Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1995-06-19 (Regular) Meeting MinutesI I ENGLEWOOD CITY COUNCIL ENGLEWOOD, ARAPAHOE COUNTY, COLORADO RqularSeuloa June 19, 1995 I. Call loOnlcr The regular mocting of !he Englewood City Council was called to order by Mayor Bums at 7:35 p.m. 2. tn,·oc1tion The invocat ion was given by Cruncil Member Wiggins. ). Pledge of Alleiianrc TIIC Pledge or Alkgiaoo: "ns led by Mai Of Borns. 4. Roll Call Prcscnl: Absen t: A quorum was present. Also present : S. Minutes Council Mcrnbcrs Hathaway, Wa ldman. Wiggins. Habenicht. Vomiiuag. Waggoner. Bums None City Manng1:r Clarlt Assistant 10 the City Mannger Grace City Attorney Brotzman Cily Clerk Ellis Din:ctor EslcrlJ. Public Works Pla .,ning Administrator Stilt Manager Stowe. Littleton/Englewood Wasicwater Tn:atntcnt Plant (a) COUNCIL MEMBER WIGGINS MOVED, AND IT WAS SECONDED, TO APPROVE THE M!NUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF JUNE 5, 1995. Ayes : Council Members Hathaway. Vormiltag. Wiggins , Habenicht . Waggoner , Waldman . Bums Nays : None Motion carried . 6, Sthcdultd Visilon lltcrc were no scheduled vis it ors . 7. Non-scbcdulc.d Vi1iton TI1crc were no non-sch~ulcd visitors . S. Communit1tion1, Proc.lam1tion1 and Ap1>0intmcnts E■slewood City C.acil Juae 19,19'5 Paa< 2 (1) A resolution nxonunending Norlcen Noolen for reappointment to the Housing Authority for the City of !!nglcwood, Colorado was considered. The resolution was assigned a number and raid by title : RESOLUTION NO . 42 , SERIES OF 199S A RESOLtrrlON RECOMMENDING NORLEEN NORDEN FOR REAPPOINTMENT TO THE HOUSING AlffilORJTY FOR THE CITY OF ENGLEWOOD. COLORADO . COUNCIL MEMBER HABENICHT MOVED, AND IT WAS SECONDED, TO APPROVE AGENDA ITEM I (1) • RESOLIJTION NO. 42, SERIES OF 1995. Ayes : Council Members Hathawa y, Vom1itlllg, Wiggins , Habenicht. Waggoner. Waldman . Bums Nai~: None Mo1ion carried. 9. Public Rearing No public hearing was scheduled before Council . I COUNCIL MEMBER HA TIIA \IA Y MOVED, AND IT WAS SECONDED, TO APPROVE CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS II • (a) (i) THROUGH (vi) ON FIRST READING. MAYOR BURNS PULLED AGENDA ITEM 10 (1) (v) FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA. COUNCIL MEMBER HA TIIAWA Y AMENDED HER MOTION TO REQUEST APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS 10 (a) (i), (ii), (iii), (Iv) and (,i) ON FIRST READING. (a) Approve on First Reading (1) COUNCIL BILL NO . 34 . INTRODUCED BY COUNC IL MEMBER HATHAWAY A BILL FOR AN ORDINANCE AlffilORIZING AN INTER GOVERNMENT AL AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE 1./NITTD STA TES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR GEOLOGICAL SURVE Y AND THE Cln' OF ENGLEWOOD . COLO RADO ENTITLED "DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR GEOLOGICAL SURVEY JOINT FUNDING AGREEMENT FOR WATER RESOURCES INVESTIG ATIONS ." (i i) CONTRACT WITH POW ER EQUIPMENT COMPANY IN THE AMO UNT OF S6 9,JOO INCLUDI NG OPTIONS FOR THE PURCHASE OF A FRONT END LOADER. (i ii ) COUNCIL BILL NO. JJ, INTRODUCED BY COUNCIL MEMBER HATIIAWAY A BILL FOR AN ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE 7. CHAPTER 6B, SECTION 6, OF THE ENGLEWOOD MUN ICIPAL CODE I 98S REGARDING OBSTRUCTING HIGHWAYS AND PUBLIC PASSAGES . I I I I E■ckwood Cky c ... adl June 1', 19'5 PaaeJ (i,•) COUNC IL BILL NO . 3 1. INTRODUCED BY COUNCIL MEMBER HATHAWAY A BILL FOR AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING AN 11-ITERGOVERNMENT AL AGREEMEITT BETWEEN TI!E CITY OF ENGLEWOOD, COLORADO AND THE CITY OF LITll.ETON, COLORADO WITH RESPECT TO TI!E FINANCING OF MEDIAN LIGHTING ENHANCEMENTS ALONG TI!E SOUTH SAITTA FE CORRIDOR. (,i) RESOLIJTION NO. 43 . SERIES OF 1995 A RESOLUTION APPROVING TI!E WAGE AGREEMEITT TO THE COLLECTIVE BARGAINING COITTRACT BETWEEN TI!E ENGLEWOOD POLICE BENEFIT ASSOCIATION AND TiiE CITY OF ENGLEWOOD FOR THE PERIOD OF JANUARY I. 1995 THROUGH DECEMBER 31. 1996. Vote results : Motion carried. Ayes : Council Members Hathaway. Vormiuag. Wiggins. HabenichL Waggoner. Waldman. Bums Nays : None (v) Director Ester ly presented a recommendation from the Dcpanmcot of Public Works to adopt a bill for an ordinance authorizing an intergovernmental agreement bctv.un the ~~le of Colorado Dcpanmcnl of Transportation and the City of Englewood pertaining lo the San1n Fe Corridor enhancements. Responding to l\,la)u Burns. Mr. Esterly staled that lhc agn:cmcnl addresses Englewood's rci•. ,-.., , "1'.