Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1998 Ordinance No. 082' I •• • • • ~. J/". b9 J..ooo ORDINANCE NO. <jj'j_ SERIES OF 1998 BY AUTHORITY COUNCIL BILL NO. 75 INTRODUCED BY COUNCIL MEMBER BRADSHAW AN ORDINANCE APPROVING THE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT PLAN IN FURTHERANCE OF THE REDEVELOPMENT OF CINDERELLA CITY IN THE AREA BOUNDED BY WEST HAMPDEN A VENUE (U.S. 285) ON THE SOUTH, SOUTH ELATI STREET ON THE EAST, WEST FLOYD AVENUE ON THE NORTH, AND SOUTH SANTA FE DRIVE (U .S. 85) ON THE WEST, CURRENTLY ZONED B- l, BUSINESS DISTRICT TO A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT. WHEREAS , The Englewood Environmental Foundation has submitted a P .U.D . application to rezone the Cinderella City Shopping Center from B-1 , Business District to a P .U.D.; and WHEREAS , the total s ite of the Cinderella City Shopping Center encompasses 51 acres more or less; and WHEREAS, the P.U .D. is a rezoning process that establishes specific zoning and site p lanning criteria to meet the needs of a specific development proposal that is not fully accommodated within the existing zoning cate gory; and WHEREAS , the P.U.D. is composed of two elements, the district plan and the site plan; and WHEREAS , the district plan is the set of regulations that establish the overall framework of development and control the uses within the project; and WHEREAS , the dis trict plan also includes design standards and guidelines , which provide specific details for site planning and design within the development based on the relationship of uses from the district plan and establish the character of the development ; and WHEREAS, the site plan is the result of applying the district plan and design guidelines to a specific site and represents the blueprint for implementation; and WHEREAS , the Englewood Town Center P .U .D . will, for the first time in the Denver metro area, serve as a model for transit-oriented development; and WHEREAS, the amount of time it has taken to get to the point of approving the P.U.D . has worked to allow the project to evolve from a "big box power center" to become a national model for transit-oriented development and mall redevelopment; and WHEREAS , the development project must be reviewed in terms of the P.U.D. Ordinance and the project's fit with the vision expressed by the community; and -1 - / WHEREAS, the project is consistent with the desires expressed by the community and consistent with the goals and objectives articulated in the Comprehensive Plan; and WHEREAS, from this base, planning for the development has been focused on the integration of the development to the site and within the context of adjacent neighborhoods with the long-term sustainability of the project being a primary concern; and WHEREAS , transit-oriented mixed-use development is considered the most appropriate form of development at this site to combine the neighborhood integration principles as well as long term sustainability; and WHEREAS, all of this leads to a project that is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and will contribute to the long-term growth and stability of the commercial core of the City of Englewood; and WHEREAS, the Englewood Planning and Zoning Commission held Public Hearings on September 1, 1998, September 22 , 1998 and October 27 , 1998, reviewed the proposal and found: 1. The P.U.D. District plan, with the additi onal conditions , is in conformance with the district plan requirements and the comprehensive plan; and 2. All required documents, drawings , referrals , recommendations , and approvals have been received or will be administratively processed ; and 3. The P.U.D . District plan, with the additional conditions, is consistent with adopted and generally accepted standards of development in the City of Englewood ; and 4. The P .U .D . District plan, with the additional conditions , is s ubstantially consistent with the goals, objectives, design guidelines , policies and any other ordinance, law or requirement of the City ; WHEREAS, the Englewood Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval of the P.U.D. with additional conditions ; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ENGLEWOOD, COLORADO , AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The Englewood City Council finds that: 1. The P .U.D. District plan, with the additional conditions , is in conformance with the district plan requirements and the comprehensive plan; and 2. All required documents, drawings , referrals, recommendations , and approvals have been received or will be administratively processed; and 3. The P .U.D . District plan, with the additional conditions , is consistent with adopted and generally accepted standards of development in the City of Englewood ; and -2- ; ' ... • • • ' : ., • • • 4. The P.U.D. District plan, with the additional conditions, is substantially consistent with the goals, objectives, design guidelines, policies and any other ordinance, law or requirement of the City. Section 2. The P.U.D. District Plan submitted is approved with the following conditions: 1. Submission of a utility plan for the Planning and Zoning Commission review prior to the start of new construction within the P. U .D . 2. Submission of a drainage plan and a grading and erosion control plan for Planning and Zoning Commission review prior to the issuance of the first building permit within the P.U.D . 3. Submission of a signage plan for Planning and Zoning Commission review prior to the issuance of the first sign permits within the P.U.D. 4. The Applicant shall pay all associated costs for improvements to Inca Street and Englewood Parkway. Section 3. Unless otherwise specified the administrative review of those portions of the P.U.D . District Plan set forth in the application and accompanying documentation shall be performed by the City Manager or his designee. Introduced, read in full, and passed on first reading on the 2nd day of November, 1998 . Published as a Bill for an Ordinance on the 6th day of November, 1998. A Public Hearing was held on November 23 , 1998. Read by title and passed on final reading with a non-substantive modification to the design guidelines on the 23rd day of November, 1998 . Published by title as Ordinance No. fA,.series of 1998, on the 27th day of November, 1998. I, Loucrishia A. Ellis, City Clerk of the City of Englewood , Colorado, hereby certify that the above and foregoing is a true copx., of the Ordinance pa d on final reading and published by title as Ordinance No .~ Series of 19 8 . -3- Please refer back to the materials attached on first reading on November 2, 1998 or contact Neighborhood and Business Development. -4- • • • ' • I I To: Thru: From: Date: ll E _\I 0 R _\ \ D l" 11 Planning and Zoning Commission Robert Simpson, Director of Neighborhood and Business Development Harold I. Stitt, Senior Planner & October 27, 1998 Subject: Case PUD-98-02 -Public Hearing. Englewood Town Center Planned Unit Development Applicant: Englewood Environmental Foundation 3400 South Elati Street Englewood , CO 80110 Propertv Owner: Englewood En v ironmental Foundation 3400 South Elati Street Englewood , CO 80110 Request: The applicant has submitted a Planned Unit Development (PUD) District Plan application for the rezoning of the former Cinderella City Mall property from B-1 , Business District to PUD. Recommendation: The Department of Neighborhood and Business Development recommends that the Planning and Zoning Commission approve the proposed Englewood Town Center Planned Unit Development District Plan with the following conditions: 1. Submission of a utility plan for Commission review prior to the start of new construction within the PUD. 2 . Submission of a drainage plan and a grading and erosion control plan for Commission review prior to the issuance of the first building permit within the PUD. 3. Submission of a signage plan for Commission review prior to the issuance of the first sign permits within the PUD. Site Location and Overview: The Cinderella City redevelopment area is a 51-acre+/-site located in the heart of downtown Englewood. It is located in the area bounded by West Hampden Avenue (U.S . 285) on the south, South Elati Street on the east, West Floyd Avenue on the north, and South Santa Fe Drive (U.S . 85 ) on the west. Main access points into the site are Englewood Parkway, South Inca Street, South Galapago Street, and South Elati Streets, and West Floyd Avenue. The site is owned by the Englewood Environmental Foundation. The site has significant redevelopment potential due to its central location and offers amenities such as excellent views of Mt. Evans and the Front Range , and potential open space and trail linkages to existing parks to the northwest and to the southeast. The site contains an existing 1.3 million square foot shopping mall and 7,000 car parking structure. (See attachment 1, Location Map, Attachment 2 Location Aerial Map) • • • The site is currently zoned B-1 , Business District. The area to the north is zoned R-1-C , Single- family Residence District and R-2, Medium Density Residence District. The area to the east is zoned B-1, Business District. The areas to the south and west are zoned I-1 , Light Industrial District. (See Attachment 3, Area Zoning Map) The new Regional Transportation District (RTD ) Southwest light rail line will include a major transit station at the site. The light rail station will be served by a 670 space park and ride facility and an 8 bay bus transfer station. Other area activities such as the potential redevelopment of the nearby 20 + acre General Iron Works site , public and private improvements along West Hampden Avenue , South Santa Fe Drive and South Broadway have increased the importance of the redevelopment of the Cinderella City site. The City of Englewood is also contractually obligated to provide the site and construct the parking and ride facility. This facility must be operational by January 2000. Site Development Historv The Cinderella City Mall opened in 1968 as the largest enclosed mall west of the Mississippi River and it was long hailed as the crown jewel of Englewood . The mall generated in excess of 50% of the City's sales tax revenue in the 1970s. Shoppers would drive hundreds of miles to this new and unique retailing experience. As Den ver grew in the 19 80s , changing consumer tastes , new retailing trends , and increased competition negati ve ly imp acted Cinderella City. Equitable and KR.AVCO , as owners, made improvements but it was not enough to stem the tide of change. The City also recognized that as sales tax generation at the mall began to decline in 1984, public intervention might be necessary. In anticipation of future rede ve lopment, the City began to study future retail needs in the area served by Cinderella City . The City also began public discussions on the future use of the site. The City managed these acti v ities with three objectiv es: 1) Determine the range of site redevelopment options and impacts on the City; 2) Negotiate with the owner for acquisition of site or redevelopment ; and 3) Develop a process to select a site developer. After the public discussions and review, site rede velopment options were narrowed to three alternatives: 1) Maximize retail to the fullest; 2) New town center with public buildings ; and 3) Mixed use project with retail , entertainment, housing , public amenities . With these alternatives in mind, the City issued a Request For Qualifications (RFQ ) in November 1994 and received 12 responses. In January 1995, the City Advisory Group recommended the Miller Development/Kitchell De v elopment proposal for an entertainmen t/retail project to City Council. By 1996 , the site was still not under City control, market conditions were changing, and public sentiments over a conventional retail project were varied. The City again conducted public forums in spring 1996 to determine long term redevelopment needs and community desires. Upon conclusion of the public forums , the City and Miller-Kitchell resumed negotiations . In late 1997 Weingarten Development replaced Kitchell Development as Miller Development 's joint venture partner. During the fall of 1997 , the City participated in the Transit Oriented Communities Initiative undertaken by the Center for Regional and Neighborhood Action (CR.i"\f A) and Compass RPI. Participants in this process included representatives from RTD , private transportation planning consultants , architects , planners , property owners and managers , developers , real estate consultants, and market analysis experts. This process resulted in a general development scenario for the site that took into consideration the market potent ial for the site , the likelihood of attracting financing for the development and community acceptability of the plan. Participation in this process reaffirmed the importance of the transit orientation for the redevelopment of the Cinderella City site . As a result of this community process , the transit oriented development (TOD) mixed-use concept gained full Council support, and this concept was refined during the next 12 months. 2 • • • In May 1998 , the City, in response to introducing a residential component to the site, issued a Request for Residential Developer Qualifications and Concepts for the Englewood Town Center. Five responses were received and reviewed by the Foundation, City, and EDDA representatives . In August 1998 , the City Council selected Forest City Residential West, Inc . to develop the residential portion of the Englewood Town Center. This developer was selected on their ability to complete the project in a timely manner, quality of product, and financial strength. Goals and Expectations: It has been Englewood's desire to see a signature development that embodies community values and general transit-oriented principles . The community and City Council have expressed a desire for a project that creates a regional presence maintains long-term value, and which supports, reflects , and enhances the small town character of Englewood. Residents and community leaders have been looking to this site to offer a "distinct sense of place which is active, mixed-use, pedestrian-friendly and economically viable". With the control of the site vested in the Englewood Environmental Foundation, the Foundation is now in a strong position to guide the redevelopment and create a successful pedestrian-scaled, transit-oriented community center. The Congress for New Urbanism, an organization that promotes neo-traditional urban planning and the restoration of existing urban centers , has articulated a set of design principle for transit oriented de velopment. These principles are also the basis of the Englewood Town Center PUD . The principles are : 1. 2. 3 . 4. 5. 6. Neighborhoods are the basic planning unit. Neighborhood size is defined as a five minute walking distance , a quarter-mile, from the edge to the center. Corridors are the boundaries between neighborhoods; districts are areas of special character. The neighborhood is mixed-use and provides housing for people with different incomes. The street pattern connects neighborhood with the greatest number of alternative routes. Civic buildings are treated as landmarks and placed to reinforce their symbolic importance. The goals and expectations for this site were documented as early as 1979 in the Citv Comprehensiv e Plan . The following goals from that Plan illustrate consistency with current TOD principles : • Support the Downtown as a Regional Activity Center by focusing high-density, high activity uses within that area . Such uses would include retail, office, high-density residential, and a hotel/c onvention center . Downtown should be a location for work , shopping, living, and playing with aesthetically pleasing areas for rest and relaxation. • Public transit should be strengthened with a transit center linking downtown to the regional transportation network. The link between Cinderella City and south Broadway should be pedestrian-oriented. In spring 1996 , the City sought to further identify desired uses for the site and solicit input on other issues surrounding the redevelopment site . It should be noted that while the forums were conducted with the assumption that the site be redeveloped as a entertainment/retail project, the mix of uses suggested are generally supportive of TOD . Those uses and the percentage of respondents indicating a preference for each use are listed below : Communitv Survev Results • Retai l/entertainment or Movie theaters -96 % • Light rail stop -92 % 3 .. • • • • Hotel -67% • Retail/Entertainment -58% • Cultural/Performing Arts Center -58% • Return of Little Dry Creek -48 % • General Merchandiser -46% • Restaurants -42% • Book or Clothing Store -33 % • Multi-family Residential -21 % • Home Electronics/Computer Store -21 % • Convenience Stores and Services near light rail -21 % • Grocery Store or Coffee Shop -17 % Additional considerations ra ised by the community for site rede v elopment are: • Buffering the residential neighborhoods to the north ; • The old General Iron Works site ~12 mile north; • South Broadway revitalization efforts d for the retail area South of Hampden A venue; and • Significant street modifications to the north, south and east of the site. Additionally, the 199 7 City initiated broad-based community forum process identified ke y expectations for the rede velopment of the site . These expectations were also reinforced by the outcome of the Transit-Oriented Communi t ies Initiativ e process. These expectations are: • Respond to community objec t iv es ; • Site contributes positi vel y to Englewood identity • Site contributes lasting value to community • Site provides shopping opportunities, jobs , entertainment, people watching/community center • Site contributes positiv ely t o City revenue base • Site becomes landmark for Englewood • Site is positi v e ly percei v ed in metro area • Connections between site , do w ntown En g le w ood , General Iron, and medical campus • De v elopment integrates with existing developed neighborhoods and commercial areas , actively contributes to Light Ra il Transit success , reinforces neighborhood integrity, and reflects traditional de v elopment patterns • Site contributes to po s it iv e regional impacts • Address the long-term vision for the site ; • Embodies transit-oriented de v elopment (TOD ) principles ; • Brings moderate revenues and "pa ys for itself'; and • Provides a unique sense of place . The extensi v e public process also pro v ided an opportunity for a variety of community groups to offer input into the rede v elopment process . Such di v erse groups as the Englewood Downtown Development Authority, En g le woo d Chamber of Commerce , and north Englewood neighborhood groups have provided v aluable comments. Issues raised by these groups included: • Connection and function of Engle w ood Parkway as a primary access to downtown and the community. • Improvements to Englewood Park w ay as it passes through "big box" parking area. • Relationship of the "big box " retailer to Broadway retail. • Relationship of South Inca Stre et between site and West Dartmouth Avenue . • Potential traffic impacts of South Inca Street on West Dartmouth Avenue and adjacent north residential neighborhood . 