLOGY CONSTRUCTORS, fi, THE AMOUNT OF
$451,573 .00.
Mayor Garrett asked if there was any di scussion. The re was none.
Vote results:
Motion carried.
Ayes: Council Members Barrentine, Moore , Bradshaw, Garrett , Wolosyn,
Woodward, Tomasso
Nays : None
12. General Discussion
(a) Mayor's Choice
Mayor Garrett did not have any mutters 10 bring before Council.
(b) Counci l Members ' Choice
(i) Counci l Member Barrentine:
I. She sai d I had an opponun it y at the bike drawing to atlf'nd the \1pc ning of Pirates Co ve. There we re a lot of
people there. My so n had a great time. We sta yed fo r aw hil e and just enjoyed that a gre at deal.
2. She said I want 10 remind everybody about the Gol f Tournament on the 13111• We hJ.ve approxi mately 60
paid for spt ts for this tournament already . It wo uld have taken I i4. We arc a li ttle disaoµointcd, but it is certairi ly
better participation lhan they expected . Golf tourna ments arc down a little. Howcvtr, we na ve really had an
out pou ri ng of spo ;isorship and support fo r thi s, in just the short pcricxl of time th at we did it. I am very pro ud of that
committee and our co mmunit y. It should be fun on the 13th .
(ii) Council Mem ber Moore said Co unci l Memt..-.:r Bradshaw and Ma.yor Garrett, I would like
10 thank yo u for your editorial in 1hc paper. I think it will he lp clarify our ordin ance and also clarify the process that
goes into creatin g an ordinance. I just wanted to lh an k you for your effons on that.
•
•
•
•
•
•
Englewood Cily Council
June 6, 2005
Pag e 15
(iii) Coun ci l Member Toma sso sail.! th e Old Town Merchan1 s Assoc iati on is moving fo rward
with their Cr uising Engl e wood Car Show and it is go ing alorg we ll. The y arc talk ing amo ng th emse lves and 1alki ng
with so me other people about setting up a speci al taxing di str il.:t fo-th cmsc !vcs so 1ha11hcy would. in the foturc . be
ab le to have an organiza ti on th at co uld lend thi s. ns opposed 10 being indiv idual s putt in g it togccher. He said it
wo uld be a propeny taxing di strict that they would se t up and wo uld work like Nonh Cherry Creek . Ms. Brad shaw
said so it wouldn 't be a Busines s Imp ro vem ent Di stri ct'! Mr. Tomasso sa id no, it wouldn 't be a Bu siness
Improve me nt Di strict. II would be a taxi ng distric t a nd it would ha ve offi ce rs. So th ey arc inve s1i gating 1hat at th is
poi nt. The car show has expa nded and added 10 growth for th is community already. It is going al ong we ll .
(iv) Co uncil Member Woodward :
t. He said on Sa turday KEB wi ll be havin g another Good Neighbor Days ... handing o u1 th e Wa ste
Management co upons . That will be dov·n here fr om 10:30 until 12:30 at th e Cit y Cen ter.
2. He said I j ust wa nt ed to me ntion that I will be pa rti ci patin g in the Golf Tournament next Monday. I do
believe in the mi ss ion and the sc holars hi p program fo r the youths. So I just wanted to say that I will be a participant.
(v) Co un cil Member Wolosy n:
I . She sa id on Saturd11y I came down and h11ndcd out Good Neighbor certificates. I th ink I had 10 or 11
peop le come ou t in the pouri ng rain to get the m and than k us. They do it every year and they think it is a great
program. If anybody does n't know , it is $20.00 off of exi sting fee s 10 get rid of old stu ff and refuse arou nd yo ur
house .
2. She sai d the other thing I have is that Jackie just showed us a logo an d it looks as if Englewood's logo was
ac tu ally inco rporated into Posi tively Englewood's, Whe n we gave permission to use the logo 1 thought it was to
denote that Englewood was a part7'CI' in so methin g and then it wo uld be used much the same way we al wavs sec th at
logo used in partnerships. I didn 't th ink it wo ul d be incorporated into a logo and I hope it isn't , beca use I think that
really isn't what our ordi nance or our policy governing the logo all ows . You know we don't do that. The logo
represent s the Ci ty and I was told, in no uncenain term s early on. th at it should not be inc orporated int o oth er logos.
I just wanted to express th ut.
13. City Monoger's Report
Cit y Manager Sears did not have a ny matte rs to bring before Council.
14 . City Attorney's Report
Ci ty Anorn ey Bro tzman did not have any matters to bri ng befo re Co uncil.
May or Garrett said Co unci l wou ld adi,-r rn and move in tu an Exec utive Se ss ion :l!gardin g uni on ncgotiatio·1s that
we re not distusscd earlier.
15.
RR ETI \1OVF.D j _'"°l;L . The meetin g adj o urned at 8:45 p.m .