«~1 lo the State of Colorado for lighting and median enhancements, which arc upgrades lo the Su~c 's proposal . The contr.1et currently under consideration by Council provides for a contribution ti'om the cities lo increase lhc quality of appearance items on Santa Fe. He said that landscaping for the project will be addressed 11 some time in the futurc wilh further funding rcquircd. He said that !J ncb~g will be part of the final phase oflhc Santa Fe projects, since it is tied lo the Navajo/Windcrmcrc lnx:lt rootc. which was bumped by the BcllC\iew/Santa Fe overpass project. Council Member Habenicht asked if lhe City has had any success in altering lhc schedule so that lhc landscaping and Na\'ajo/Windcm1crc project can be done concurrent with the other phases. Mr. Esterly stated that lhc Ci1y h.,s not yet indicated lo the Sta le th.1l there is a problcn, "i th , , v.t.cdulc . He suggested it might be appropriate to approoch the highway commissioner and district Ch !i\\JC:C'f during a study session . Ms . Habenicht and Mayor Burns ag reed that the maller shou ld be pursued . Mayor Burns cxpn:sscd concern that budgeting ,.;11 be a problem b)' the lime lhe final phases of the project arc undertaken , Mr. Esterly agn:cd that the fear is well -founded . He suggested lobbying our hi ghway commissiO' • prior to the end or the summer . M.1yor Bums agreed . Changing the subject . Mayor Barns asked for Mr. Esterly 's comments reg.irding the King Soopcm parking structun: and whether it is modular and can be dis.i c;sc mblcd 1-:::1hcr th,10 destroyed or knocked down . Mr. Esterly responded that he is nol involved in that projcct . City Manager Clarl( said he C"JlCCIS to rcccive information from Manager of Communi ty Scmc:cs Blumenthal rcg;ording the King Soopcrs project. which he will rclay 10 Council. 11:aakwood City C•ocll Jaae 19, 1995 Paae4 Mayor Bums asked for further oommcnts and questions ,.ganling the Council Bill , and , hearing none, called for a motion . COUNCIL BILL NO. 32. INTRODUCED BY COUNC IL MEMBER HA1llAWAY A BILL FOR AN ORDINANCE AUTimRJZING AN 11',"J'ERGQVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN 11-IE STA TE OF COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION AND THE CITY OF ENGLEWOOD , COLORADO PERT AINlNG TO THE SANT A FE CORRIDOR ENHANCEMENTS CONTRACT. COUNCIL MEMBER HATHAWAY MOVED, AND IT WAS SECONDED, TO APPROVE AGENDA ITEM 10 (a) (,·\·COUNCIL atLL NO. ]2. Motion carried . A) ,s: Council Members Hathaway, Vom1i11ag, Wiggins, Habcnich~ Waggoner, Waldman. Bums Na'!,'S: None COUNCIL MEMBER HAT HAWAY MOVED, AND IT WAS SECONDED, TO API: RVVE CONSENT AGENDA ITI:MS 10 (II) (i). mROUGH (I,•) ON SECOND READI NU. (b) Appm-c on S<cc, d Reading Ci) ORDINANCE NO. 25, SERIES OF 1995 (COUNCIL BILL NO . 26), INTRODUCED BY COUNCIL MEM.BER HATHAWAY AN ORl1!NAI' ;; cST ABLISHING THE PERMANENT APPOINTMENT OF SIX SAffifY SERVI(,$ FOi.i:. ADMINISTRATIVE POSITIONS OUTSIDE THE CLASSIFIED SER VJ CE OF THE CARJ:10;1 :i',. vlr"E ~YSTEM . (ii) ORDINANCE NO . 26 . SERIES OF 1995 (COUNC IL BILL NO. 27). INTRODUCED BY COUNCIL MEMBER HATHAWAY AN ORDINANCE AIJlliORIZING AN 'EXTENSION OF 11-IE CURRENT TELEVISION SYSTEM PE.qMIT. (iii) ORDINANCE NO. 27 . SERIES OF 1995 (COUNC IL BILI. NO . 28). INTRODUCED BY COUNCIL MEMBER HA 11-IAWA Y I AN ORDINANCE AIJlliORJZING AN INTER GOVERNMENT AL AGR t:EMENT BETWF.EN THE I CITY OF ENGLEWOOD . COLORADO . SOIJlli ARAPAJIOE SANITATION DISTRICT. ARAPAHOE COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS , SOUTHGATE SANITATION DISlRICT, WASTE MANAGEME NT OF CO LORADO , INC .. AN D SOUTH ENGLEWOOD SANITATION DI STRICT NO . I. APPROVJNG TliE TRANSMISSION OF WASTEWATER ORIGINATING AT THE COUNTY LINE LANDFILL . . (iv) ORDINAN C;, NO . 28. SERIES OF 1995 (COUNCIL BILL NO . 29), INTRODUCED BY COUNCIL MEMBER I'.\ THAW A Y AN ORDINANCE AIJlliORIZING AN INT ER GOVERNMENT AL AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF THORNTON , COLORADO AND 11-IE CITY OF ENGLEWOOD, COLORADO FOR AN EXCHANGE OF THE CITY OF ENGLEWOOD 'S ROTO MILLING SE RVICES TO THE CITY OF I I 11:a ...... ood City c .... u J• .. 19, 199S Pa1:<S TIIORNTON FOR SAND/SALT , HOT MIXED ASPHALT, OR CRUSHED AGGREGATE MATERIALS . Vote ruulla: Ayes : Nays : Motion carried . Cooncil Members Halha~~y. Vormill ag. Wiggins, Hahcnicht. Waggoner, Waldman , Burns None 11 . Ordinances. Raolution1 and Motions (a) ApplV''C on First Reading (i) Planning Administrator Stitt presented a n:commc.-.dation from the Board of Adjustment and Appeals lo appm•c, by motion. a home occupation USi: \'ariancc . He explained on May 10, 199S the Board of Adjustment 1rnt1 Appeals considered a use v1uian~ :.pp li ci -~n to pcnnil the operation of a manicuring business u ~ Ito .iccu pation . 