4 .. • • • Two of these off-site issues, the South Inca connection and the Englewood Parkway connection, are so critical to the development that the Englewood Environmental Foundation has obligated itself to completion of these two connections in conjunction with this PUD. The redevelopment of Cinderella City following these goals and expectations will provide transit and pedestrian supportive uses , and ensure a long-term sustainable development as well as a significant focal point to the urban landscape of Englewood and metro Denver. Analvsis: The Planned Unit Development is a rezoning process that establishes specific zoning and site planning criteria to meet the needs of a specific development proposal that is not fully accommodated within the existing zoning category. The PUD is composed of two elements, the district plan and the site plan. The district plan is the set of regulations that establish the overall framework of development and control the uses within the project. The district plan also includes design standards and guidelines, which provide specific details for site planning and design within the development based on the relationship of uses from the district plan and establish the character of the de velopment. The site plan is the result of applying the district plan and design guidelines to a specific site and represents the blueprint for implementation. PUD District Plan The Planning and Zoning Commission is required to make the following findings concerning the Englewood Town Center PUD District Plan: I . The PUD District Plan is , or is not, in confo rmance with the District Plan requirements and the Comprehensive Plan ; and The proposed Englewood Town Center PUD is in conformance with the applicable requirements set forth in Section 16-4-15 E, 3 e. PUD District Plan. The 19 7 9 Comprehensive Plan designates this site as part of the Central Business District. The Comprehensive Plan has established goals and policies for the Central Business District of the City. The Town Center PUD specifically addresses the following goals and policies: Goals ;---sllpport the Downtown as a Regional Activity Center by focusing high-density, high activity uses within that area. Such uses would include retail , office , high-density residential, and a hotel/convention center. • To promote the regional nature of Cinderella City. • To link Cinderella City and the Broadway/ Acoma area so that they complement one another. Policies • A concentration of high activity uses should be encouraged in the downtown to provide a focal point for the city . Downtown should be a location for work shopping, living, and playing with aesthetically pleasing areas for rest and relaxation . • To provide housing for workers and encourage home ownership , residential condominiums should be provided within the downtown district, • To preserve and protect the existing single-family residential nature of the surrounding area from commercial encroachment, Floyd and Eastman should be strengthened as barriers to further commercial expansion to the north . • Downtown should be maintained as a regional activity center with high concentrations of retail , office and residential uses . • The downtown area should be developed under a coordinated theme . 5 • • • • Public transit should be strengthened with a transit center linking the downtown to the regional transportation network. • The link between Cinderella City and South Broadway should be pedestrian-oriented, with retail use at ground level in buildings bordering the West Girard Mall. • The proposed redevelopment should be linked to surrounding neighborhoods with safe pedesnian connections. • Usable open space should be created in the downtown . • The image and character of the redevelopment should be aesthetically pleasing to attract people. 2. All required documents , drawings , referrals, recommendations, and approvals have been received; and All items required for the Town Center PUD Disnict Plan and have been reviewed and approved except as noted. All items are on file with the Department of Neighborhood and Business Development: a. The name and location of the proposed development ; and b. The names, addresses and phone numbers of the applicants, owners, developers and designers of the development; and c. Documentation confirming that the applicant has legally sufficient interest in the property proposed for development, or is the duly authorized agent of such a person; and d. An American Land Title Association and American Congress on Surveying and Mapping, Land Title Survey (ALT N ACSM Land Title Survey) and Urban classification ; and e. A PUD District Plan, drawn at a scale of not less than one inch per fifty feet (1"=50') along with north arrow, written and graphic scale, of the proposed development. (District Plan Map is at a scale of l ''= 150'.) The District Plan shall be of sufficient detail to determine impacts, both on -and off-site that may require mitigation. The District Plan shall additionally show or stipulate the general location, arrangement, extent, and character for the following , where applicable: 1. 2. 3 . 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. Adjacent streets and proposed points of access; and (See Attachment 4) Existing zoning and land use within at least three hundred (300) feet of all property boundary lines ; and (See Attachment 3) The existing topographic character of the land and existing natural features; and Location and descriptions of any existing utilities or easements on the property; (Existing utiliries will be replaced based on the approved utiliry plan submitted prior to the start of new construction.); and Location and size of proposed land use; and Approximate location and height of proposed structures referenced to lowest finished floor elevation of the structure; (This information will be included as part of the PUD Site Plan submittal and review.); and Parking plans including : location, drive-thru and access point, stacking, drive aisles, standard parking space, disabled parking, compliance with ADA requirements, loading, fire lanes , dimensions, quantity of parking spaces, and internal circulation of parking areas or structures; and The character, and approximate location and density of all dwelling units, if applicable; and The approximate location and area of open and recreation space; and 6 . ' . • • • 10 . 11. 12. 13 . 14. 15 . 16. 17. 18. Identify conceptual landscape plans including typical materials or conceptual landscaping and irrigation criteria if different than City of Englewood Landscaping Ordinance criteria; and Identify transitional buffer areas requiring fencing and landscaping between incompatible uses; and Identify pedestrian circulation routes including sidewalks, bus stops, bike paths; and Dimensions of separations between buildings, streets, and other features; and Areas subject to five year and 100 year flooding, retention areas, detention areas and surface drainage; (A drainage plan and a grading and erosion control plan will be submitted prior to the issuance of the first building permit within the PUD.); and Signage plan including; location , size, architectural elevations and illumination; (A signage plan will be submitted prior to the issuance of the first sign permit within the PUD.); and Fire hydrant locations; and Traffic Plan describing external circulation of vehicles entering or leaving the site (See attached Memo ji-om Chuck Esterly, Director of Publi c Works); and Other elements such as c onceptual architectural and building designs , facade treatments , and exterior building materials , as necessary to establish how the proposed Pl.JD zone district will relate to adjacent properties ; and f. A written statement generally describing the proposed PUD and the market which it is intended to serve ; its relationship to the Comprehensive Plan, and how the proposed PUD district will relate to adjacent property. Where the applicant's objectives are not in substantial conformance with the Comprehensive Plan, the statement shall include the changed or changing conditions that justify approval of the proposal ; and g. A general statement of the anticipated legal treatment of common ownership and maintenance of such areas , if appl icable ; and h. A general indication of the expected schedule of development indicating: 1. The approximate date when construction of the project can be expected to begin ; and 2. The stages in which the project will be built; and 3. The common areas including but not limited to open space , drive aisles, parking and service areas that will be provided at each stage ; and i. Other information deemed necessary, reasonable, and relevant to evaluate the application. 3. The PUD District P lan is cons istent with adopted and generally accepted standards of development in the City of Englewood,-and The proposed Town Center PUD District Plan is based on and consistent with the existing B-1 , Business District regulations . The PUD District Plan replaces the current B-1 Zone District regulations with regulations specifically designed to permit and foster a high quality transit oriented de v elopment. While the proposed Town Center development could proceed under the current B-1 zoning, the PUD will provide a higher level of control of the development. This control is necessary to protect the long-term interests of the City and also ensures the proper integration of the development into the fabric of the community . 4. The PUD District Plan is substantially consistent with the goals , objectives, design guidelines , policies and any other ordinance, law or requirement of the City : and 7 • • • The proposed Town Center PUD District Plan is in conformance with all other ordinances , laws and requirements of the City. Based on the project needs , this PUD has been designed and will provide for the long-term control and vision for this site. 5. When the PUD District Plan is within the Englewood Downtown Development Authority (EDDA) area, the Plan is consistent with the EDDA approved designs , policies and plans. The PUD District Plan is consistent with the EDDA approved designs, policies and plans . The Englewood Town Center PUD will, for the first time in the Denver metro area, serve as a model for transit-oriented development. Equally as important is the public-private partnership that has been established to make this project possible . The amount of time it has taken to get to the point of approving the PUD has worked to allow the project to evolve from a "big box power center" to become a national model for transit-oriented de velopment and mall redevelopment. Also the many players involved in Cinderella City redevelopment effort , both public and private , that have contributed to the creation of a project that is trul y unique . Uniqueness aside , this is still a development project that must be re v iewed in terms of the PUD Ordinance and the project 's fit with the vision expressed by the community. The project is consistent with the desires expressed by the community and consistent with the goals and objectives articulated in the Comprehensiv e Plan. From this base , planning for the development has been focused on the integration of the development to the site and within the context of adjacent neighborhoods. Likewise , the long-term sustainability of the project has been a primary concern. Transit-oriented mixed-use de v elopment is considered the most appropriate form of development at this site to combine the neighborhood integration principles as well as long term sustainability. Coupled with these issues is that of the long-term control of the development. In addition to the development controls set forth in the PUD District Plan , a separate development agreement has been negotiated. This document controls certain aspects of the development outside the realm of land use. These issues will be cons idered by City Council. Howe ver, the development agreement controls and the PUD provisions are important to provide assurance to the community that long-term property controls are in place. Two of the more important items in this agreement are the "go dark" provision and control of any part of the development over 75 ,000 square feet in area. The "go dark " provision allows the City to repurchase the big box site in the event that WalMart ceases operation. This provides for the long-term control of the largest development parcel of the PUD that will not be owned by the City and the ability if the provision is exercised, to ensure that future development is consistent with the PUD and community desires . Likewise, the control of the largest development parcels (greater than 75 ,000 square feet) provides the additional insurance that the largest elements within the PUD will be designed and developed in character with the rest of the PUD. All of this leads to a project that is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and will contribute to the long-term growth and stability of the commercial core of the City. Legal Description: See attached legal description sheet. Department and Agencv Review: No adverse comments were received concerning the proposed Englewood Town Center District Plan . F \DEP T\N BD\GROU P\BOARDS\PLANCOMM\ST . ..\FF REPORTS 98 \PUD9802 . DOC 8 • • • To: Thru: From: Date: Subject: Applicant: Skip Miller Planning and Zoning Commission Robert Simpson, Director of Neighborhood and Business Development Harold J. Stitt, Planning Community Coordinator& August 28, 1998 Case PUD-98-02 -Public Hearing. Englewood Town Center Planned Unit Development Miller Weingarten Development 2 In v erness Dri ve East En gl ew ood, CO 8011 2 Propertv Owner: Englewood En vironmental Foundation 3400 South Elati Street Englewood , CO 80110 Request: I~ \ The applicant has submitted a Planned Unit Development (PUD) District Plan application for the rezoning of the former Cinderella City Mall property from B-1 , Business District to PUD . Recommendation: The Department of Neighborhood and Business Development recommends that the Planning and Zoning Commiss ion approve the proposed Englewood Town Center Planned Unit Development District Plan . Site Location and Overview: The Cinderella City redevelopment area is a 5 1-acre+/-site located in the heart of downtown Englew ood. It is located in the area bounded by West Hampden Avenue (U .S. 285 ) on the south , South Elati Street on the east, West Floyd Avenue on the north, and South Santa Fe Drive on the west. Main access points into the site are Englewood Parkway, South Inca Street, South Galapago Street, and South Elati Streets , and West Floyd Avenue. The site is owned by the Englewood En v ironmental Foundation and is currently zoned B-1 , Business district. The site has significant redevelopment potential due to its central location and offers amenities such as excellent views of Mt. Evans and the Front Range , and potential open space and trail linkages to existing parks to the northwest and to the southeast. The site contains an existing 1.3 million square foot shopping mall and 7,000 car parking structure. The new Regional Transportation District (RTD) South West light rail line will include a major transit station at the site. The light rail station will be served by a 670 space park and ride facility and an 8 bay-bus transfer station. Other area activities such as the potential redevelopment of the nearb y 20 + acre General Iron Works site , public and private improvements along West Hampden Avenue , South Santa Fe Drive and South Broadway have increased the importance of the redevelopment of the Cinderella City site . • I I Site Development Historv The Cinderella City Mall opened in 1968 as the largest enclosed mall west of the Mississippi River and it was long hailed as the crown jewel of Englewood. The mall generated in excess of 50% of the City's sales tax revenue in the 1970s. Shoppers would drive hundreds of miles to this new and unique retailing experience. As Denver grew in the 1980s, changing consumer tastes, new retailing trends, and increased competition negatively impacted Cinderella City. Equitable and KRA VCO , as owners, made improvements but it was not enough to stem the tide of change. The City also recognized that as sales tax generation at the mall began to decline , public intervention might be necessary . In anticipation of future redevelopment, the City began to study future retail needs in the area serve d by Cinderella City. The City also began public discussions on the future use of the site. The City managed these activities with three objectives: 1) Determine the range of site redevelopment options and impacts on City; 2) Negotiate with the owner for acquisition of site or redevelopment ; and 3) De velop a process to select a site developer. After the public discussions and review , site redevelopment options were narrowed to three alternatives: 1) Maximize retail to the fullest ; 2) New town center with public buildings ; and 3) Mixed use project with retail, entertainment, housing, public amenities. With these alternatives in mind, the City issued a Request For Qualifications (RFQ) in November 1994 and recei ve d 12 responses. In January 1995, the City Advisory Group recommended the Miller Development/Kitchell De velopment proposal for an entertainment/retail project to City Council. By 1996, the site was still not under City control, market conditions were changing, and public sentiments over a full retail project were varied. The City again conducted public forums in spring 1996 to determine long term redevelopment needs and community desires . Upon conclusion of the public forums , the City and Miller-Kitchell resumed negotiations . In late 199 7 Weingarten Development replaced Kitchell De velopment as Miller Dev elopment's joint venture partner. During the fall of 1997, the City participated in the Transit Oriented Communities Initiati v e undertaken by the Center for Regional and Neighborhood Action (CR.i'\f A ) and Compass RPI. Participants in this process included representatives from RTD , private transportation planning consultants , architects , planners, property owners and managers , developers, real estate consultants , and market analysis experts. This process resulted in a general development scenario for the site that took into consideration the market potential for the site, the likelihood of attracting financing for the de velopment and community acceptability of the plan. Participation in this process reaffirmed the importance of the transit orientation for the redevelopment of the Cinderella City site . As a result of this community process, the transit oriented development (TOD) concept gained full Council support, and this concept was refined . In May 1998, the City issued a Request for Residential Developer Qualifications and Concepts for the Englewood Town Center. Five responses were received and re v iewed by the Foundation, City, and EDDA representatives. In August 1998, the City Council selected Forest City Residential West, Inc . to develop the residential portion of the Englewood Town Center. Goals and Expectations: It has long been Englewood's desire to see a signature development that embodies community values and general transit-oriented principles . The community and City Council have expressed a desire for a project that creates a regional presence , maintains long-term value, and which supports, reflects , and enhances the small town character of Englewood. Residents and community leaders have been looking to this site to offer a "distinct sense of place which is active, mixed-use, pedestrian-friendly and economically viable". With the control of the site vested in the Englewood Environmental Foundation, the Foundation is now in a strong position 2 • • • to guide the redevelopment and create a successful pedestrian-scaled, transit-oriented town center. The Congress for New Urbanism has articulated a set of design principle for transit oriented development. These principles are also the basis of the Englewood Town Center PUD. The principles are: 1. Neighborhoods are the basic planning unit. 2. Neighborhood size is defined as a five minute walking distance, a quarter-mile, from the edge to the center. 3. Corridors are the boundaries between neighborhoods; districts are areas of special character. 4. The neighborhood is mixed-use and provides housing for people with different incomes . 5. The street pattern connects neighborhood with the greatest number of alternative routes. 6. Civic buildings are treated as landmarks and placed to reinforce their symbolic importance. The goals and expectations for this site were documented as early as 1979 in the City Comprehensive Plan. The following goals from that Plan illustrate consistency with current TOD principles: • Support the Downtown as a Regional Activity Center by focusing high-density, high activity uses within that area. Such uses would include retail, office, high-density residential, and a hotel/convention center. Downtown should be a location for work, shopping, living, and playing with aesthetically pleasing areas for rest and relaxation . • Public transit should be strengthened with a transit center linking downtown to the regional transportation network. The link between Cinderella City and south Broadway should be pedestrian-oriented. Additionally, the broad-based community forum process identified key expectations for the redevelopment of the site. These expectations were also reinforced by the outcome of the Transit-Oriented Communities Initiative process. These expectations are: • Respond to community objectives; • Site contributes positively to Englewood identity • Site contributes lasting value to community • Site provides shopping opportunities, jobs, entertainment , people watching/community center • Site contributes positively to City revenue base • Site becomes landmark for Englewood • Site is positively perceived in metro area • Connections between site, downtown Englewood, General Iron, and medical campus • Development integrates with existing developed neighborhoods and commercial areas , actively contributes to LRT success, reinforces neighborhood integrity, and reflects traditional development patterns • Site contributes to positive regional impacts • Address the long-term vision for the site; • Embodies transit-oriented development (TOD) principles; • Brings moderate revenues and "pays for itself '; and • Provides a unique sense of place. 