1bc applicant cun :11I ,pcratcs a daycare home as a home occupation and wanlS tu cr.;wgc occupations to manicurin g., rhit \ u oo :aidcrcd as cosmetology and as such is prohihitc11 &.s • b,mc occupation. As the applican1 ·, proper')' is ::ono.l R-1-C , City Council is required to review the \'a r}.1.r.a:: request . in addition to the :\.v: ... -w by the Board of Adjustment and Appeals. Mr . Stitt advised that Cooncil shall rt\icw the roco<d and written decis ion of the Board to dctcnninc if the variance compH vi lh the requircmrn ts of the Com prehensive Zoning Ordinance . Council Member H., · ~ r.K ht questioned the 3f ,1;an1•~ ~btru to phasc•ir.i .e manicuring business while continuing lo opcrat · daycare home as she was concerned aboul it ems SlfCh as manicuring fluids silting around. Mr. Stitt explained that thc applicant has stw .t l she will not be co nducting the manicuring business. ir ii is approved, during the hours thal she is opcuu.i ng the daycare. Council Member Habenicht stated she feels =lly uncomfortable to have any kind of phase-in on this . Mr. Stitt advised that thc applicant indicated she "i ll do maniams in the e<'Cning if she cannot malce the clean break from one use 10 lhc other aM thal she is inlercstcd in making the lransition as soon as possible . In response 10 Council Member H~benichl , Mr . Slin stated that he is unaware of any other daycare homes th.it operate other home occu pations. He added that he suspects if they do th ey would be more or an office type use so that it would not interfere with the provision of child care services. Council Member Waggo ner asked if she will be restri cted on her hours or operation . Mr. Stilt advised that home occupation provi si ons speci fy that the hours and manner or opcralion be such that it docs not interfere ~ith the peace, qui et and dignity or the neighborhood . In response to Council Member Waggone r. Mr . Still veri fied that the ap pli ca nt will not opera te the busi nesses al the same time . Council Member Habenicht questioned if there arc any legal co1.sidcra1ions or restrictions in 1cm,s of this concurre nt use \\ith a licensed daycare home . Ci1y Attorney Brot1.man st.1 1cd there arc none other than th ose addressed by Mr . Still . Mr. Stitt advised 11011 the ap pli can t's address is 431 East Girard Avenue . E ■ ..... oodChyC•IICII Ju ■e 19, 1995 Pace6 Council Member Waggoner queslioned whether there will be more traffic generated by a manicure business as opposed to a daycare home . Planning Administrator Stilt discussed both home o.;cupation 5CCnarios, "<lncluding thal feasibly traffic will remain the same . Council Member Halha"~l' nOled thal the applicant docs have enough ofT-strcct parking al thal particular l001lion bcc1usc or the si7..c of her 101. ou.. 1 ,1,~i:nlbcr Wald nan expressed concern that Council seems to be rc•hcaring the case as it is hi s u,,.._rw rnding that Council is only 10 review whether the Board observed the rulings of the variance . Mayor Bums fell that is comx:1 and a.<ked for clarification from City Allomey Brotzman . Cit y Altomcy Broczman staled Council Member Waldman is con<ct. Mr . Brotzman explained 1ha1 there arc ten conditions thal the Board of Adjustment and Appeals had to find since this is a use variance . He pointed oul that Council is basically sining as a appellate body to make SUR 1ha1 the Bo:.td reviewed each of the ten conditions and found that this applicant mcclS all of lhosc ten conditions. Responding 10 yor Bums. City Anomcy Brotzman confirmed that Cou ncil can review the Board 's Findings offw.1 anct minu1cs in order to make their dct.c nnination . Plannin g Aduu nistralor Sti lt explained procedures follo"al by lhe Board of Adjustment and Appeals as lhcy n:v icw a use ,-ariancc. Generall y. he staled. lhe Findings. in conjunction wilh the stalf rcpon and board minutes, "ill indiclle that all conditions"""' discussed . Additionally, the Board must address in the Findings such things as the fact that the publi c hea rin g was initialed by a specific applicant. that lhc posting and publicati on werc cond ucted properly and that spec ific indi,i duals testified one "~Y or lhc other. He noted that some findin g. an: very stringent. particularly Uoc: filSI finding under the use variance which stipulates lhal lhis has I0 be lhe only USC lo which you can pul lhc propcny , HOWC\'Cr, in lhis case ii docs nOI appl y in quite lhe same "~Y because 1ha1 is generally construed to appl y 10 principal uses . Residence is a principal u,c in R-1-C. He explained 1ha1 this would be considered a secondary or subordinate usc. Mr. Still sta led 1h.11 lhc Board feels 1hn1 the impact generated by a manicuring business would be no grt01er lha n !hose generated by a