3 I I I The redevelopment of Cinderella City following these goals and expectations will provide transit and pedestrian supportive uses, and insure long term sustainable development as well as a significant focal point to the urban landscape of Englewood and metro Denver. Analvsis : The Planned Unit Development is a rezoning process that establishes specific zoning and site planning criteria to meet the needs of a specific development proposal that is not well accommodated within the existing zoning scheme. The PUD is composed of three elements, the district plan , design standards and guidelines, and the site plan. The district plan is the set of regulations that establish the overall framework of development and control the uses within the project. The design standards and guidelines provide specific details for site planning and design within the development based on the relationship of uses from the district plan and establish the character of the development. The site plan is the result of applying the district plan and design guidelines to a specific site and represents the blueprint for implementation. The District Plan is the only element of the Englewood Town Center Planned Unit Development that is being considered at the September 1, 1998 public hearing. The District Plan is a critical element of the PUD because it establishes the regulatory framework from which design and implementation flow . The review of this element is important to insure consistency within the PlJ D itself and within the larger context of the Comprehensive Plan. At subsequent hearings the other elements of this PUD will be brought forth for review by the Commission. PuTI District Plan The Planning and Zoning Commission is required to make the following findings concerning the Englewood Town Center PUD District Plan : 1. The PUD District Plan is, or is not, in conformance with the District Plan requirements and the Comprehensive Plan ,· and The proposed Englewood Town Center PUD is in conformance with the applicable requirements set forth in Section 16-4-15 E , 3 e. PUD District Plan . 2. All required documents , drawings , referrals, recommendations, and approvals have been received,· and All appropriate documents concerning the proposed Englewood Town Center PUD have been received and referrals to outside agencies have been made. 3. The PUD District Plan is consistent with adopted and generally accepted standards of development in the City of Englewood," and The proposed PUD District Plan is based on and consistent with the existing B-1, Business District regulations. The PUD District Plan replaces the current B-1 Zone District regulations with regulations specifically designed to allow and foster a transit oriented development 4. The PUD District Plan is substantially consistent with the goals , objectives, design guidelines , policies and any other ordinance, law or requirement of the City: and The proposed Englewood Town Center PUD District Plan is in conformance with all other ordinances, laws and requirements of the City . 4 • I • 5. When the PUD District Plan is within the Englewood Downtown Development Authority (EDDA) area , the Plan is consistent with the EDDA approved designs , policies and plans. The PUD District Plan is consistent with the EDDA approved designs , policies and plans. The proposed Englewood Town Center PUD District Plan is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and will contribute to the long-term growth and stability of the commercial core of the City . Current Zone District: B-1 , Business District. Legal Description: See attached legal description sheet. Department and Agencv Review: No adverse comments were received concerning the proposed Englewood Town Center District Plan . F:\DEPTINBD\GROUP\BOARDS\PW\NCOMM\ST AFF REP ORTS 98\PUD9802 .D OC 5 -• I • CITY OF ENGLEWOOD PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION September 1, 1998 I. CALL TO ORDER The Planning and Zoning Commission was called to order at 7:00 P.M. in the City Council Chambers of Englewood City Hall, Chainnan Douglas presiding. Members present: Members absent: Secretary's note : Also present: Rininger, Tobin, Weber, Hayduk, Lathrarn , Douglas Simpson , Ex-officio Dummer, Welker One vacancy Gary Sears , City Manager Harold J. Stitt, Senior Pla nner Marilee Utter. Owner 's Representative Dan Brotzman , City Attorney Nancy Reid , Assistant City Attorne y II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES August 18 , 1998 Chairman Douglas stated that the Minutes of August 18 , 1998 were to be considered for approval. Tobin moved: Rininger seconded: The Minutes of August 18 , 1998 be approved as written. Mr. Hayduk noted an amendment on Page I. Mr. Douglas asked that the first paragraph on Page 2 be clarified . The vote on approval of the Minutes, as amended on Pages I and 2, was called: AYES : NAYS : ABSTAIN : ABSENT: Tobin, Weber, Hayduk . Lathram, Rininger, Douglas None None Welker. Dummer The motion carried. III. PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT Englewood Town Center CASE #PUD-98-02 Mr. Douglas stated that the Public Hearing on the proposed Planned Unit Development for the redevelopment of the Cinderella City Mall site is the issue before the Commission. He asked for a motion to open the Hearing. Tobin moved: Lathrarn seconded: The Public Hearing on Case #PUD-98-02 be opened. AYES : NAYS : ABSTAIN : ABSENT : Weber, Hayduk, Lathram, Rininger, Tobin, Douglas None None Welker, Dummer The motion carried. • Harold Stitt, Senior Planner, was sworn in . Mr . Stitt presented the Chair with proof of publication of the Public No- tice, and Certification of Posting of the property . Mr. Stitt stared that the Planning Commission is to consider re- zoning of the former Cinderella City property to Planned Unit Development. Mr. Stitt noted that the staff report indicates that the applicant is Skip Miller, Miller Weingarten Development; in reality, the applicant is the Englewood Environmental Foundation . The Foundation has control of the property , and Miller Weingarten does not at this time. Mr. Stitt also pointed out to the Commission that the "Gold Mine" restaurant is included on the map as part of the Planned Unit Development ; the Foundation does not , at this time. control that property . • • Mr. Stitt stated that the Planned Unit rezoning will impose regulations , development plans and design guidelines on this site. The benefit of a PUD is to provide development abilities not otherwise available under conventional zon- ing. Once a PUD is approved and in place. all development must be consistent with the approved plan. The PUD will provide for unified development control, and will be applicable whether there is one developer or multiple de- velopers of the site. Mr . Stitt stated that the District Plan , a portion of which is before the Commission this evening , will establish the regulations governing the development. The Design Guidelines, which will be forthcoming for consideration at a future date. will provide the framework for the actual physical development, and the Site Plan. also forthcoming for consideration at a future meeting , will show specifics -footprints of buildings, and relation of development ro other businesses and adjoining neighborhoods . Mr. Stitt reiterated that the PUD will be applicable for all development on the site unless the PUD is amended by action of the Planning Commission and City Council. Mr. Stitt distributed to members of the Commission a list of goals established for the redevelopment of the Cinder- ella City Mall site , and a list of the goals , policies , and courses of action as cited in the 1979 Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Stitt noted the number of goals. policies and courses of action written in 1979 which are applicable to the rede- velopment proposed for the old mall si te . Mr. Stitt reviewed the responsibilities of the Planning Commission as set forth in the Planned Unit De velopment ordinance. These responsibilities include the requirement that the Commission make findings that: • The PUD District Plan is. or is not , in conformance with the District Plan requirements and the Comprehensive Plan ; and • All required do cuments, drawings , referrals, recommendations , and approvals have been received ; and • The PUD District Plan is consistent with adopted and generally accepted standards of development in the City of Englewood ; and • The PUD District Plan is substantially consistent with the goals, objectives, design guidelines, policies and an y other ordinance. law or requirement of the City ; and • When the PUD District Plan is within the Englewood Downtown Development Authority (EDDA ) area, the Plan is consistent with the EDDA approved designs, policies and plans. Mr. Stitt reiterated that the issue before the Commission is onl y a portion of the District Plan. and the District Plan is only one element of the total Planned Unit Development. The District Plan will provide the basic framework for the redevelopment . The nature of this redevelopment is such that there are elements which will be contained in the de- sign guidelines. and in the Site Plan . Mr. Stitt stated that the Englewood Environmental Foundation is taking a very measured approach on the redevelopment, and will go through the PUD process step -by-step . Mr. Stitt stated that staff suggests the Commission continue the Public Hearing to October 6, 1998 . The Design Guidelines and com- plete District Plan will be available at that time . Mr. Stitt introduced Ms . Marilee Utter , owner's representative, and stated that he will further address the Commis- sion following comments from Ms. Utter. Ms. Marilee Utter was sworn in. Ms. Utter stated that she was appearing on behalf of the property owner and the developer , and appreciates the opportunity to speak about the project. She stated that this particular redevelopment 2 • • • project has been worked on for over four year s. The rede velopment project is community driven. received consider- able community input, and contains many "community., elements, all of which will provide longer viability for the community . Ms . Utter emphasized that this has been a very collaborative effort -City personnel , consultants. the developer, and the general public have all been very involved in developing the plans for the redevelopment. Ms . Utter stated that the proposal is not a typical PUD -this is for a site in excess of 50 acres, and there will be multiple developers. The various development entities must work out the details before the total package can be assembled. Ms . Utter stated that the proposed development is transit-oriented, and in a suburban setting. She noted that typi- cally , transit-oriented developments are smaller, more self-contained village type developments . The goal of this redevelopment is to create something in the short term which will provide long term infrastructure and econom ic viability -to make a good impact on the entire city. Ms . Utter referenced a schematic included as part of the staff report, and directed the attention of the Commission to the three "'zones" indicated on that schematic . Zone 1 is the "transit-oriented zone", and encompasses the area 1/8 to Y. mile from the RTD light-rail station. This would be the "village" type of development -quite dense in terms of activities and land use, including the residential develop- ment proposed on-site. Zone 2 is the "hybrid" zone -in the short-term it will include the infrastructure and eco- nomic generator, but over the long-term may further redevelop to the "vi llage"' concept. This Zone 2 will contain the "big box retail", and some smaller retail pad sites. Zone 3, along U.S. 285 , is highway-oriented , auto related developmen t. This will allow structures on a lower scale than the l 00 foot structures allowed in Zones 1 and 2, and will not inhibit view of the interior development from passersby on U.S. 285 . Ms . Utter stated that there is a budget "'ga p" that needs to be addressed. and finalization of the PUD documents is. to a degree, dependent on the ways the budget gap is closed. Ms. Utt er stated that tenants are still being so ught and talked to. but unt il the District Plan and Design Guidelines are approved, the tenants will not commit ; until the ten- ants commit, and footprints of structures can be determined. the Site Plan cannot be developed. Ms. Utter stated that she and staff are very anxious for the Design Guidelines to be completed -they are so very important to the tenants and to marketing efforts for the redevelopment. Mr. Weber noted on the schematic that Zone 2 has a small protrusion into the Zone 3 area along U.S . 285 ; he asked why this small area was not made part of Zone 3. Ms . Utter stated that it probably can be in Zone 3, but thinks it was placed in Zone 2 because it is an existing structure/use . Ms. Tobin inquired about the ratio of residential development to the commercial/retail development. Ms . Utter stated that she did not have that information with her. but estimated 350 residential units and that this might equate to approximately 50% of Zone # l. Ms . Tobin noted that the number of residential units ma y have an impact on school attendance and taxes . Ms. Utter stated that the proposed housing is targeting young professionals and empty nesters; the housing units to be developed by Forest City will be up-scale rentals , ranging from $1.000 to $1.200 per month . The development will comprise a variety of unit sizes and types -studio, one , two, and three bedroom units . Ms. Lathram asked if the initial proposal to build for ownership has been scrapped. Ms. Utter stated that units that are built for sale would not come "o n-line"' at the same time as the rest of the redevelopment , but could be con- structed and opened over the course of a couple of years . The goal is to have the total redevelopment coming on- line in a closer time-line. Ms. Utter also pointed out that even though residential units may be built "for sale", peo- ple do purchase units, rent them out, and there is no central control. Forest City is a nationally-known residential developer, with a good track record throughout the country. They hold the residential units they build , and have management control over their units . Mr . Douglas asked if Ms. Utter didn "t think that the quality and type of residences in this development will define the character of this entire project. Ms . Utter agreed that they are concerned with the quality of people who will be residing in the units , and reiterated the proposed rental range of $1,000 to $1,200 or above. Mr. Douglas stated that in his opinion , a for-sale residential development will be better for the overall redevelopment project than 3 50 rental units . Mr. Rininger asked how many rental units and how many condominium units there are in this area. Ms. Utter stated that she did not have that information available . Ms. Utter noted that the residential units are focused on a "life style., -prospective tenants may be able to afford to purchase a home , townhouse, or condominium, but choose not to do so. She also pointed out that when the Request for Proposals were sent out for the residential segment of the 3 • • • proposed redevelopment. five responses were received -onl y one of those five respondents proposed a "fo r sale" development. Roben Simpson , Director of Neighborhood & Business Development , was sworn in. Mr. Simpson suggested the possibility of asking representatives of Forest City to attend a Commission meeting to address the issue of for-sale residential development versus rental. He suggested that this might be scheduled within the next couple of weeks. Mr. Hayduk asked how the proposed redevelopment relate to adjacent propenies ; have adjacent property owners been involved in the discussions . Ms . Utter stated that there have been discussions with the business owners on the south side of U.S. 285, on South Broadway , the EDDA Board of Directors , and with the neighborhood to the nonh. Ms. Utter also noted that there have been discussions with RTD regarding a shuttle bus system to provide easy ac- cess for some ou tlyi ng areas, such as the medical campus area. with the new development. Ms. Utter stated that every attempt is being made to mitigate traffic impacts on residential neighborhoods . Mr. Hayduk asked whether the proposed redevelopment will complement or compete with existing businesses. Ms. Utter stated that typically a different kind of tenant will be attracted to the new rede velopment than one who would choose to locate on South Broadway. There will, inevitably , be so me degree of competition . Mr . Rininger asked abo ut the impact the South [nca Street extension wi ll have on Cushing Park and Dartmouth A venue. Ms. Utter stated that extension of South Inca Street and a bicycle path has been discussed. Thi s will be a very imponant connection for traffic from south of U.S. 285 through the redevelopment area and thro ugh the north Englewood residential area to Dartmouth Avenue . Ms . Utter sta ted that the traffic consulting finn of Fehlsburg, Holt and Ullevig has been working with the City , developer and consulting team regarding traffic impacts. Ms. Ut- ter said the South fnca Street extension will use park land, and playground equip ment will be relocated. Ms . Tobin asked for clarification on the location of the street , and the impact on Cushing Park . She also inquired whether the City /Pa rk s Department will be reimbursed for the loss of this park land . Mr. Simpson stated that the street will extend along the west side of Cushing Park ; this roadway will be used by contractors during the course of construction of the redevelopment. The Park will still be under the ownership of the City , there will be sound walls erected, and other steps taken to assure protection for park patrons . The City recently acquired the site of the Englewood Depo t and the adjoining vacant property ; this vacant property will be developed as a park area. also. Mr. Simpson stated that the extension of South Inca Street will be the only through street from the rede velo pment site to the nonh . The extension of South Inca Street could result in a traffic reduction on other neighborhood streets, panicularl y of truck traffic. Mr. Rininger asked if any residences will be affected by the extension of the street. Mr. Simpson stated that no resi- dences will be taken . Ms. Tobin stated that all residents who take their children to Cushing Park will be affected . She asked if the roller blade area will be removed or relocated. Mr . Simpson addressed the issue of the trails , noting that there will be a connection from The Plaza at Little Dry Creek trail system , extending along the northern pan of the redevelopment to tie into South fnca Street extended, and then tie into the trail system at Dartmouth and Santa Fe . Gary Sears, Englewood City :vtanager, was sworn in . Mr. Sears provided additional information on the location of the South [nca Street extension and the impact on Cushing Park . The pla yground will be moved to allow for align- ment of the street and to provide for a stacking lane at the Dartmouth /Inca intersection . Mr. Sears also discussed the location of the trail system: this will provide a vital connection to the existing trail systems. Mr. Sears stated that the City Engineer is working on the street and trail extension. Mr. Sears stated that the South Inca extension will proba- bl y be 40 ft. to 50 ft. in width . Ms. Tobin asked how yo ung sters who live south of Dartmouth A venue will get across the street to take advantage of the new park area by the Englewood Depot. Mr . Sears stated that the park area north of Dartmouth Avenue hasn't been designed; it may be more of a passive recreation area rather than an active playground area for kids. There is money set aside to accomplish the relocation of the playground in Cushing. Mr. Sears discussed plans to reinforce the integrity of the neighborhood just north of Floyd Avenue ; the City does not want this area impacted by traffic 4 • • • generated by the redevelopment. and that Cherokee Street and Inca Street will be the only two streets going through from Yale to south of U.S. 285 . Mr. Simpson noted that the extension of South Inca Street isn't fully designed; there will be two lanes for vehicular traffic -one each direction -and sidewalks. Mr. Simpson speculated that the street will have 60 foot right-of-way with a 42 foot roadway. Mr . Hayduk asked Ms. Utter how it can be determined whether what is being done is "long-term" development. Ms. Utter stated that there are no guarantees, but we are trying to do the best we can. Big box retail product is very strong today -will it be strong in 15 years? No one knows. However , the basic infrastructu re will be in place , and