daycar< home. And lhcy loo« into consideration the fact tha t lhc use w an<c pm,i sions arc tailored towards principal uses and not accessory or secondary uses . Also. the Board adan:,;scd other conditions about the least impacting type of variances . Mr. Still achi scd that the neighbors that presented testimony were merely cont.:emcd about lhc traffic and the type of busi~. Council Member Habeni cht expressed oonccm that the neighbors arc discomforted and qu estioned whether ii is appropri ate for her 10 address the phas ing of one busin ess to another. Cit y A Homey Brotzn 1.1n stated it is appropri ate and that one of the co nditio ns of a straight va riance is how it imp.1ct s ,~ i cighbo J!' Coun cil Member Wnggo ncr po in ted oul th.11 the vari ance. if granted. mUSl not adverse ly affect the adjacent propcny oflhe neigh bo rhood . Council Member Waldman a,hi scd lhal ii is not noccssarily lhal lhc neighbors think that ii will affect lhcm bul it is whether the Board. after weighing the neighbors opinions. thinks 1ha1 ii will adversely affect them. Council Member Hathaway and Council Member Waldman discussed the fact that only one nei ghbor presented tcsthnony and one letter was rece ived into th e rca,rd . I I I I E ■atewoo.t Clly CINIKII Ju ■e 19, 1995 P1p7 Council Membe r Waldman fell that the .,..i ,,hborhood is nol noccsarily that much of I residential neighborhood at this point He qucstiona. ow much of an impact the nw1h.-uring business \\ill ha\'C on the neighborhood as essentially one pcnon ~ • time can be serviced in I business like this , Council Member Hathaway noted that she rcspccu the fact that the applicant advised the City of her intent ,,. she could hive done it without advising the City , Mr . Stilt stated he fell this type of business is nol really the issue with the neighbor,, that Oicy are moro concerned with parking and uallic in general. In response to Council Member HabcnichL Mr . Still confinncd that Council ,.;u be approving the granting of a variance that \\ill all ow two occupations to Lake place at this home. Counci l Member Waldman a:: ~d tha. :nort SfWi~ca lly Council ,.;u be saying thnt the Board did no1 err in their Findings of fact and tli.Ai r.he A ..tJd obS<'r'\ ':d the ten co ndilio ns for l!ranting the ,iariancc . Mayor Burns stated <"1 ,.., ,, 1: ,-.·i:'lY snling bite an appcali-oou n OJ\d should not uy it all ovcr again. ~1ayor Burns. n:garding :· ·. Y · "IGt,.an 's rcnurlt that the area is not much of a residential neighborhood. shan:d the history or the atu_ , "<181<"1 wt Swedi sh auempled to chanJle that neighborhood o\'cr a period or years, which they IIC\'Cr accorr,pJir.hcd . Se,•eral years ago S"'Cdish ~:cdica! Founda tion essentially sold 22 silcs to llic H~sini Authority. The si 1cs ~1cre either rchabilitalcd. tom down or new houses "~re built , Mayo r BurTIS stated that the ueighborhood has been regenerat ed as a rosidcnilil neighborhood and it is going to remain l.hal way. Ci ty Manager Clark noted that cosmetology is nol permiltcd in thi s particulnr wnc district . He asked if thi s va riance is granted if it will set precedence for similar use variances of this nalurc in the future . Mr. Still stated that lhe Board docs not operate on prcccdcn1 and C\'cry case is taken on it 's own merit . He stated that he goes to great lengths to explain to applicants that wh ether a similar case was granted or denied has oo bearing on their ,'aria .cc, that the applicant must make their case and meet the COflditions and Oien the Board rules accordingly . Discussion ensued , City Manager Clnrk questioned thaL as the Zoning Ordinance prohibits cosmetology "ithin the residential 1.o ncs, that by granling variances over a period of time will we have chiseled away against that standard . He asked how thal squares "ith the original tenant of lhc ordinance restricting cosmetology acti ,itics. Mr , Still agreed th.it is a problem . He staled that one of the thin ~ that he pointed out in the Stall' Rcpon ts the original prohibition of these types of uses was based on the fact lhal the State licensing requirements prohibited them in homes. Not long aft er the City adopted that standard the State changed their regulations so that they do now permit those in homes. And based on that , it was staffs feelin g that since 11011 was the maJor criteria by which we chose to prohibit those uses that maybe it was our ordinance that needed changing . Mr. Stilt hesitated 10 get into the proposed amendments to the home oci11pat ion provisi ons but he did stale he feels the City docs need to take a look at our rcgulittions in ligh1 of current reality, If, as a result or citizen inpul . Council determines that this should romain a restricted usc then that policy ,.;u be adhered to by the Board. Ci ty Manager Clark asked if the City is ina,t .. cnenOy , through granting a series of usc variances, conducting ad hoc legislation which is really in the power of the Planning and 7,,ning Commission and Cit y Council. Mr , Still agreed and sta led that is why lhe usc variance criteria is so tough , because it amounts 10 a rcwning. He stated lhat in this p:1rticular case he spoke with this appli ca nt approx imalel y two )'Co'U'S ago i:■pcw City C•■cll J•ne 19, 1995 ,., .. ood stnJT rw,m Wnded that she• ait to submit a use variance until stall' submitted the proposed amendments IQ 1ltc l ..on ing Orcli 14&00C to lhe Planning Commission and City Council for review. <:'ou ncil Member Waldman noctd that when the Board or Adjustment and Appeals hears simi lar n,qucsts rr~, aod over again they tend to refer the requests back to 1hc Planning and Zoning Commission for rtmcw . He staled that , rrom his experience on tht Board, personality somt1imcs changes the opinions about ccnain issues. And. he staled, since the Board never considtn prcccdtnce he questioned whether :'?: t. "ill ever be a case identical 10 this one with the same location, amenities and paved lot He said he , oc,· n"1 fer.I then: is really a prcccdtna: to be considered in this case. t '"'•,,Burns stated that legally the Board cannot estab lish a proccdencc as the variance procedure docs nc1 · :.liow for it. Council Member Habenichl acknowledging that the issue may noc be appropriate to th ;s discussion. pointed out that both the Council's and City Manag,,'s g01J is to improve and upgrade the City's housing st ocl.. She wondered if approving this use variance is cons,istc nl with the vis ion . She stated she is vcay to, 11 a\ !his point because her heart says )'CS, but her mind keeps saying she must be \'Cl)' thoughtful about wha; tllcy arc app!O\ing and why . Ms . Habenicht reiterated that she docs not feel clear or comfortable "ith any vote at this poinl . Cwnrii Member Waldman stated that USllally a variana: goes "i th the propen y, but ns this is a (.osm.:-lology use. which is a licc nvd occup.11i on. he questioned whether ii wi ll be going "i th 1hc applicant onl)'. ~1•~r than the location . Mr. Stitt sta ted it "ill not. unless that is a specific finding or specific condition imposed by the Board or Council. City Auontey Brotzman clarified that Council cannot add additional conditions . Council can appro\'e or deny th e use variance request and that is all as Council is si ttin g as an appellate body to determine if the ten conditions have bcr.n met. In n:sponsc to Council Member Waldman . City Attorney Brotzman confinned th.it the appro,-al of this use variance "i ll be recorded "ith the Arapahoe County Clerk and Recorder . Planning Administrator Stiu concurred that the decision will be recorded in this case because ii is a use variance and future property owners can operate as a manicurist Mr. Stitt, in rcspornc to Council Member Waldman. sta led that Lhc use variance \\ill show up in a titl e search as it "ill be recorded against that propeny. but not in the deed per sc . Cou ncil Member Habenicht asked for confirmation that the Board or Adjustment and Appeals beliC\'CS that this variance, ir gran ted. "ill not adversely affect the adjace nt propen y or the neighborhood and that 1he proposed use is the least traffi c intensive use possible which "ill permit so me reasonable use .-,he propeny . Ci ty Attorney Brot7.man staled that is what Council is charged "ith. that Council mu st determine from the Findings and minut es that the Board acted appropria1cl y. Discussion ensued . COUNCIL MEMBER HATHAWAY MOVED, AND IT WAS SECONDED, TO APPROVE THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND APPEALS CASE NUMBER 5-95, HOME OC CU PATIO N USE VARIANCE -AGENDA ITEM 11 (a) (i). Ayes : Council Members Hathaway. Vormittag , Wiggi ns. Habe nic ht . Waggoner. Waldman . Bums Nays: None I I I I Eoillewood City Counci l June 19, 1995 P1r:e9 Motion carried. (ii) Planning Adminatralor Still prcscna..J a rocommcndation from thc Dcpanmcnl or Co mmunily Dc:vclopmenl 10 adopt a bill for an ordinance amending thc Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance n:lativc 10 Home Oc:cupalions and 10 schedule a dale for a public hearing on lhis issue . He noled 1h11 this has been an issue for approxim11ely lwo ycan. Ciay Council held a public hearing on ahe proposed amendments in November or 1994 and n:mandcd Ibis issue 10 thc Plannins and Zoning Commission for addilional review. lo