a mixed use retail project probably will not fail at the same time . Mr. Hayduk asked if an estimate might be given - 10 years, 15 years, 20 years? Ms. Utter reiterated the redevelopment is trying to ensure the development of good infrastrucrure; buildings will be similar to those along Broadway -if one small retailer moves out, another small retailer can move in with minimal tenant modification . Mr . Rininger asked if there is a minimum amount of open space required for each zone area. Ms. Utter stated that the District Plan does not set forth a "minimum'' for each zone. Mr. Simpson stated that while the schematic in the staff report does indicate "zones'', open space and landscaping is being considered for the overall development and not each zone. Within the development there will be a defined public plaza area over one acre in size; there will also be a "boulevard" treatment along Englewood Parkwa y/Girard Avenue that can accommodate works of art, festivals, etc ., as well as landscaping provided withi n the residential developments , and along other travel routes in the devel- opment. Mr . Rininger noted that permitted height in zones I and 2 is I 00 feet: he asked how many floors this would allow . Ms . Utter stated that this will probably equate to 8 or 9 story buildings . Mr. Rininger asked how many floors are in the Bank One and Wells Fargo buildings . Mr . Stitt stated that these buildings are I 0 stories in height. Mr. Hayduk asked wh y there is a short-term proposal and a long-term vision for zone 2 -economic generation ver - sus the longer-term village development. Ms. Utter discussed the need for the economic generator -the need for retail sales , taxes , and service to the market area . Ms . Tobin commented th at if she were to pay S 1,000 per month for an apartment. she wouldn't want to look out the window into a Wal-Mart . Ms . Tobin also stated that "we " live here and have to put up with the development, but the developers and consultants do whatever they do and go home . Mr. Stitt again addressed the Commission , and reviewed the Englewood Town Center PUD document. Section 1, General Provisions , sets forth the principles, intent, elements, and requirements for the transit-oriented development. Section 2 sets forth the De velopment Regulations , cites permitted uses in the three "zones'', development densities, and height limitations. This section also establishes criteria specific to all three of the zones , such as prohibited uses. setbacks , landscape and sign sta ndards , and determination of uses not mentioned . Mr. Stitt advised that while regulations for the three zones differ in character, the regulations will be coupled with the design guidelines and provide a cohesive redevelopment project. Mr. Stitt stated that a significant amount of the redevelopment project will be devoted to open space , but that an exact percentage cannot be cited at this time; he noted that a lot of the landscaping requirements may be "quality" versus "quantity'' -for instance , the minimum size of trees may be beefed up in lieu of overall number of trees required. Mr. Stitt stated that the permitted principal uses cited in the zone districts are those permitted in the typical B-1 Zone District: however, the regulations will be more narrowly applied than in the typical B-l without PUD regulations. The B-1 Zone District currently allows I 00 foot height for development, and also allows multi-family residentia l development. Zone 2 will allow "big box" development in addition to the small-format retail. The development regulations for Zone 2 are designed to address both the short- term economic generator concept and the longer-term evolution of this zone . The regulations will provide flexibility to address growth and change anticipated in this zone . Zone 3. the transitional zone , or highway-oriented zone , will be developed with highway related uses and provide an "entrance'' into the higher intensity development in zones 1 and 2 . De velopment in zone 3 will be primaril y the small-retail format. and height of structures will be limited to 42 feet. Mr. Stitt stated that the regulations governing zones l , 2, and 3 will be driven by the Design Guidelines. Mr. Stitt cited uses which will be prohibited in zones 1, 2. and 3. The central corridor through the project east to west will be an extension of Englewood Parkway /Girard Avenue -this will become one of the signarure landscaped 5 • streets of the total development. Signage standards will be governed by the existing Sign Code. and will be required to be consistent with style, theme, and nature of the development. Mr. Stitt stated that landscaping requirements in zone 3 may be more intensive than in zones l and 2. Mr . Stitt discussed the landscaping proposed along the north- ern boundary of the site -along Floyd A venue. This landscaped area will be designed to protect the residential neighborhood north of Floyd A venue from the visual impact of the redeveloped area as well as provide restrictions on through traffic . There will be provisions for pedestrian access from the north, but through vehicular traffic will be restricted to use of South Inca Street and/or South Cherokee street. Mr. Stitt stated that Section 3 of the PUD regulations pertains to Administration : he summarized the provisions in this Section . Mr. Douglas asked if staff anticipated a complete District Plan by October 6th. Mr. Stitt stated that it is staff's intent that the full District Plan and Design Guidelines will be completed and before the Commission on that date . Mr. Douglas stated that the application isn 't really complete until all elements as set forth are in the possession of staff and the Commission. Mr. Stitt stated that in a typical PUD application , the developer would have to have every- thing prepared before presentation to the City and the Commission; however , the typical PUD application is not fo- cused on redevelopment of a 50 + acre site . In this instance , the City staff is working with the Englewood Environ- mental Foundation , who controls the site , as well as working with the developer and his consultant assistants to try to pull all of the infonnation together. Staff is bringing individual elements to the Commission for consideration at separate times. Mr. Simpson addressed the Commission, and acknowledged that the application is incomplete at this time . He em- phasized that the redevelopment of the mall area has been a very long , difficult process . There is still a budget gap to be addressed , which ma y have implications on some o f the design elements. Staff had hoped that the ent ire proc- ess would be further along at this time. Mr. Simpson stated that there will be a complete application before the Commission on October 6, 1998 . Mr. Rininger noted that zone 1 allow s small fonnat retail of less than 40.000 square feet: he asked how the proposed theater will be accommodated . Mr . Stitt stated that the proposed theater is ·'entertainment'. -not retail. • Ms. Lathram suggested that there be consistency throughout the regulations. Mr. Weber referenced the "development density " provisions , and asked how the no less than 40% of total gross floor area for commercia l/retail purposes can be achieved when other permitted uses and percentages are taken into consideration. Mr. Simpson stated that this will be considered further ; the intent is to assure a minimum level of revenue-producing businesses in each of the three zones . We need to have the revenue to provide fo r the services each zone will require . Consideration of "uses not mentioned " was discussed. Mr. Stitt stated that there are two ways this can be accom- plished: each request of "use not mentioned" can be brought before the Planning Commission, or it can be handled on an administrative level. Mr. Douglas pointed out that the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance does not set out any provision for administrative approval of a change of use , and asked wh y the ordinance provisions are being rewritten to allow this . Mr . Simpson stated that ·'use not mentioned" and "use determinations" section is not intended to be considered as a "change of use··. Ms. Tobin suggested that the detennination of uses not mentioned should remain with the Planning Commission , and commented that citizens will not have the opportunity for comment if this func- tion is an administrative function . Brief discussion ensued . Mr. Simpson agreed that citizen input should not be restricted , and that the provision will be rewritten to require Planning Commission approval. Mr. Douglas asked if anyone in the audience wanted to address the Commission . Carol Rigdon , 3296 South Fox Street , asked for explanation on the South Inca Street extension . She stated that it appears the traffic will be "dumped " at Dartmouth and Santa Fe . She also asked what will be done to protect the residents living north of Floyd from the traffic -will there be buffer zoning. Mr. Stitt responded there will be no direct through access from the redevelopment area on South Delaware , South Elati. South Fox , or South Galapago Street. There will be a landscaped "'median ., with no ve h icular traffic breaks along this area , which will create a "frontage road " effect to provide circulation only to those residing north of Flo yd A venue. Mr. Stitt outlined this • proposal on a map for Ms . Rigdon . 6 • • • Mr. Douglas stated that when the complete District Plan, Site Plan , and Design Guidelines are available it will be much clearer. Ms. Rigdon stated that "this is a dog and pony show"; she commented on the volume of traffic pres- ently experienced by this neighborhood. and the fact that RTD buses traveling on Floyd Avenue now make it very difficult to hear TV during the summer time when doors and windows are open. She does not want her property to be devalued and fea rs it will be with the increased traffic . She stated that the traffic has already increased along Floyd A venue -people just want to see the demolition of the old mall. Ms. Rigdon stated that she is concerned about strangers going through their neighborhood, and expressed concern about Cushing Park. Mr. Simpson assured Ms. Rigdon that Floyd A venue is being scrutinized very carefully -he emphasized that there will be no north/south through traffic except on South Inca Street and South Cherokee Street. There will not be concrete barriers, but a heavily landscaped median to buffer the frontage road from Floyd A venue . Mr. Simpson stated that residents who live on Floyd A venue need to be aware that Floyd A venue will serve as the primary access route for the buses serv- ing the RTD light rail station . Mr. Simpson stated that it is also important that, yes, the plan does affect Cushing Park, and that there will be additional park space developed on the north side of Dartmouth A venue, but in addition to that there will be one to two acres of open space within the development -the civic plaza will be developed and landscaped and is for use by the public. Ms. Tobin asked if this proposed redevelopment could stand alone if "RTD went down the drain'". Mr. Simpson stated that the plan will be self-sufficient even if RTD were not part of it. RTD station is scheduled to be open for business in J uly , 2000 . Ms . Reid noted that the Commission mentioned a meeting with representatives from Forest City ; she asked if the Commission wanted to take evidence from Forest City pertaining to this de velopment. or does the Commission want to receive background infonnation on the compan y in general. If evidence is desired, the Commission must con- tinue to a date certain. and ask that Forest City representatives be present to provide that evidence -not a "study session." Mr. Douglas stated that the Commission needs to detennine if the project will be better off without residential if it means 350 units of rental units . Ms. Tobin asked if the meeting with Forest City could be prior to September 15'h ; she leaves for vacation that week . Mr. Douglas reiterated that the commission needs to determine whether residen- tial development will be part of the redevelopment project. Mr. Simpson suggested that arranging for representa- tives from Forest City to attend a Commission meeting by September 15th might be a tight ; he suggested they could probably be in attendance on September 2:2 "d, and that an y Commission member not in attendance at that date could listen to the tape of the meeting . Brief discussion ensued . Mr. Douglas asked if an yone else w ished to address the Commission. No one so indicated . Mr. Douglas asked for a motion to continue the Public Hearing . Tobin moved: Rininger seconded: The Public Hearing on Case #PUD-98-02 be continued to September 22 , 1998 at the hour of7:00 P.M. AYES : NAYS : Hayduk, Lathram, Rininger, Tobin. Weber, Douglas None ABSTAIN : None ABSENT : Welker, Dummer The motion carried . IV. PUBLIC FORUM No one addressed the Commission under Public Forum . V. DIRECTOR 'S CHOICE Mr. Simpson stated he had nothing to bring before the Commission . 7 VI. ATTORNEY'S CHOCCE • Ms. Reid stated she had nothing to bring before the Commission. • • VII. COMMISSIONER'S CHOICE Election of Vice-Chair Mr . Doug las discussed the need to elect a Vice-Chair ; this position became vacant upon Mr. Homer's resignation from the Commission . Discussion ensued . Tobin moved : Lathram seconded : Nominations for Vice Chair be opened. The motion carried . Tobin nominated Mr. Rininger for Vice Chair . Ha yduk seconded the nomination. Tobin moved: Lathram seconded: Nominations be closed , and Mr . Rininger be elected Vice Chair . AYES : NAYS: Ha yduk , Lathram , Tobin , Weber , Douglas None ABSTAIN : Rininger ABSENT: Dummer , Welker The motion carried . Nothing further was brought before the Commission . The meeting adjourned . - Gertrude G. Welty , Recording Secretary f:\dept\nbd\group\boardsl plancomm\minutes 98\pcm 09 -9 8a.doc 8 • • • CITY OF ENGLEWOOD PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION September 22, 1998 I. CALL TO ORDER The regular meeting of the City Planning and Zoning Commission was called to order at 7:00 p .m. in the Englewood City Council Chambers, Chairman Douglas presiding . Members present: Hayduk, Lathram, Rininger, Weber, Welker, Dummer, Douglas Simpson, Ex-officio Members absent: Secretary's Note : Also present: Tobin One vacancy Senior Planner Harold J. Stitt Assistant City Attorney Reid II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES September 1, 1998 Chairman Douglas stated that the Minutes of September 1, 1998 are to be considered for approval. Rininger moved : Lathram seconded: The Minutes of September 1, 1998 be approved as written. AYES: NAYS : Lathram, Rininger. Weber, Hayduk, Douglas None ABSTAIN : Welker, Dummer Tobin ABSENT: The motion carried. III. ENGLEWOOD TOWN CENTER Cinderella City Mall Redevelopment Planned Unit Development CASE #PUD-98-02 Mr. Douglas stated that this case was continued from September 1, 1998 , and asked for a motion to reopen the Pub- lic Hearing . Weber moved: Lathram seconded: The Public Hearing on Case #PUD-98-02 be opened . AYES: NAYS : ABSTAIN: ABSENT : Rininger, Weber, Welker, Dummer, Hayduk, Lathram , Douglas None None Tobin The motion carried . Harold Stitt, Senior Planner, was sworn in. Mr. Stitt stated that the presentation will be made by Mr. Hank Baker, Senior Vice Presi d ent of Forest City West, the developer selected by the Englewood City Council to do the residen- tial de velo pment portion of the Englewood Town Center. Mr. Stitt reviewed the developer selection process fol- • • • lowed by the City, noting that several months ago. a ·'Request for Proposals" was sent to 12 well known developers of residential property; six responses were received . These responses were reviewed by a selection team. and nar- rowed down to two candidates. These two finalists were asked to make a presentation to City Council. City Coun- cil selected Forest City to do the residential development . Mr. Stitt outlined the area proposed for housing develop- ment, noting that the eastern boundary would be South Galapago Street, and the western boundary would be South Inca Street: the residential development will be behind the retail development along West Hampden Avenue, and there is a parking structure proposed on the north between the residential development and West Floyd A venue. Mr. Stitt noted that the information sent to the Commission in their meeting packets is what was presented to City Coun- cil. Mr. Hank Baker , Vice President of Forest City West , was sworn in. Mr. Baker stated that Forest City has been in business for 77 years, and is a family-owned business ; it is a publicly traded business. but 75% of the shares are owned by the founding family. Mr . Baker stated that Forest City very rarely sells residential properties that they build: the majority of the residential properties are held by Forest City and managed by Forest City. Mr. Baker stated that Forest City has done developments in many major cities in the United States, and are becoming very in- volved in Denver with the Lowry Airbase redevelopment. Mr. Baker stated that Forest City is not only involved in development of residential properties , but has also done extensive retail development. office developments. and is holding approximately 5.000 acres of undeveloped land. Forest City will also be one of the major players in rede- velopment of the Stapleton Airport site . but this project won't get underwa y for another two or three years. Mr. Baker assured members of the Commission that their rede velopment efforrs in Eng lewood will not be diminished by other projects in the Den ver metro area. Mr. Baker cited developments in San Fr ancisco (Bay side Village ), and in Irvine . California. He noted that in Irvine. the compan y built approximately 2,000 units per year. and built a total of 18.000 residential units in this project. He stated that both developments have been extremel y successful. He also cited de velopments in North Carolina. Cleveland , and other metropolitan areas throughout the country. Mr. Baker stated that there is a great opportunity in Englewood in the redevelopment of the former Mall site into a transit-oriented development. The residential project that Forest City is proposing is fairly low density -approxi- mately 350 rental units. Mr. Baker described the proposed residential development, pointing out that the parking structures will have retail businesses adjoining the street frontages; there will be a concrete ceiling to the parking structures. and the residential units (three story , wood-frame structures) will be constructed atop the parking struc- ture. Mr. Baker stated that the residential units will have 10 % to 12% studio apartments ( 450 square feet); 30% - 35% will be one bedroom units , and the remainder will be two bedroom units . Amenities proposed include swim- ming pools , health club facilities , copy machine. fa x machine , and computer facilities. There will be elevators from garage level to the residential floors ; the residential de velopment will be gated. secure "communities''. Mr. Baker stated that the proposed residential development wil l attract single people and empty nesters who no longer want the responsibility of maintaining a single-family home. Mr. Baker discussed residential developments built for sale versus those built for lease. He pointed out that when building "for sale '', the project build out is a longer process than the build out on for lease projects. He noted that some of the projects in downtown Denver have taken up to eighteen months to sell 30 to 35 units. Mr. Baker sug- gested that it would be difficult to do a ·'for sale'' project on the subject site because of the projected low density. Mr. Baker also commented that even with ·'for sale '' projects , 50% of the condominium units become rentals within one or two years. He also noted that on-site management in for lease developments provide a quicker means of ad- dressing problem tenants than do homeowner associations . Mr . Baker stated that Forest City takes great pride in the properties that they have de veloped and manage. and stated that with on-site management there is one place for the City and/or other tenants to come to if problems aris e. Mr. Hayduk asked what protection the City would have in the event Forest City decides to sell the residential devel- opment; would the City be granted first right-of-refusal to purchase and control the residential development. or could assignment of management responsibility be given . Mr. Baker acknowledged that Forest City does. on occa- sion , sell developments but that they are trying to de velop and retain a "critical mass" in the Denver market. and the company has no desire to sell. Mr. Baker stated that sometimes ·'offers you cannot refuse" are made , and companies do take advantage of such offers. 2 •• • • Mr. Hayduk asked for clarification on the park ing structure. retail and residential development as propose·d. Mr. Baker stated that the parking structure will serve the residential units and provide some parking spaces for the retail businesses: 50 ,000 square feet of retail will be ·'tucked'" in along the front and sides of the parking structure, and the residential units constructed atop the parking structure . Mr. Baker indicated that two sites on the overall plan that Forest City will be responsible for; the remainder of the retail development and the theater will be constructed by Miller!W eingarten . Mr. Hayduk asked if a marketing study had been done to show the necessity for the development: how did Forest City arrive at the percentages Mr. Baker had cited. Mr . Baker stated that Forest City has looked beyond the specific boundaries of Englewood in determining the market area for the residential development. and did. in fact, consider the general Denver metropolitan area. Mr. Baker stated that with the residential development in close proximity to the light rail , the development could attract people who work in downtown Denver, or in the Denver Tech Center. Mr. Baker stated that Forest City specializes in deve loping ·'infill" sites. Mr. Baker stated that if the light rail/transit station had not been proposed for this redevelopmen t, Forest City probably would not have considered doing the residential section. Forest City has done previous developments along light rail lines , and the light rail line will make this project work. In terms of the percentage of unit mix , he suggested that it is "w ild, best guess" to deter- mine the percentages . They have tried to propose a broad range of housing choices for the targeted market. Mr. Hayduk commented on the $600 to S l ,200 in lea se range for the units: he asked what will happen if the lease rate increases and tenants are lost because they cannot afford the rents . Mr. Baker noted that the average length of stay for a tenant is two yea rs -the y may purchase a ho me. or relocate to a different area. Apartments or for lease developments are for short term residenc y, but Mr. Baker also pointed out tha t the average le ngth of home owner- ship is only four years. Mr . Welker asked about the population per unit. Mr. Baker stated that 2 to 2.3 persons per unit was the estimate . Mr . Welker asked for clarification of the parkin g structure: will a portion of the structure be below grade. Mr. Baker reviewed the proposal for the parking structures, noting that retail will be on the perimeters of the residential devel- opment, with berming and landscaping used to camouflage any portion of the exposed parking structures. Mr. Baker noted that Forest City and their architectura l/development personnel will be working closely with Mr. Calt- horpe , and Mr. Tryba 's architectural firm on design features. Mr. Welker inquired about latitude and variety in the development . He pointed out that the parking structu re j ust so uth of West Flo yd Avenue is in very close proximity with the established low-density residential de ve lopment north of West Floyd Avenue . Mr. Baker suggested that there ma y be va riables in roof lines . He also addressed possible future development on the site of the parking structure referenced by Mr. Welker, noting that if this part of the si te were to be developed residentially, it probably would be built as rental and offered for sale within three to five years. Mr . Rininger asked why this sa me scenario could not be followed for the proposed 350 units to be built ·'for lease ". Mr. Baker reiterated that Fore st City is in the bus iness of building and holding rental apartments -they are in the business to build and hold . Building for sa le is good, but if that is what the City is looking for, Forest City is not the company to do that. Mr. Rininger asked if any of the units that Fore st City had built were subsidized -did they accept Section 8 tenants . Mr. Baker stated that they were not, and none of the unit s proposed in the residential development in Englewood will be subsidized . Mr. Baker noted that of the 67 ,000 units Forest City has sold , the major ity of those units were subsidized in some way. Howe ver, their portfolio of33 .0 00-,-units they currentl y own and manage are not subsi- dized . Mr. Dummer noted that Forest City wants to maintain control of their developments: how does Forest City deter- mine what type of retail the y want to attract. Mr. Baker st ated that Forest City has a full retail development branch in their company, and that during the course of their work on the Lowry site they ha ve had contact with many retail- ers who could be interested in locating in the Englewo od Town Center. Mr. Dummer inquired about the quality of restaurants that might be locating in the development. Mr. Baker suggested that they are considering a mid-range to casual. Ms . Lathram asked if Mr. Bak er had a list of prospecti ve clients for the retail sector. Mr. Baker stated that he did not have a list. Mr. Ba ke r stated that there will be a variety of tenants: most retailers don 't want to talk to yo u until .) • • • they are assured the development will. in fact. occur . Mr. Baker stated that the Englewood Town Center develop- ment is a very important project to Forest City . Mr. Rininger asked if any study had been done to determine the number of apartment units within a given radius of the site. Mr. Baker stated that his company has not. He reiterated that this development is driven by the transit- oriented character of the total development. He noted that "'The Marks" on east Hampden Avenue is a very nice development, but addresses a different market niche than the Forest City development will address. Mr. Rininger expressed his concern about transients in the Englewood area, and that this development will only add to the number of apartments. In his opinion, ownership of the units will lead to more stability for the project and the City. Mr. Rininger suggested that homeowner 's associations for condominium developments do oversee and man- age developments. Mr. Baker noted that a homeowner·s association could be dealing with an out-of-state owner, and resolution of any problem could take considerable time. An on-site manager for a "for lease " development has the option of eviction of a problem tenant if other resolution avenues are unsatisfactory. Ms . Lathram asked ifthe Irvine. CA project was similar to the proposal for Englewood . Mr. Baker stated that it is quite similar. He stated that there are two projects that Forest City did which are within five miles of each other in Irvine and Irvine Ranch . Ms . Lathram stated that she will be traveling to southern California this week, and may have an opportunity to view the Forest City developments. Mr. Dummer asked if this would be similar to some of the development occurring in Lo Do . Mr . Baker said that Lo Do is a driving force for quite a few other developments. This proposal isn't completely new to Forest City: he commented that their development in North Carolina is much larger than the ETC proposal. Mr. Baker reiterated that this is a good "i nfill site"', and that e::ich compon ent suppo rts the other, but they are not interdependent . If one component needs to be redeveloped earlier than others. it should not negativel y impact the other components of the development. Mr. Welker aske d when Mr. Baker anticipated this component of the development could be built out. Mr. Baker estimated they could get control of the land in March , 1999 , and could be moving retail people in sometime in early 2000. The ir entire portion of the redevelopment cou ld be wrapped up in mid-2000. Mr. Welker asked how long it is anticipated to get the residential component leased up. Mr. Baker stated that they could do at least 30 to 40 leases per month. Mr. Douglas asked about the parking spaces. Mr. Ba ke r stated that 560 parking spaces will be provided in the parking structures. This will provide parking for each unit. plus additional parking for the retailers on their portion of the site. Additional parking spa ces will be on-street for retailers /shoppers. Mr. Baker noted the possibility that some of the tenants of the residential units may not have the typical two cars per unit: in fact, some may not have vehicles but rel y on the light rail. bus. and shuttle sys tem which is proposed . Mr . Douglas asked how the parking spaces will be designated. Mr. Baker said that parkin g spaces will be assigned: there will be no charge to tenants for their parking spaces. Mr. Douglas asked how a for lease product versus for sale product would prolong the development. He noted that his home was built in 1954: it is in good condition. and is still being occupied. Cinderella City was opened in 1968, and is being demolished . Mr. Baker stated that with the Forest City development , the City will have a "sophisticated owner/manager" who is interested in keeping their de velopment/investment in good condition: Forest City is a long- term owner. Mr . Douglas stated that in his opinion. unit ownership would result in better maintenance from the in- dividuals . Mr. Hayduk asked whether a study was done regardin g sale versus lease product. Mr. Stitt stated that when the RFP was sent out, the option was provided for respondents to propose either a for lease or for sale development. Of the six respondents. five proposed for lease developments . The two companies chosen by the selection team both sub- mitted proposals for "for lease"' de ve lopment. Ms . Lathram excused herself from the meeting . 4 • • Mr. Hayduk asked whether there wo uld be any tax benefits to the City on a for lease versus for sale development. Mr. Baker stated that one company would be respons ible for payment of the property taxes , rather than 350 individ- ual taxpayers . Mr . Dummer asked what the concern is regarding for lease versus for sale. Mr. Hayduk stated that he just wants to understand why the for lease product was chosen ; what is best for the City, what is the anticipated longevity of the development, and are there any tax benefits to the City. What is suitable for this development -can people afford S 1,000 per month for a small rental unit. He suggested that the residential development should target Englewood residents. Mr. Dummer noted that the residential development will draw a percentage of people who work in downtown Denver. or at the Denver Tech Center , in ad dition to Englewood residents . Mr. Simpson was sworn in. and stated that the primary focus for the Commission deliberations must be land use: the issue of sale versus lease isn "tan area the Commissio n needs to be concerned with -City Council will address this issue. At the time the RFP was sent out, guidelines were set forth . The City Council has indicated a desire for resi- dential development in conjunction with the retail development, and that all development should be long-term . One of the most important goals staff. Council. and consultants have worked toward is to develop a framework for "sustainability". Mr. Simpson agreed that Cinderella City was opened for business in 1968 , and that a lot of people thought it would be a long time development: he noted that several other malls built in the same period of time are also experiencing serious trouble -loss of shoppers , etc. Mr. Simpson stressed the effort on this redevelopment to work toward ·'sustainability"' -if market changes negatively affect one facet of the redevelopment. the total project will not fail -each component will have the ability to sustain itself. A grid street system will be developed in the redevelopment project. Mr. Simpson stated that the transit station and the residential density are important compo- nents of the project ; suggested density was 30 dwelling units per acre . Tenants of the residential development may be people who opt out of hea vy reliance on the automobile -rely more on rapid transit. bus system. etc. [n short. we are looking at a different market segment than is ty pic al of the Denver area. With the light rail line and the transit station coming to Englewood , the City has an opportu nity to create something trul y unique -to do this, we are ad- dressing a different marketing segment. Mr. Simpson noted that the one residential developer who presented a "for sale " proposal was for a lower density , more con ve nti onal housing product. and would be built out over a five-year period . Mr. Simpson reiterated the attempt to create a "community " with and within this redevelopment. He stated that he isn't entirel y sure who will choose to live in th e residential units, but stressed the need to provide a variety of style and price range of housing in the City. Mr . Douglas commented tha t the goals cited in the Comprehensive Plan support this effort. and there is need for housing for higher-i ncome people in Englewood. Mr. Simpson stated that we have said there is a need to increase housing ownership in Englewood , and he still sup- ports this goal, and the 350 rental units isn 't the only hou sing product we need to bring into the community. He noted that there we still need to proceed with deve lo pment agreement negotiations. and we need to assure a quality development. He stated that he is very pleased that Ms . Lathram will be traveling to southern California, and will have an opportunity to view the developments in the Irvine area ; he stated that he was in southern California ap- proximatel y two weeks ago and viewed the Forest City developments. He stated that he was very impressed with those projects. Mr. Douglas asked if anyone else wished to address th e Commission. No one else in the audience addressed the Commission. Mr . Baker distributed copies of the Forest City annual report to members of the Commission . Mr . St itt again addressed the Commission , asking that the Publ ic Hearing on the ETC be continued to October 27 , 1998 . On that date. a final , complete presentation will be made on the proposed Planned Unit Deve lo pment. Mr. Stitt stated that staff and members of the consulting team are st ill working on design guidelines , and updating the traffic study ; both items are important pieces of the tot al project. Dummer moved : Rin inger seconded: The Public Hearing on the ETC Planned Unit Development , Case #PUD-98-02 , be con- tinued to October 27. 1998 . at the hour of 7:00 P.M. 5 • • • AYES : NAYS : Weber, Welker, Dummer, Hayduk. Rininger, Douglas None ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: Tobin, Lathram The motion carried . IV. PUBLIC FORUM No one addressed the Commission. V. DIRECTOR'S CHOICE Mr. Simpson stated that the staff has no other cases pending ready for Hearing before the Commission on October 6'h, and suggested that this meeting be cancelled. He stated that staff doesn 't know whether one issue will be ready for presentation to the Commission on October 20th or not. The meeting on October 6'h was cancelled . VI. ATTORNEY'S CHOICE Ms . Reid stated that she had nothing to bring before the Commission . VII. COMMISSIONER'S CHOICE Nothing was raised for discussion. The meeting adjourned . Gertrude G . Welty , Recording Secretal)I f:\dept\nbd\group\boards l plancommlminutes 98 \pcm 09-98b .doc 6 ·' -· • • TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: MEMORANDUM Bob{t::ot_Director ofNeighborhood and Business Development Chuck Esterly, Director of Public Works Octoberl9, 1998 CINDERELLA CITY REDEVELOPMENT TRAFFIC IMP ACT ANALYSIS REPORT Attached is the Felsburg, Holt and Ullevig (FHU) Cinderella City Redevelopment Traffic Impact Analysis Report of October, 1998 , along with our related comments. /lw Attach . /7 . ~~"· P rin ted on Recyc led Paper .'~...: • • • CINDERELLA CITY TRAFFIC IMPACT ANAL YS/S FELS BURG, HOLT & ULLEVIG REPORT OCTOBER, 1998 This study assesses the potential traffic impacts associated with the proposed transit oriented development on the site. The primary focus is on the impacts of site generated traffic at the major access points serving the site, including intersections along Hampden/285, Broadway, Englewood Parkway, Floyd and Dartmouth. The analysis was prepared assuming the following uses: Reta il Civic and Government Entertainment Center Residential Restaurants Light rail and Transit transfer stations, Park-n-Ride facility The report addresses existing conditions, and year 2000 post development travel demand forecasts . Being unique as a Transit Oriented Development (TOD), standard traffic engineering goals, such as minimizing congestion, have reduced in importance. In TOD's, parlance congestion is often referred to as "activity" and viewed as a positive anribute. Numerous assumptions were made based on a uniqueness of the TOD by the consultant during the evaluation process. Some of their assumpt ions include: • Pass-by trips allocation. Assumes cars or trips already passing by on Hampden/285 become trips to the development. This has the effect of reducing the total number of vehicles that could be assumed to be on Hampden/285. • Site trip generation with regard to a type of proposed development. Some reduction in total trips is attributed to the presence of residential units on the site and light rail or bus transportation. • Trip distribution orientation. Where vehicles are coming from and going to. • Frequency of bus trips and routing. The following are primary findings , mitigation measures and recommendations from the traffic impact analysis study: • All Hampden/285 and Broadway intersections will operate near or at capacity for the post de velopment traffic conditions . •• • • • Certain intersection movements are analytically determined to operate at a level of service (LOS) of E or F for the post development traffic conditions. LOS is a measure of delay per vehicle, which can be expected at controlled intersections. The LOS ranges from A (very little delay, less than 5 seconds) to .E (extreme delays, greater than 60 seconds). • Eastbound left turn movement at Hampden/285 and Inca is expected to exceed the provided storage at times during the peak periods. This may impact the operation of Hampden/285. • The study presumes Inca extension north to intersect with Dartmouth Ave. to reduce demands on the approaches to Hampden/285 Ave. The Dartmouth and Inca intersection will be signalized, and the signal timing coordinated with the timing of the signals at Santa Fe and at Elati St. • It is recommended that mitigation alternatives be considered for the Englewood Pkwy. and Girard intersection, including a roundabout. • It is recommended that the substandard width and storage for the existing westbound right turn lanes on Hampden/285 be improved . • It is recommended to enhance the north approach of Inca and Galapago at Hampden/285 with two left turn lanes and a single through/right lane. These modifications are required to accommodate the projected traffic volumes. • An additional lane is required on the north leg at Elati and Hampden/285 . • The proposed separation of Floyd west of Cherokee will help to minimize the impacts of the redevelopment on the residential neighborhood bordering it to the north. • The lane geometry is proposed for all the intersections to illustrate the basic cross- section requirements for the internal street network. Comments by Public Works Department 10/19/98 2 • • COUNCIL COMMUNICATION Date Agenda Item Subject Englewood Town Center November 2, 1998 11 a ii Planned Unit Development Initiated By Staff Source Harold J . Stitt, Senior Planner Englewood Environmental Foundation Neighborhood and Business Development COUNCIL GOAL AND PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION There have been numerous Study Sessions concerning this proposed Planned Unit Development (PUD) since the conclusion of the Transit-Oriented Communities initiative in November 1997. PREVIOUS PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION The Planning Commission considered the Englewood Town Center Planned Unit Development at a public hearing on September 1, 1998 and continued to September 22, 1998 and October 27, 1998. The Planning and Zoning Commission approved the PUD District Plan and Findings of Fact on October 27, 1998 . RECOMMENDED ACTION The Department of Neighborhood and Business Development recommends that Council approve on first reading the Ordinance authorizing the Englewood Town Center Planned Unit Development and set November 23 , 1998 as the date for the PUD Public Hearing. BACKGROUND, ANALYSIS, AND ALTERNATIVES IDENTIFIED The Planned Unit Development is a rezoning process that establishes specific zoning and site planning criteria to meet the needs of a specific development proposal that is not fully accommodated within the existing zoning category. The PUD is composed of two elements, the district plan and the site plan. The district plan is the set of regulations that establish the overall framework of development and control the uses within the project. The district plan also includes design standards and guidelines, which provide specific details for site planning and design within the development based on the relationship of uses from the district plan and establish the character of the development. The site plan is the result of applying the district plan and design guidelines to a specific site and represents the blueprint for implementation. The Englewood Town Center PUD will, for the first time in the Denver metro area, serve as a model for transit-oriented development. Equally as important is the public-private partnership that has been established to make this project possible. The amount of time it has taken to get to the point of approving the PUD has worked to allow the project to evolve from a "big box power center'' to become a national model for transit-oriented development and mall redevelopment. Also the many players involved in Cinderella City redevelopment effort, both public and private, that have contributed to the creation of a project that is truly unique . • • • Uniqueness aside , this is still a development project that must be reviewed in terms of the PUD Ordinance and the project's fit with the vision expressed by the community. The project is consistent with the desires expressed by the community and consistent wi th the goals and objectives articulated in the Comprehensive Plan. From this base, planning for the development has been focused on the integration of the development to the site and within the context of adjacent neighborhoods. Likewise, the long-term sustainability of the project has been a primary concern. Transit-oriented mixed-use development is considered the ·most appropriate form of development at this site to combine the neighborhood integration principles as well as long term sustainability. In addition to the development controls set forth in the PUD District Plan, a separate development agreement has been negotiated. This document controls certain aspects of the development outside the realm of land use. However, the development agreement controls and the PUD provisions are important to provide assurance to the community that long-term property controls are in place. All of this leads to a project that is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and will contribute to the long-term growth and stability of the commercial core of the City . FINANCIAL IMPACT This Planned Un it Development has no direct f inancial impact on City resources. LIST OF ATTACHMENTS Proposed Bill for Ordinance 10/27/98 Staff Report 8/28/98 Staff Report Minutes from the September 1 and 22, 1998 Planning Commission meetings District Plan Traffic Impact Analysis Report District Plan Map District Plan Design Standards and Guidelines Development Schedule ---· ---·· ·-· . I . I l • t .. ATTACHMENT 1 Location Map CINDERELLA CITY AREA ~I SOOFT INCLUSION FROM THE I . PERIMETER OF ~ CINDERELLA CllY t ' t I I f 325 351 Girard --.