schedule a public hearing and n:pon back lo Council by June or 1995 . The i...., lhal came up was thc types of home occupations Iha! should be pcnuilted in thc R-1 -A zone and al thc time 1ha1 lhe Planning Commission n sioa!ly held lh<ir hearin3 thcn: were n:ally no co mments to tha1 effect . Residents did show up at th1. <_ounci! public hearing and made their vie"-s known . Mr . Stin advised thaa lhe Planning Commiuio. based on Council's diroction. advcrtis:d !he public hearing in both thc Englewood Citizai and Englewood Hcnld. Four oplions for c>nsidtmio,. ahe Planning Commissi on wen: prcpatcd by staff. lhosc options being. I) rocommcnd adopti a,n orlhc amendments a.s originally p1oposcd to Council by ahc Planning Commission. 2) amend thc n:gulitions for all Distriru as originally proposed. c.,ccpt for R-1-A, which would ha,-c limiled 1ypr and number of ho,ne occupations. J) an\Cnd the proposed regu lations for all Distriru as originally proposed. except prohibi t home occupaaions in the R-1-A Zone District. 4) rocommcnd lhal then: be no amendments made 10 tho home occupaaioo n:gulaaions. He advised that thc Planning Commission. after receivi ng testimony in a public hearing. rocommcnds ahat option 2 be awroved by Council . Option 2. he poinaed out, n:strict5 the type or home occupations allo\\<:d in R-1-A. and allo\\~ the an\Cndmcnts penaining to the oah<r rc.1dcn tial zone districts. This option stales th.it home occup.1tions in R•l•A shall be restricted to professional offi~ as defined in 1hc EnglC\\ood Municipal Code and thcn: shall be no [1<%-lo-[ace conL1ct \\ith clien ts. customers or the public al the location or the home occu pa1ion. Council Member Hathaway asked if the Planning Commissioo considered all the testimony 1t-J1.! 1ndic:ucd citizens did not object to any non-<>btrusi\'c, im'Uible busine.~ Plan ning Administrator Sti ll stated th.it is a difficult qucstL t, t: the citizens arc basicaJiy asking the Planning Commission. and ultimately Council . 10 turn a blind eye to all lhosc businesses that an: curn:nUy illegal. And thc Planning Commission had a hard lime with that The Planning Commission dctennined that if lhe Cily is going to have re gulations oa thc aypcs of businesses lhcy must be consiste nt Mr. Stilt ack nowledged that from a practical Slll ndpoint there are home occupations in the R-i -A . Generally. he noted. enforcement occurs on a complaim basis. He concluded lhaa ahc problem is. if thc Ciay as a policy ~,ys we will tum a blind eye to those that exist because lhcy an: not causing any problems. "'Can: admitting that they exi st and not enforcing the ordinar,cc as tt is written . Mr . Still stated he has a problem with th.it. Counci l Member Hathaway asked Ci ty Allomey Brotzman if !here is a "~Y 10 clarify the definiti on slightly to differentiate between a home offi ce and a home ort,, ..... t.io a,. Sbc note,1 that some cilizens testified that lhcy \\ill tolerate the pc~n that dqcs nolhing ~.; on-.:raae a computer, which is basically a home office type of business. Ms . Hathaway pointed out that Co,mdi acknowledges 1ha1 lhcsc businesses cxiSI , just as Mr . Still Sla1ed . but Council has not come up l'ith an elTecti\'C way to deal wi th that fact . She notc.J that unless the City cracks do,,11 on enforcement they will still c.xist regardless or what Council docs . City Ah , ·"~ Brotz.m..1 n stated that nothing in the proposed council bill prohibi ts anyone from bringing work home and workin& on it . The problem occu rs when ci1i1.cns do no1 h.1 , e any olher loca tion that th ey work from . Council Member Hathaway staled thal is what she is asking, i[ there is a way to dilTercnti alc between a hom e office and a home occupa1ion . She cited an example of if she were 10 run a publi cation out of her home from a computer and did not ha\'C any ot.hcr office location . Eactewood City CIMIKil J•oe 19, 1'95 Pace 10 City Attorney BrolZman staled lhal wou ld be a home occupalion . Council Member Ha1haway staled she undcniood 1ha1, bul asked again if !here is a way 10 di!Tcrcn1ia1c between lhc home office and home occupation . Ci1y Attorney Brotzman stated Iha! lhe regula1ions QI !his lime in !he R-1-A rclaled 10 professional offices comes the closest to addrcssi"g Ms. Hathaway 's co1-.::cm . Mayor Burns poinled oul 1ha1 you cannot pick up a maga,Jnc any more wi1hou1 an aniclc on home occupatior~. cspocially auoc:iated wilh compulcn . Council Member Ha1haway agrcod and noted Iha! leltimony rcccivod 11 Council 's pubuc hearing on 1he issue indicated citizens do not mind !he neighbor runninJ a !ravel agency 001 of !heir home, bu1 objocled t<' other occupations. She