------l ~~ I I :fi 3400 333 333 701 I I 699 11 I 999 I I I ; ... ..... .,. Hampden I . 113501 -.. I __, ,-----,800 I 770, 0 630 ~ .. I 840 0 900 Cl ns 990 I c: c. 0 ns ns ... ~ I 3545 113545 Hs:lu :I 750 c: c: :I: 0 -~ 3550 I I L__Jl.jbf b .....-I Ithaca ~i .. ~;:'"~ I ·"· Hampden NE IGHBORHOOD AND BUSINESS 490 lt2f 19 ~.::1.n 11 ' DEVELOPMENT +:I ~~~..;.:;.u N ns ns jjj Qi 3530 c 3553 3550 W* E Ithaca 1 1 S • • ATTAC H MEN .Zon _ing Map • COMPREHENSIVE ZONING MAP LJ Parcel Bounciaries B-1 Business D istrict PYWM ~~~h~ B-2 Busi.::iess D istrict LJr-1 Lignt Industrial District -I -2 General Industrial District CJ R-1-A Single -Family Resicience Distric: R-1-B Single-Family Residence District I R-1-C Singl e-Family Resid ence D istri ct D R-2 Medi um Density Resid ence D istrict D R-2-C Medium Density Residen ce District R-3 Hign D ensity Residence Distric -R-4 Resiciential /Proressional Disc:ict .• , • '[] ! ) !j I I I I I # I £. ATTACHMENT 4 Access Atnts · ----·--- (J s .... ~~£{~',el.' ~ '" .... ·µ -11 ~ ~ ~L.-=...........· 0 ._ I ~ ---------:----.. r vr-~( RQW ~ •r£ ----"'Z . ,, I -:::;:: t:: . • City of Englewood CINDERELLA CITY ~ ._ Access Points SCALE: 1 IN .. 300 FT • • • Englewood Town Center PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT PLAN DESIGN STANDARDS & GUIDELINES • • • ENGLEWOOD TOWN CENTER PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT PLAN SECTION 1. GENERAL PROVISIONS A. PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD) DOCUMENTS B. c. The Englewood Town Center PUD includes the District Plan and Site Plan(s). Each of these documents is described below . 1. District Plan Elements: 2. a. Ge n eral Prov isions b . Administrat ion c . District Plan Map d. Dis trict Plan Developme nt Regulations e . De si gn Standards and Guidelines The Distr ict Plan encompasses the ent ire Englewood Town Center (Town Center) site and becomes the controlling document for the regulation of land use and development design. The Distr ict Plan Map delineates zones and parcels within the PUD . The Development Regulations specify the land use requ irements for each of the zones. The Design Standards and Gu idelines specify the arch itectural des ign , site design , streetscape criteria , and use of materia ls and colors for each of the parcels. The Design Standards and Guidelines shall also include landscape standards and s ignage standards where they are different from City standards. Site Plan(s) The s ite plan (s ) encompasses all or portions of the Town Center site and defines site specific improvements for part icular development projects . The site plan shall be in conformance with the District Plan and Design Standards and Gu idelines. APPLICABILITY The Town Center PUD shall apply to all property as described by the legal description conta ined here in. The property is generally bounded by West Floyd Avenue to the north , South Elat i Street to the east , West Hampden Avenue (U.S . 285) to the south , and South Santa Fe Dr ive (U.S . 85 ) to the west. PROJECT INTENT The Town Center PUD provides land use regulations , standards, guidelines, and procedure for the design and redevelopment of the former Cinderella City site as a high-qual ity , m ixed-use , pedestrian-friendly , transit-oriented community . Development should create a fine grain of uses that complement trans it and 1 • • • positively integrate with . the traditional neighborhood design of Englewood. As a transit oriented community, current and future development under this PUD should demonstrate, as much as possible the following principles: Land Use 1. Encourage a range of land uses, commercial, public, office, and residential, that are mutually reinforcing and supportive of transit. 2. Encourage active pedestrian-generating land uses which concentrate activity at or within walking distance of transit stations, along the street edge and within public areas. 3. Accommodate future intensification of site uses and redevelopment. 4. Encourage neighborhood-oriented commercial uses, at the street level of buildings especially within higher-density residential areas. 5. Encourage uses, wh ich offer the potential for shared parking, more pedestrian traffic, and joint neighborhood activities. 6. Encourage denser residential development sympathetic to t he scale of adjacent development. 7. Site Planning and Design 1. Coordinate vehicular and pedestrian access and connections within the development and adjacent properties. 2. Reinforce the sidewalk pedestrian zone by locating smaller, out-parcel development adjacent to the street. 3. Maintain a direct and visible pedestrian path across parking lots to commercial developments . 4. Create an attractive pedestrian zone with storefronts designed with articulat ion , i ndividual ident ity, and small-scale details. Parking 1. Encourage structured, reduced, and shared parking arrangements for all land uses . 2. Encourage surface parking lots to be located off main streets and away from front lot lines . 3. Encourage the use of shuttle service to the transit station from the community at large. 4. Encourage multi-modal transit systems. D. ADDITIONAL DEVELOPMENT REQUIREMENTS 1. Subdivision Prior to or concurrent with approval of the first building permit, subdivision of the entire property shall be required. Each final plat shall include appropriate plat notes to assure the continued functioning and maintenance of the project as an integrated whole , such as, but not limited to, cross lot access and parking easements to be maintained by the property owner, owner's authorized agent, or an owner's association. Any 2 • • • 2. 3. 4. 5. subdivision of the property shall comply with the provisions of the Title 10: Subdivision Regulations, of the Englewood Municipal Code, as amended. Water and Sanitary Sewer Installation Water and sanitary sewer shall be installed in accordance with the provisions of Title 12: Public Utilities, of the Englewood Municipal Code, as amended and all other applicable regulations. Drainage and Erosion Control A drainage plan and a grading and erosion control plan for the entire Town Center site shall be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer prior to the issuance of the first building permit within the PUD. Storm drainage shall be managed in accordance with the approved Drainage Plan as provided by Section 16-5-1: Storm Drainage; and Title 12: Public Utilities, of the Englewood Municipal Code, as amended and all other applicable regulations. Utility Plan A complete PUD utility plan shall be reviewed and approved by the City Manager or designee prior to the issuance of the first building permit within the PUD. All utilities shall be installed in accordance with the approved utility plan . Traffic Plan All vehicular access and circulation facilities, and traffic control devices and signs, shall be constructed and installed in accordance with the approved traffic plan, the City of Englewood Traffic Code, and the traffic policies of the City of Englewood. 6. Street Lighting Street lighting shall be installed in accordance with the standards required by Public Service Company of Colorado. 7. Easements Utilities may be installed beneath any recorded easement within the PUD area with the exception of reciprocal parking easements, for which permission to install utilities may be obtained on a case by case basis. Utilities are defined as water, sanitary sewer, storm sewer, telephone, gas, electricity, cable television, and data transmission. 8. Private Drives and Parking Areas All private drives and parking areas shall be constructed using City approved construction standards. Concrete pavement shall be used at all loading service and trash areas . 3 • • • 9. Water Conservation Water conservation measures, features, and standards shall be provided in accordance with the applicable provisions of the Englewood Municipal Code or other adopted code or regulation. 10. Underground ing of Utilities All existing and proposed utility lines and services, and all street light circuits shall be installed underground both within and adjacent to the development. 11. Relationship to Other Regulations In addition to complying w ith the Englewood Town Center PUD, all development shall be subject to all other applicable City ordinances and regulations , as determined by the City , to the extent that they are not superseded or replaced by th is document. SECTION 2: ADMINISTRATION A. AUTHORITY 8. Authority for the approval , adoption and enforcement of this PUD is granted pursuant to Section 16-4-15: Planned Unit Development Zone District, of the Englewood Municipal Code , as amended . APPROVAL Approval authority for the elements of the PUD shall be as follows: Distr ict Plan City Council Design Standards and Guidelines City Council Site Plan(s) City Manager or Designee C. APPEAL All appeals to this PUD shall be handled as specified in Section 16-4-15: Planned Unit Development Zone District, of the Englewood Municipal Code, as amended or as otherwise provided by this PUD . D. CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES 1 Rights, Responsibilities and Conduct Construction activities for the purpose of this section shall include both pre-construct ion activities such as temporary construction shelters, storage faci li ties and fencing and the construction of structures themselves. Any owner or developer of a property within the PUD boundaries undertaking construction activities shall take all necessary precautions to expedite, continue and comp lete all construction and site improvements. 4 • • • Any owner or developer of a property within the PUD boundaries undertaking construction activities shall take all necessary precautions to maintain all building sites in a safe and clean condition. Any owner or developer of a property within the PUD boundaries undertaking construction activit ies shall take all necessary precautions to have their personnel and subcontractors to conduct themselves in a professional manner. An owner or developer shall have the right to one (1) cons truction/leasing sign on si te. The signage area shall be no greater than 4 feet by 8 feet and the sign shall be no talle r than eleven feet. 2 Protection of Existing Structures and Infrastructure 3 Any owner or developer of a property within the PUD boundaries undertaking construction act ivities shall take all necessary precautions to protect and , when necessary , replace any ex isting street infrastructure , utility infrastructure, landscaping or site improvements . Site drainage shall be controlled to prevent run off of mud and stockpiled sand. Soil Conditions and Compaction Analysis and investigation of the existing site and soil conditions of any development parcel are the sole responsibility of the developer of each parcel. Permission for site access to perform site and soil analysis must be obtained from the C ity of Englewood. Site areas adjacent to Town Center infras tructure disturbed by construction must be compacted to protect existing infrastructure and also be returned to their original state . 4 Site Ingress and Egress 5 Proposed site access points for t he purpose of construction and a plan for construction traffic must be approved by the City of Englewood. Where possib le , existing curb cuts sha ll be used . Streets soiled by construction work shall be cleaned to prevent track ing and accumulation of dirt and construction debris . At a minimum, cleaning shall be provided once a week. The City retains the right to increase clean ing measures based upon observed construct ion activ ity . On-Site Storage, Parking, Stockpiling and Waste Removal Any owner or developer of a property within the PUD boundaries undertaking or contracting for construction activities shall take all necessary precautions to : • Store all materials in areas that do not negatively impact the visual appearance of the Town Cen ter . • Locate and park all construction-related vehicles in a manner that does not negatively impact the visual appearance of the Town Center. • Protect all stockpiled materials from the weather. 5 • E. • • • Remove all construction debris on a frequent basis in covered containers. MAINTENANCE 1 Property Limits and Off-Site Responsibilities Each property owner or its agent is responsible for the maintenance of their buildings, site improvements and parking areas within their parcel boundaries. In addition, each property owner shall be responsible for the cleanliness, litter removal and graffiti removal from the immediately adjacent public sidewalks, street curbs and gutters. 2 Building Maintenance 3 Each property owner or their agent is responsible for the external maintenance (operation and appearance) of all structural and ornamental elements of their properties including all site improvements and signage. All unsafe conditions or damaged elements must be remedied or replaced immediately. The property owner must paint all painted elements of buildings and site improvements on a parcel, whether structural or ornamental, as often as is required to maintain the appearance of those elements . Landscape Maintenance and Site Irrigation Maintenance A regular seasonal maintenance program is required of all property owners , including lawns, trees , shrubs, ground cover, mulched areas, tree grate areas and irrigation equipment. Dead trees or shrubs shall be replaced immediately or when the appropriate planting season permits. Any holiday-related illumination or strings of lights shall be removed from trees and shrubs when the season or holiday time is over. 4 Trash, Litter and Snow Removal Each property owner or their agent is responsible for trash collection from their building or parcel. All trash service areas and associated screening must be cleaned and maintained on a regular basis. All trash receptacles must have covers and be covered at all times. Trash collection shall be scheduled on a regular basis and coordinated to not conflict with pedestrian and vehicular circulation. Use of trash receptacles for repeated removal of construction debris is prohibited. Snow removal within parcel boundaries is the responsibility of the property owner or their agent. Any stockpil ing of snow shall be done in a manner to not obstruct existing parking , drainage patterns, sight lines, access routes, or fire lanes . 6 • • • 5 All trash receptacles installed in common public areas will be handled under a Common Area Maintenance Agreement. All private trash receptacles are the responsibility of the owner of the parcel. Rights and Responsibility of Tenants and Associations All rights and responsibility of property owners and their agents apply to tenants, resident associations and homeowner associations. F. ADMINISTRATION OF GUIDELINES 1 Authority to Administer The City of Englewood or its approved agent shall solely control the development of the PUD parcels within the boundaries of the PUD. The PUD Administrator shall be the City Manager or designee. The PUD Administrator's responsibility shall be to administer, regulate, enforce and interpret the Guidelines as well as coordinate the PUD process and parcel development process in conjunction with the City or its approved agent. The administrative responsibilities of the PUD Administrator shall apply to all publicly owned and privately owned structures and improvements . regulated by the Standards and Guidelines . SECTION 3: DISTRICT PLAN MAP (See attached Map) SECTION 4: DISTRICT PLAN DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS The Town Center PUD District Plan is comprised of three zones as delineated in the District Plan Map. Each zone is further divided into individual development parcels. Each Zone and its development parcels are governed by general regulations. Within each Zone, each development parcel is also governed by specific design regulations. These development Parcel regulations are set forth in the District Plan Design Standards and Guidelines. · A. ZONE 1 1. Permitted Uses a. Commercial. Small-format retail [<20,000 square feet gross floor area (GFA)], sales and service businesses, and restaurants. b. Residential (except on parcels 1.3 and 1. 7.). Multi-family dwellings, excluding single family and detached type units c . Hotels (except on parcels 1.3 and 1.7). 7 • • • 2. Height Limit Maximum height of buildings and structures shall be one hundred feet. B. ZONE 2 1. Permitted Uses a. Commercial. Small-format retail [<20,000 square feet GFA], sales and service businesses, and restaurants; Large-format retail [>20,000 square feet GFA] (parcel 2.1 only). b. Residential. Multi-family dwellings, excluding single family and detached type units. c. Hotels(except on parcels 2.3 and 2.4.). 2. Height Limit Maximum height of buildings and structures shall be one hundred feet. C. ZONE 3 1. Permitted Uses a. Commercial. Small-format retail [<20,000 GFA], sales and service businesses, and restaurants, b. Office. Business, professional, medical , and dental, above first floor commercial only. 2. Height Limit Maximum height of buildings and structures shall be forty-two feet. D. ALLZONES 1. Permitted Uses 2. a. Entertainment and cultural facilities. Theaters, cultural arts facilit ies , museums, indoor/outdoor recreational facilities, and nightclubs . b . Office (except on parcel 1.3). Business, professional, medical, and dental. c. Parking and transit facilities. Parking structures, surface parking, and public transportation fac ili ties. d. Institutional (except on parcel 1.3). Libraries, governmental, community and public facilities. e. Parks and open space. . Parks, community and recreational facilities. Prohibited Uses The following land uses shall be prohibited: a. Adult entertainment and service establishments. 