noted it is a very lcnuous situa1 1on u citil.COS do not mind their neighbor conducting a home occupation on one hand. bul on !he olhcr hand 1hc)• wani 1hc Ci1y 10 enforce lhc restrictions. Mayor Bums stated lh'\l lhcrc arc people like o.wraiscrs that work out of their home exclusivel y. but leave their premises to app taisc something so they an: operating there business out of, 'teir home . Council Member Vormittag staled he lik es option number 2. Mayo r Burns noted lha1 Council's laSk 1onigh1 is 10 vote on !he initial approval of 1hc proposed council bill and schedule a public hearing . Council Member Waggoner staled be feels lha1 ifappm·cd, allowing home occupations in 1he R-1-A zone \\i ll dc1criora1e 1ha1 District. The regulalions as proposed, he feels , \\ill be difficull 10 enforce, i.e. lhc ability to pro\'C increased traffic . Counci l Member Habcnichl staled lhal stafT and lhe Pianning Commission have done an exa:llcnt job of addressing lhc issues. She feels Iha! Council Member Halhaway 's question regarding !he abilil)· w differentiate bct"'CCn a home office and home occupation is germane to this issue and has still not been addressed. Ms . Ilabcnichl noted Iha! she 1135 received a number of phone calls nnd visiis from citii.cns in 1he R-1-A zone who are expressing lhc same concerns Iha! Council Mcmbr~ Waggoner addressed . She said she \\ill vole yes on approval oflhe council bill , bul \\ill be listening carcful'y al lhe publ ic hearing, as she feels this is an extremely important decision . Council M~mbcr Wiggins agreed \\ilh Council Member Waggoner's comments . He cilcd his personal e>'J)Cricncc wilh a home occupation (a floor repair mainlcnancc business) in his neighborhood, whereby another neighbor complained and code enforcemcnl 1135 given !hem IS days 10 cease and desist . They just recently bough! lhc home, have docidod lhcy wan l lo co ntinue lhe business an d have pul !heir home back on the market. He reiterated that he concurs ,\ilh Mr . Waggoner 's sra1cmcn1s and will be volin g against lhc proposed counci l bill. Mayo r Bums staled he agrees these arc importanl issues and he al :o h.u concerns c.~pccially regarding increased traffic accessing the residen ces . He said hr. \\i ll \'Ole i1, ~,var of the counci l bi ll in order 10 h.ivz a publi c hearing on the issue. The Cily Clerk \\~S asked 10 read Council Bill No . 25 by lillc : COUNCIL BILL NO. 25 , INTRODUCED BY COUNCIL MEMBER HATHAWAY A BILL FOR AN ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE 16, CHAPTER 4, OF THE ENGLEWOOD MUNICIPAL CODE . 1985 . REGARDING HO ME OCCUPATIONS . I I I I Enakwoocl City c .. acu J•., 19, 199S Past II COUNCIL MEMBER HATHAWAY MOVED, AND IT WAS Sl!CONDED, TO APPROVE AGENDA ITEM 11 (a) (Ii)· COUNCIL BILL NO . 25. Ayes : Council Mcmbc 11 Ha1haway, Vonniuag. Habcnichl , Waldman . Bums Nays : Coo""il Mcmbc11 Wiggins. Waggo ner Moti on ca rried . Council Member Hnlhaway asked abolll a publ ic hearing dale. Ci1y Clerk Ellis Sla led •hal August 21. 1995 will allow for the notice or public hearing 10 be publi shed in the Englewood Cili w 1 and Englewood Herald . COUNCIL MEMBER HA TUA WAY MOVED, AND IT WAS SECONDED, TO SET A PUBLIC HEARING CONCERNING HOME OCCUPATIONS FOR AUGUST 21 , 199S AT 7:JO P.M. AT THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING . Cou nci l Member Habc nic h1 questioned . llS 1his IS' an extremely vo lat il e issue and a lot or people may be on vacatio n. whether it woul d be bett er 10 sc hedul e l:u::r. Coonci l Membe r Halhaway P')hlled ool lhal August 21. 19Y5 allo1<, for pub lica lio n in bolh 1hc Englewood Cit b..c n and Englewood Herald ana that 11 citizc 1o ca n submit a lcucr to be entered into the : ·:o rd if 1hcy arc unable 10 auend 1hc publ ic hearing. Vote results: Mo(fon carried . Ayes : Counci l Members HaL"away. Vonni1tn g. Wiggins , Habcni chl Waggoner. Waldman . Bums Nays : None (iii) Manager Stowe prese nted a rcannmcndalion from the Utilities Department to appro\'c, by motion. the pu rchase of a four wheel dri\'c front load er from Power EQ·Jipmcnl Company in lhe amounl of$62.570 .00 . Ci 1y Manager Clark staled thal nonnally this would have appeared under the Conscn1 Agenda. However. 