8 • • • b. c. d. e. f. Automotive service stations and automotive uses that are engaged in repair and/or ma intenance services Auto storage and auto sales/leasing Drive through uses Industrial and general manufacturing Wholesale unless subordinate to a retail operation 2. Setbacks a. Setbacks Setbacks for buildings , structures, and parking, except as provided in Section b. below, shall be in accordance with the streetscape standards set forth in the Design Standards and Guidelines. b. Exceptions to Setback Requirements The following exceptions may be allowed, with written approval from the City Manager or designee , in any required setback, but shall not obstruct motorist's vision at access points : (1) Bus shelters (2) Dr iveways (3) Walkways (4) Street furniture (5) Mailboxes and newspaper racks (6) S igns with an approved sign permit (7) Walls and fences with an approved building permit (8) Outdoor seating, and its related structures , for a restaurant or other use , if approved as part of a final site plan (9) Minor utility fac ilities not exceeding thirty-six inches (36") in he ight 3. Landscape Standards The Town Center s ite landscaping shall be regulated by Section 16-5-26: Landscaping Standards , of the Englewood Municipal Code and the Englewood Town Center PUD . A complete PUD landscape plan shall be reviewed and approved by the City Manager or designee prior to the issuance of the first building permi t within the PUD . 4. Sign Standards The Town Center site signage shall be regulated by Section 16-4-19: Sign Code, of the Englewood Mu nicipa l Code and the Englewood Town Center PUD. A complete PUD sign package shall be reviewed and approved by the City Manager or designee pr ior to the issuance of the first sign perm it within the PUD . 9 • • • 5. Uses Not Mentioned; Use Determinations Where a proposed use is not lis t ed in the District Plan, it may be allowed if determined by the City Manager or designee to be similar in character and operation, and having the same or lesser impact, as uses that are allowed. The use determination procedure set forth in this section shall not be used as a substitute for a PUD or zoning amendment. a. Submittal of Request b. The property owner or owner's authorized agent shall submit a request for a use determination in writing , to the City Manager or designee. Requests for use determinations shall be accompanied by the following information . (1) Written description of the use, including character and operation (2) Proposed location and location map (3) Written statement describing the compatibility of the proposed use with the PUD project intent and other permitted uses . (4 ) Other information deemed reasonable and relevant by the C ity Manager or des ignee. Action on Request. W ith in th irty (30) calendar days from the date of the request , the City Manager or designee shall make a determination in writing as to whether or not the use is permitted based on the criteria set forth in Subsection a. above . A denial of a use determination request s hall be appealable to the Planning Commission using the same procedures as for appeals of decisions on final site plans as set forth here in. SECTION 5: (See attached) DISTRICT PLAN DESIGN STANDARDS & GUIDELINES F:\D EPT\NB D\GRO UP\PLAN\CINC ITY\ETC PUD3 .DOC 10 • • • Englewood Town Center PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT PLAN DESIGN STANDARDS & GUIDELINES • TABLE OF CONTENTS • • 1.0 Statement of Purpose 1.1 Overview 1.2 Town Center Nomenclature 1.3 General Purposes of Standards and Guidelines 1.4 Speci f ic Purposes of Standards and Guidelines 1.5 Interpretation of Standards and Guidelines 1.6 Modif ications 2.0 Zone and Parcel Overview 2.1 Explanation of Zones 2.2 Designation of Zones and Parcels 2.3 Parcels Sizes, Allowable Site Coverage and Floor Area Ratio Zone Designation Map Parcel Designation Map 3.0 District Plan Standards and Guidelines 3 .1 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5 3.6 3 .7 3 .8 Axial Relationships and Sight Lines Special Site Elements (SSE ) and Spec ial Site Markers (SSM) Pedest rian and Vehicular C irculation Architectural Character Public and Pr ivate Landscaping Signage and Building Illumination Street Furniture , Site Lighting and Fencing Special Retail Standards and Guidelines 4.0 Parcel Characteristics 4.1.1 4.1.2 4.1.3 4.1.4 4.1.5 4.1.6 4.1 .7 4.1 .8 4.1 .9 4.1.10 4.1.11 4.1.12 4.2.1 4.2 .3 4.2.4 4.3 Parcel 1.1 Parcel 1.2 Parcel 1.3 Parcel 1.4 Parcel 1.5 Parcel 1.6 Parcel 1.7 Parcel 1.8 Parcel 1.9 Parcel 1.1 O Parcel 1.11 Parcel 1.12 Parcel 2.1 Parcel 2.3a and Parcel 2.3b Parcel 2.4 Parcel 3.1 a and Parcel 3.1 b 1 • Appendix Attachment Number 1: District Plan Attachment Number 2: Zone Des ignations Attachment Number 3: Parcel Designations Attachment Number 4: Building Type Matrix (2 sheets) Attachment Number 5: Road Type Plan Attachment Number 6: Road Types (11 sheets) Attachment Number 7: Approved Des ign Elements Attachment Number 8: C ity of Englewood Landscaping Standards Attachment Number 9: City of Englewood Sign Code At tachment Number 1 O: C ivic Plaza Plan Attachment Number 11: Park ing Plan Attachment Number 12: Green /Open Space Plan • Attachment Number 13 : Bus and Bike Routs Date of Issue: October 22 , 1998 • 2 1.0 STATEMENT OF PURPOSE • 1.1 Overview and Intent • -· The purpose of these District Plan Standards and Guidelines is to explain and quantify the District Plan for the Englewood Town Center. They are shall promote a high quality realization of the District Plan vision initiated by the City of Englewood in 1997 . These Design Standards and Guidelines describe both overall District Plan concepts and characteristics of individual parcels within the District Plan . They shall establish criteria for reviewing and evaluating development proposals within the District Plan boundaries. All development shall promote an active pedestrian environment as · well as sensible vehicular circulation arid access . The streetscape is intended to be visually interesting and animated with fenestration, entrances and displays . All development shall promote the use of landscaping and street furniture to enhance public streets , private streets and walkways in order to provide a cohesive and attractive streetscape. All development shall promote development continuity and ease of circulation from parcel to parcel as well as promote "good neighbor" relationships between parcels. Diversity in parcel development shall not override the intended continuity in design encouraged by the Guidelines. "Good neighbor" shall mean considering the development impacts of noise , glare , vibration and odor when evaluating proposals. All development shall also consider "good neighbor" relations between the development parcels within the District Plan boundaries and the adjacent parcels of land not within the boundaries of the District Plan. All development proposals shall consider the surrounding properties and neighborhood as an integral part of the Town Center when evaluating development proposals. 1.2 Town Center Nomenclature For the purposes of these Standards and Guidelines , the term "Town Center" shall be used to include all improvements and property within the District Plan boundaries . The term "Civic Plaza" shall be used to indicate the plaza at the west terminus of Englewood Parkway and is shown in more detail within the Appendix . 3 • • • The term "Civic Center" shall be used to indicate the building at the southwest corner of the Civic Plaza . The Civic Center contains the City Hall, City Library, City Courts , Cultural Arts Center and other municipal functions . The terms "Town Center," "Civic Plaza" and "Civic Center" may be modified or renamed in the future . 1.3 General Purpose of Standards and Guidelines • Promote a cohesive Town Center development that respects and fosters variety • Promote a mixture of land uses that support an active and vibrant town center • Establish a consistent, high quality level of building materials and architectural character • Assist developers and architects in meeting the intentions of the District Plan 1.4 Specific Purposes of Standards and Guidelines • Establish a recognizable quality of design as an "identity" for the Englewood Town Center • Draw activity into the Town Center and integrate it into the larger Englewood community • Establish the new Civic Plaza and Civic Center as the "engine" of the new Town Center • Promote and facilitate the use of the Regional Transportation District (RTD) light rail and bus lines as a positive benefit • Balance vehicular and pedestrian circulation where new streets are provided • Set a blueprint for initial development, for future development and eventual redevelopment 1.5 Interpretation of these Design Standards and Guidelines These Design Standards and Guidelines are intended as a flexible framework for developing the designated parcels within the District Plan. These Design Standards and Guidelines are not meant to be proscriptive, but are meant to to foster high quality, creative designs consistent with other elements of the District Plan. The interpretation of these Design Standards and Guidelines as it relates 4 • • • 1.6 Modifications In cases where the design standards and guidelines may not be practical, feasible, or may result in a less than appropriate design response , the applicant may consider modifications. Modifications should equal or exceed the design standards intent and goals. Modifications shall be reviewed by an independent City selected architect or design professional to provide input to the Plan Administrator. The proposed change should demonstrate consistency with the PUD. The Plan Administrator shall forward the design modification proposal to City Counci l for final approval. Modification Review Process. Applications for review of modifications to the Design Standards and Guidelines of the Englewood Town Center Planned Unit Development shall be submitted to the Department of Neighborhood and Business Development. Applications shall consist of five (5) sets of pre liminary drawings of the proposed modification, a written explanation of how the proposed modif ication equals or exceeds the design standard's intent and goals , and a wr itten statement from the property owner or developer authorizing the proposed modif ication . Within ten (10) working days of the receipt of an application, the Design Review Committee shall meet to consider the proposed modification. The Design Review Committee shall be composed of an independent City selected architect or design professional , the City 's PUD site plan Arch itect , and the Plan Administrator. The Comm ittee sha ll approve , approve with condi ti ons , or deny the proposed modification. The applicant shall be notified in writing of the Committee 's decision. If the decision of the Committee is to approve the proposed modification , the applicant shall submit twenty (20) complete application sets that will be forwarded along with Committee 's decision to City Council for final approval. If the decision of the committee is to approve the proposed modification with conditions , the applicant shall resubmit plans that incorporate the conditions for review by the Committee. When the Committee is satisfied that the conditions have been properly incorporated into the plans, the applicant will be notified in writing and shall submit twenty (20) complete application sets that will be forwarded along with Committee 's decision to City Council for final approval. If the decision of the Committee is to deny the proposed modification, the reasons for the denial shall be reduced to writing and forwarded to the applicant. Approved modifications shall be scheduled for City Council consideration at the earliest Council meeting possible. Approval by the City Council shall t ake effect immediately be in force for a period of eighteen (18) months. If the development to which the modification applies is not complete or under construction within this time period, a new application must be submitted for complete review and approval. 4a • • -· to a developer's proposal is intended to be a cooperative process conducted between the District Plan Administrator and potential developers. Final interpretation shall be rendered by the District Plan Administrator . For purposes of interpretation of these Design Standards and Guidelines , the following rules of interpretation shall apply: The use of "may ," "should", "promotes " or "encourages" means permissive , recommended or advised and is not mandatory ; the use of "shall ," "must" or "requires " means compl iance and is mandatory . Where the terms "compatible " or "appropriate " are used, generally their meaning shall mean compatibi lity in terms of scale, height , degree of fa9ade articulation or transparency , qual ity of materia ls , and degree of landscaping . Where terms or phrases are subject to more than one reasonable interpretation , the more stringent interpretation shall be intended . Where two or more prov isions conflict , the more specific shall control over the more general. The parcel-by-parcel tables reflect the best current thinking about how to implement the narrative portion of the document , and will prevail over other interpretations of the narrative unless the City agrees with the alternative view . 2.0 ZONE AND PARCEL STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES 2.1 Explanation of the Zones There are three Zones indicated on the District Plan . The Zone boundaries are established to reinforce interaction among the adjacent parcels and also to recognize the distinctive differences in the Zones. The Parcel boundaries indicated in the Parcel Characteristics section are for general location purposes and are not intended to represent property lines. 2.2 Designation of Zones Zone 1 The development of the twelve (12) parcels that comprise Zone 1 establishes the mixed-use transit-or iented nature of the entire development. Development within this Zone is a fine g ra in mix of uses. The overall approach to development of this Zone is that of an urban transit village with a focus on Civic Plaza . 5 • • • Zone 2 Parcel 1.1 Parcel 1.2 Parcel 1.3 Parcel 1.4 Parcel 1.5 Parcel 1.6 Parcel 1.7 Parcel 1.8 Parcel 1.9 Parcel 1.10 Parcel 1 .11 Parcel 1 .12 Zone 2 is comprised of three (3) parcels that establish a predominantly retail nature of the zone. Initial development of this zone is intended to respond to current retail market trends for larger format bui ldings . The zone is intended to remain strongly integrated into the overall mixed-use focus of the development. Future redevelopment of this zone should strengthen the mixed use focus, and fine grain nature of the larger Town Center within this zone The District Plan provides a strong visual and physical link between Zone 2 to Zone 1. Zone 3 Parcel 2.1 Parcel 2.3a and Parcel 2.3b Parcel 2.4 Zone 3 is comprised of a single parcel that links the traditional automobile- oriented development of West Hampden Avenue to Zone 1 and Zone 2. It provides an entrance to the Town Center and a transition to the urban village areas of Zone 1 and Zone 2. Parcel 3.1a and Parcel 3.1b 2.3 Parcel Sizes and Allowable Site Coverage The parcel sizes , boundaries and legal descriptions are available from the District Plan Administrator . The allowable amount of site coverage by buildings and accessory structures shall generally follow the building footprints indicated on the District Plan. The building footprints shown on the District Plan are the recommended approximate sizes . 6 • • • DISTRICT PLAN ZONE DESIGNATION MAP DISTRICT PLAN PARCEL DESIGNATION MAP Englewood District Plan 7 o.o _J m£:i : ·' 0 l .. Q -~.· ~' . .1 J ·, I I , I ~,' I '<Jit .' :, I ZONE 1 Hampden Ave. (Hwy 2&S) District Plan Zone Designation • Englewood District Plan 8 • • • D , I , /I ! i ;: ,/ l---,..-f--'-----,-,-1 j / // !i I· /;/ '// /I .... ,/ If ,, I ti I' 'I \..)/ 2 / / ; I i * Denotes Special Site Element • Denotes Special Site Marker 1.10 :I I 21 3.1 Hampden Ave. (H wy 2&5) District Plan Parcel Designation Englewood District Plan 9 • • • 3.0 DISTRICT PLAN STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES 3 .. 1 Axial Relationships and Sight Lines All development shall respect the Englewood Parkway axis, the Inca axis , and views down those axis to the SSE's . For the District Plan, Englewood Parkway shall be the main visual axis connecting South Cherokee Street and the Civic Plaza. All developments along Englewood Parkway shall respect this axis and the sight line established . All developments around the Civic Plaza shall build to approximately the same development line around the Civic Plaza as shown on the District Plan Parcel Design Map and within the Appendix. This edge will shape the urban space and maintain a strong relationship of the Civic Plaza to the RTD station . Sight lines indicated by the Special Sight Elements (SSE), located at the perimeter of the Civic Plaza, and the Special Sight Markers (SSM), which are distr ibuted throughout the Town Center , shall be accommodated as part of any parcel development. The SSE's at the Civic Plaza that provide a visual terminus to the two offset stretches of Inca Street shall be given special consideration. Entr ies to buildings shall be visually connected and shall have direct public access to adjacent public streets and proposed plaza areas. 3.2 Special Site Elements (SSE) and Special Site Markers (SSM) These Design Standards and Standards and Guidelines require SSE 's to be architecturally integrated into the buildings around the Civic Plaza to mark entries and turn corners . They are to reinforce the enclosure of the Civic Plaza . The four SSE 's on the Civic Plaza shall be a minimum height of 33 feet from top of curb and shall clearly relate to one another through shape , size, lighting, or color. The SSE 's located on the west side of Galapago Street at the Englewood Parkway should provide a gateway to Englewood Parkway and a transition to Zone 2 . These Design Standards and Standards and Guidelines require SSM's to be located at the designated locations on the District Plan and the SSM's are intended to provide additional reinforcement to the District Plan . Buildings and their related improvements shall respect the design intention of the SSM's and their visibility. 3.3 Pedestrian and Vehicular Circulation All development shall minimize conflicts between pedestrian and vehicular circulation and also to recognize the pedestrian and the automobile as an essential part of the District Plan. All development shall promote the positive aspects of pedestrian access , reduce the negative impact of automobiles and facilitate the use of mass transit as a quality of life issue . 10 • • • • The Town Ce _nter road type cross sections provided in the Appendix shall be used as informational references for the development of structures and site improvements within parcel boundaries . All deve lopment proposals shall clearly indicate intended traffic directions , pedestrian routes and traffic signage . All proposed drop-offs , loading zones and prohib ited park ing areas shall be indicated. All curb cuts and paved areas shall be coordinated with existing underground utilities . Proposed new underground utilities shall be installed in conduit or encased as required by the City . All public streets , private streets and driveways shall be paved with concrete or asphalt and include concrete curbs and gutters . All sidewalks shall be concrete and meet or exceed the requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act. The use of stone , br ick or concrete pavers , either as accents or for the paving field , is encouraged for all vehicular and pedestr ian areas . Differentiation in paving shall be used where vehicular and pedestrian ci rculation paths cross. The use of landscaped parkways adjacent to pedestrian sidewalks is encouraged . The provision of sidewalk cafe areas is encouraged where appropriate . No proposed drop-offs , trash removal areas or loading zones shall block public streets , fire access routes or pedestr ian ci rcu lat ion . All development shall determ ine parking areas , control the appearance of parking areas , facilitate access to parking and recommend service area locations . Opportunities for shared and overlap park ing shall be coordinated with the District Plan Administrator and variations . Requests for shared parking shall be approved at the discretion of the Distr ict Plan Administrator . In no event shall parking areas be signed or configured so as to place the City in violation of any agreements w ith RTD . In the Parcel Characteristics , t hese Design Standards and Standards and Guidelines indicate linkages and relationships between parking lot parcels and building development parcels . The relationships between all adjacent parcels noted by these Design Standards and Standards and Guidelines must be met or exceeded . Layouts of parking aisles and the associated trees indicated on the District Plan are the recommended layouts . The number of trees and planted traffic islands indicated within parcel boundaries shall be maintained . Pedestrian routes and indicated lines of trees across parking lots shall be ma intained. All grad ing shall be coordinated with adjacent parcels and public ways . Parking lots shall drain to catch basins located within paved areas on development parcels . Maximum grade slope for parking areas shall be 5%; minimum grade slope shall be 1 %. Parking garages, when proposed in the future as replacements for existing parking garages or surface parking lots , shall be compatible w ith buildings on adjacent parcels. Future deve lopments that build on designated parking lot 11 • • • parcels shall maintain existing public way trees and provide new trees that are consistent with Town Center streetscape . Service areas , including trash collection areas , maintenance areas, loading areas , satellite dish area and storage areas , shall be integrated with proposed buildings and their parking areas and shall be of at least as high quality as the primary buildings that they serve. The paving surface for these areas shall be concrete. They shall not conflict with street traffic and pedestrian circulation and they shall be screened from view . The anticipated delivery and service times should be indicated in any development proposa l. Modifications of the recommended layouts for parking and service areas shall be coordinated with the District Plan Administrator. 