'as lhc bid came in over the line item budgcL ii was liSled under the n,gular agenda . Mr. Cl arlc staled staff is recommending approval of lhi s purchase . Manager Slowe a1'i scd lhal $5 5,000 was budgeted for this purchase in 1995 based on an estimate from one of th e biddm. n,e final bid of$62 ,570 is $7,570 over bud gcl. Mr. Slowe explained lhal there arc funds avai lable in the Utility Ocpanmcnt budget as the McBroom pip111g extension h.is bee n postponed until 1996 due to the we t Vi'C..1thcr and some ~m :nl probl ems. !n res ponse to Council Member Hathaway . Mr. Ste we con fim1cd that th is purchase will nol adverse ly impacl Ihe budgel for 1995 . COUNCIL MEMBER HA THA WAY MOVED , AND IT WAS SECONDED, TO APPROVE THE PURCHASE OF A FOUR WHEEL DRIVE FRONT LOADER I/ROM P'lWER EQUIPMENT COMPANY IN THE AMOUNT OF $62,570 .00 . Ayes : Council Member, Halhaway, Vo nniuag. Wi ggins. liabcni chl. Waggoner. Waldman. Bums Nays: None Malian ca rded . (b) Ap pro\'e on Seco nd 'leading E■&lewood City Couocil Ju ■e 19, 1995 P1,:ell There were no addilional items submiued for approval on second reading. (Sec Age nda 11cm 10 • Conscn1 Agenda .) 12 . General Dl1<uulon (a) Mayo(s Choice I. Mayor Bums noted that Council has rccci\"ed a proposal budget fo r his aucndancc at the CML Annual Conference . He rtqucsled Council appfO\'lll ofS816 .40 for his Conference expenses. COUNCIL MEMBER HATHAWAY MOVED , AND !TWAS SECONDED, TO APPROVE THE BUDGET FOR MAYOR BURN S' ATTENDANCE AT THE CML CONFERENCE IN GRAND JUNCTION IN THE AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED 51!6.40 Ayes : Council Members Hathaway , Vorminag. Wiggins , Habenich t. Waggoner. Waldman. Bums Nays : None Motion carried . 2. Mayo r Bums encooragccl Council to offer special recognition 10 lhc employees who worked so dili gcnll y during the rcccnl Ooodin g which occuncd at Cily Hall . Council Member Wiggins suggested Cou ncil send thank you lcncrs under the Mayor 's signature . ~-tayo r Burns co ncurred. (b) Council Membe(s Choice (i) Council Member Habenic ht slll led she has also distribuled 10 Council a budget for her auendancc al the CML Annual Conference in Grand Junction in the amounl or $876 .40 . She rtquCS1 ed Council appfO\'al . COUNCIL MEMBER HATHAWAY MOVED , AND IT WAS SECONDED , TO APPROVE C:>UNCIL MEMBER HABENICHT 'S EXPEN~£S FOR A ITENDANCE AT THE CML ANNUAL CONFERENCE IN GRA ND JUNCTION IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $876 ,40 WITH THE ASSUMPTION THAT THERE WILL BE A CHANCE TO TRY TO LOWER THOSE COSTS IF POSSIBLE AND THAT THE DIFFERENCE IN COST BETWEEN COUNCIL MEMBER HABENICHT'S AND MAYOR BURNS' IS BECAUSE OF THE A ITENDANCE OF A DIFFERENT DAY AT A DIFFERENT SEMINAR OF THE CONFERENCE. Motion carried . Ayes : Council Members Ha1haway, Vormillllg. Wiggins. Habenicht Waggoner. Waldman. Bums Na ys : None (ii) Co uncil Member Wiggins noled thal his neighbor.; in lhe area by Bcllc,icw Park arc cx:/4 ri cncing brown wntcr in the early morning hours, whi ch immediately clears up. He asked Manager Slowe if the City has received complainls and whal might be causing the problem . Manager S1owe Jdviscd thal 1herc have been a few co mplainlS , which arc preny locali 1.cd. He staled 1ha1 staff is attributing the brown water to lhe wet weather we arc experiencing. As V.'3 ter use has remained really low and is now picking up 1his is 10 be expected . However. he nolcd lhal if ii docs not clear up h)' next week the water di stri buti on crew will probab ly go through and flush the hydrants again to clean 1hc system oul. I I I I E■&tewood Clcy Coa ■dl J•■e 19, l!ltS Pa&< 13 (iii) Counci l Member Vo1mi11ag comrncnu,d lha1 l'1c owne r of lhc property al 4801 Sou1h Gran! Slrtd has skM'Cd down on >1,irliing on ii. He n,qucstod an upda1e on l'1c si1uation . (i\•) Counci l Member Hathaway n,qucstod a run-<lo1m of c:osu assoaa1od >1i lh lhc fonncr Eagles property and l'1c property al lhc soulhwe,1 comer of Englewood Parkway and Broad"~)' which 1hc Cily oow owns. She s1a 1od lha1 she would like 10 know l'1c actual c:osu including original purchase prices., negotiations,. main1cnancc, refurbishment clc. and if the Ci1y has any imcntion of se ll ing lhc propcnics in lhc near fu ture . I J . Cily Man1,:u'1 R,port (a/ Cil )' Manager Cl ark recommended lhal Council hold an Excculi\'e Session a, l'1c ncxl st udy session 10 discuss Cindere ll a Cily str.uegy. He OOlod he is OOI pleased wilh 1hc negotiation progress . 14. City Attorney '• Rtport (a) Ci 1y A IIDl'l'lC)' Brol7.ma n Slalod lhal Counci l should ha\'e rccch'cd a co py of an old pol icy regarding the n.i.ming and renaming of City parks . He recommended 1ha1 the issue be scn 1 back to the Parks and Rocrc:uion Commission . Counci l Member Wiggi ns agreed U,a1 ii should go back 10 lhe Commission . Council Member H:ttha "-a) sta ted she origina lly brought thi s issue up as she wanted to forma lize the pol icy . She highli• r<oommcndcd 1ha1 Council send ii back 10 the Paro and Recreation Comm ission. 15. Adjour■m,n1 EMBER HATHAWAY MOVED TO ADJOURN . The meeting adj ourned at 8:43 p.m.