3.4 Architectural Character All development shall establish and control use of the parcel and bulk of the buildings being proposed . The architectural character of the build ings may be diverse , but all proposed buildings shall demonstrate careful attention to quality and detail as well as a consistent architectural language for the entire Town Center . Material and colors shall be harmonious with the public infrastructure mater ials used and other proposed or built structures . The use of highly reflective or mirrored glass is prohibited . Build ings shall align with the proposed street grid and have an articulated fac;ade - on all faces of the building. Sitework shall provide for a seamless transition from public infrastructure improvements to private site improvement work , especially at areas where bu il dings are allowed to be set back from parcel boundaries. Projections over property lines are restricted except as permitted by the District Plan Administrator . Projections in to any required or voluntary setback lines , such as cornices , balconies, bay windows, canopies , garden walls , utility connections , etc . must be clearly indicated on all development proposals . Flat roof areas shall use interior roof drains . Drains leading from large sloped roof areas shall be integrated with the architectural design. Drainage of ornamental canopies and balconies shall be concealed or integrated with the architectural design. Architectural character including material se lection and colors shall be evaluated during the P.U.D . review process. The intentions of these Design Standards and Standards and Guidelines are to establish a cohesive and interesting building character , especially as it impacts the pedestrian level. Arcades or articulated walkways are encouraged. The architectural character of parking garages shall complement all District Plan buildings . Trees and landscaping, where appropriate , shall be used to further minimize any negative visual impact that a parking garage may present. 12 • • -·· All accessory structures shall be compatible with their main buildings and shall be compatible with adjacent neighboring buildings . Masonry wing walls and screen walls shall be compatible with the buildings to which they are related. Service area walls sh.all be masonry . Open fencing shall be masonry piers connected by painted wrought iron or steel fencing. All rooftop and at-grade mechanical and electrical equipment shall be screened or architecturally integrated into the building or site layout. Where possible , sustainable design principles with regards to energy efficiency, water management, landscaping and building materials shall be used . 3.5 Public & Private Landscap i ng All development shall recognize the positive environmental and psychological benefit of trees and landscaping . The District Plan is intended to maintain traditional development relationships between streets , parkways and pedestrian walkways . Trees and li nes of trees shall be used to accen t uate the design of the District Plan as well as define the sidewalk and pedestrian zones within parcel boundaries. Trees and shrubs shall be used as buffers and screens where possible , and green spaces for residential developments should be maximized . All planti'ng material proposed for public areas and areas within parcel boundaries shall conform to the approved des ign elements in the Appendix. Within the boundaries of a parcel , internal streets and parking lot drive lanes shall have evenly spaced trees of the same species planted along their edges. The spacing of trees shall be close enough to produce a visually effective line of tree canopies. The placement of the trees should not block sight triangles or traffic signage for vehicular turning or egress . In hard paved areas, appropriate organic material or functionally equivalent inorgan ic materials shall be used at all openings for tree bases . In parkway areas or lawns , sod shall be used around the bases of all trees. The use of ornamental plants or flowers in planting beds and planter pots is encouraged. All lawn , tree and planting areas shall be provided with irrigation and all irrigation controls shall be placed in unobtrusive and secure areas . All landscaping shall meet the Town Center Landscape Plan. Unti l the Landscape Plan is approved, the City of Englewood Landscape Standards shall be used and are provided in the Appendix as a reference. 13 • • 3.6 Signage and Building Illumination All development shall promote consistency and quality in the signage used . For the purposes of this section, these requirements shall apply to all private signage . All development proposals shall indicate the size , height, type, color , material, illumination and location of all proposed building, commercial and directional signage including any construction/leasing signage . Signage that is visually accessible to pedestrian traffic should be integrated with the buildings . Billboard-type signage is prohibited . Signage shall be placed within development parcel boundaries and shall not be attached to trees, public property improvements or traffic signs. Signage may not encroach over public right of ways such as public streets or public sidewalks unless permitted by the District Plan Administrator. Signage shall be compatible with the public and civic signage used for District Plan streets and public ways. All wiring and conduit shall be concealed. Private building illumination shall be compatible with all Town Center and Civic Plaza lighting . Accent lighting on buildings shall be integrated with the architectural design or screened from view if mounted at ground level. It shall not be a distraction to automobile traffic and shall be located away from pedestrian ways . Parking garage illumination shall be controlled to reduce glare and light spillage on to adjacent streets and parcels. The placement of strings of electric lights in trees or shrubs located on public property or public ways shall be by City approva l only . All signage shall meet the Town Center Sign Plan . Until the Sign Plan is approved , the City of Englewood Sign Code shall be used and is provided in the Appendix as a reference . 3. 7 Street Furniture, Lighting and Fencing All development shall promote and reinforce a positive perception of the Town Center . The success of this perception is related to the quality of design of the street furniture , lighting and fencing . All privately-owned street furniture including benches , bollards , trash receptacles, information kiosks , lighting, fencing, and other ornamental pieces shall conform with the approved design elements listed in the Appendix . Advertising benches are prohibited . • Parking lot lighting shall be designed to avoid excessive illumination of adjacent properties or street areas and shall be controlled by photoelectric sensors. 14 • Parking lot lighting shall conform to the approved design elements listed in the Appendix . Parking lot light fixtures may not be attached to principle buildings except for parking garages . Parking areas shall be lit to a minimum of one foot candle . Pedestrian walkway lighting shall conform with the approved design elements listed in the Appendix . Masonry wing walls and screen walls shall be compatible with the buildings to which they are related. Service area walls are shall be masonry . Open fencing shall be masonry piers connected by painted wrought iron or steel fencing . All accessory structures and fencing , including material and color , must be indicated on development proposals. Parking lot lighting within 100' of any boundary of the Englewood Town Center site shall use full cut off functions to avoid glare beyond the property edge . 3.8 Large Format Retail Standards and Guidelines Because a large retail establishme nt, such as a cinema or single large retail store of 20 ,000 square feet or more , has a significant visual impact , special consideration must be given to the design of the facades, fenestration and roofs of large retail establishments . • Facades shall be articulated to p rovide visual interest , both at the pedestrian level and at upper levels of the facades . Bu ildings should have architectural features that are integral parts of the fac;ade and not superficially applied . Fac;ade colors shall be low reflectance , subtle , neutral or earth tone colors . The use of high intensity colors , metallic colors , black or fluorescent colors is prohibited . Fac;ade materials shall be of high quality and shall comply with these Design Standards and Guidelines. Smooth faced concrete block, tilt-up concrete panels , prefabricated steel panels and poured in place concrete wall are prohibited . • Building facades shall include a repeating pattern of fac;ade elements of color change , texture change and material module changes . Horizontal and vertical material module changes include offsets , reveals and projecting ribs . Vertical offsets , vertical reveals and projecting vertical ribs shall be a minimum of twelve inches (12"). At least one of these fac;ade elements shall repeat horizontally . All fac;ade elements shall repeat at intervals of no more than thirty feet (30'), either horizontally or vertically . Facades greater than 75 feet (75 ') in length, measured horizontally, shall incorporate wall plane projections or recesses having a depth of at least three percent (3%) of the length of the fac;ade and extending at least twenty percent (20%) of the length of the fac;ade . No unin terrupted length of fac;ade shall exceed seventy-five (75) horizontal feet. 15 • • • Ground floor facades that face public streets shall have arcades, display windows, entry areas, awnings, or other such features along no less than sixty percent (60%) of their length. Transparency of the street level fac;ade between the height of three feet (3') and eight feet (8') is encouraged and the appearance of smaller retail stores within a principal building is encouraged . Large retail buildings shall feature a minimum of two customer entrances to facilitate pedestrian circulation and to reduce the possible blankness of a large building. Buildings and their parking lots shall be designed to facilitate and shorten pedestrian circulation and to reduce the possible isolation of a building in the parking area . All pedestrian walkways shall be distinguished from driving surfaces through the use of durab le materials such as pavers, bricks or scored concrete . Where possible , bu ildings should offer attractive pedestrian gathering spaces , such as pedes tria n plazas or courtyards , that are defined by special design features , such as planters or arcades . These gathering spaces shall be connected to the public sidewalk network . Continuous pedestrian walkways , no less than eight feet (8') in width , shall be provided from the public sidewalk or right of way to the principal customer entrance. Walkways shall connect focal points of pedestrian activity . Sidewalks, no less than eight feet (8') in width along the full length of the building, shall be provided at any fac;ade featuring a customer entrance and at any fac;ade abutting public parking areas. Such sidewalks shall be located at least six feet (6') from the fac;ade for planting beds . Weather protection features such as awnings or arcades shall be provided within thirty feet (30') of all customer entrances . Each principal building on a site shall have clearly defined , highly visible customer entrances featuring no less than three (3) of the following entryway design features : Canop ies , porticos or overhangs Recesses /projections Arcades or Arches Raised parapets w ith cornices over the doorways Peaked roof forms Outdoor patios Display windows Integral planters or wing walls Architectural or ornamental detail integrated into the building All rear and side facades that are visible from adjoining properties and/or public streets shall feature architectural characteristics similar to the main front fac;ade. The scale of adjacent parcels and adjacent residential areas should be considered in the fa9ade articulation. Landscaping and screen walls compatible with the architecture of the build ing shall be used to screen service/storage areas . The visual and acoustic impact of these service areas shall be fully contained. No attention is to be attracted to the functions of these screened 16 • • --· areas by the use of inferior or different materials to the principal materials of the building or its landscaping. No delivery, loading, trash removal or compaction shall be permitted between the hours of 10:00pm and 7:00am unless approved by the City. Variations in roof lines shall be used to add interest to large buildings and conceal rooftop HVAC equipment. Roofs shall have no less than two (2) of the following features : parapets, overhanging eaves, sloping roofs or multiple roof slopes (three or more). Parapets shall have a three dimensional cornice treatment. Overhanging eaves shall project no less than three feet (3') past the supporting walls. Sloping roofs shall not exceed the average height of the supporting walls and shall have an average slope greater than or equal to one foot (1 ') of vertical rise for every three feet (3') of horizontal run and less than or equal to one foot of vertical rise for every one foot (1 ') of horizontal run . 17 4.0 PARCEL CHARACTERISTICS • 4.1.1 Parcel Designation Parcel 1.1 District Plan Use Parking, Initial Development This parking is intended to function as shared parking for the adjacent parcels . District Plan Building Type Surface Parking or Building Type VIII -Parking Garage Allowable Dwelling Units Minimum : 30 units/acre Building Height/ Stories 17 feet above curb as a parking structure . See Attachment Number 4 in the Appendix . Building Location on Parcel Not applicable Setbacks and Building Orientation Treatment of the east face of the Parcel 1.1 should provide visual and acoustic screening to adjacent neighborhood . The South Inca Street side of the parcel should respect the neighboring houses to the east. Treatment of the south face should reflect typical Town Center character. • Parking and Pedestrian Pedestrians should be able to easily move down the west and Circulation east side of the parcel as well as travelling across Parcel 1.2. Any development must maintain the existing parking count. Vehicular Access/ Service Areas Parcel 1.1 should be accessible via West Floyd Avenue and South Inca Street. Landscaping and Greenspace Parking lot trees and parkway trees are required as a buffer to the houses to the east as well as a route to the Cinema (Parcel 1.3) See District Plan for a suggested layout. Special Site Elements (SSE) & A SSM gateway is indicated across South Inca Street at the north Special Site Markers (SSM) east corner of the parcel. Relation to Adjacent Parcel The parking on Parcel 1.1 is linked to Parcel 1.2 and Parcel 1.10 . The extension of West Floyd Avenue to the western boundary of the parcel must allow for bus circulation and also accommodate pedestrian traffic between Parcel 1.1 and 1.2 . Special Note Possible alternative uses are housing, retail services or a multi- story parking garage of more than two levels . Height is determined by building type . Transit-related uses are recommended . See other permitted uses under the Town Center P.U.D . • 18 • • • i i i / / / i I . I / ' I I .' .' .. ; ; / ' : / / / I I I I ... ! 4.0 PARCEL CHARACTERISTICS • 4.1.2 Parcel Designation Parcel 1.2 District Plan Use Parking This parking is intended to function as shared parking for the t adjacent parcels. District Plan Building Type Surface Parking or Building Type VIII -Parking Garage Allowable Dwelling Units Minimum : 30 units/acre Building Height/ Stories 17 feet above curb as a parking structure . See Attachment Number 4 in the Appendix . Building Location on Parcel Not applicable Setbacks and Building Orientation Treatment of all four sides of Parcel 1.2 should reflect typical Town Center character Parking and Pedestrian All improvements to Parcel 1.2 should promote north to south Circulation access . Any development must maintain the existing parking count. • Vehicular Access/ Service Areas Parcel 1.2 should be accessib le via West Floyd Avenue and South Inca Street. Landscaping and Greenspace Parking lot trees and parkway trees are required as part of a route to the C inema (Parcel 1.3). See District Plan for a suggested layout. Special Site Elements (SSE) & The northeast corner of Parce l 1.2 has a SSM. Special Site Markers (SSM) Relation to Adjacent Parcel The parking on Parcel 1.2 is linked to Parcel 1.1 and Parcel 1.10. The extension of West Floyd Avenue to the western boundary of the parcel must allow for bus circulation but also accommodate pedestrian traffic between Parcel 1.1 and 1.2. Special Note Possible alternative use is a multi-story parking garage of more than two levels . Transit-re lated uses are recommended . See other permitted uses under the Town Center P.U.D . • 20 • • / i I i ! j i i i . / I I I , : , ! ' ~b // • I i .JJ_// Parcel 1.2 21 1 :1 00 4.0 PARCEL CHARACTERISTICS • 4.1.3 Parcel Designation Parcel 1.3 District Plan Use Cinema/Entertainment District Plan Building Type Bu il d ing Type V -Cinema Allowable Dwelling Units Minimum : Not Applicab le Building Height/ Stories 38 feet to cornice line , 42 feet to top of parape t above curb. See Attachment Number 4 in the Appendix . Building Location on Parcel See se t bac ks be low . Setbacks and Building Orientation Structure shall fo ll ow southern bu ild-to li ne with no setbacks a ll owed at the C iv ic Plaza eleva ti on . Entr ies and drop-offs are recommended facing both Parce l 1.2 to the north and the Civic Plaza. See Section 3.10-Spec ial Retail Gu idelines . Street lev e l reta il uses are encouraged a long t he east face of the parcel. Whe n poss ible , a 1 O' setbac k off of the east and west build-to li ne is recommended . The west face of the bui ld ing shall reflect typical Town Center • character and shall not be treated as rear elevation . Parking and Pedestrian Circulation Parking is provided on Parcel 1.1, Parcel 1.2 and Parcel 1.10 . Some inc idental park ing is prov ided at the Civic Plaza . Vehicular Access/ Service Areas Drop-offs are pro vi ded fac ing Parce l 1.2 and the Civic Plaza . Serv ice is intended to occur on the north side . Landscaping and Greenspace See Dis t ric t Plan for a suggested layout. Special Site Elements (SSE) & None are anticipated . See Pa rce l 1.5. Special Site Markers (SSM) Relation to Adjacent Parcel Parcel 1.3 is linked to the park ing on Parcel 1.1 , Parcel 1.2 and Parce l 1.10. The Cinema or alternate enterta inment fac ili ty is the major backdrop for the Civic Plaza. The structure must be compatible with all Zone 1 improvements . The street level base of the structure should be articulated to resemble a multi-tenant retail street level condition and integrate Parce ls 1.4 and 1.5. Special Note Any enterta inment related use is permitted . Multi-tenant retail is also allowab le. See other perm itted uses under the Town Center P.U.D . • 22 .· • • •• ~ • l I . L:::J : i 4' Q // ---1 i D ; Ii Parcel 1.3 23 .· 4.0 PARCEL CHARACTERISTICS • 4.1.4 Parcel Designation Parcel 1.4 District Plan Use Retail or Entertainment with a link to public transit uses District Plan Building Type Building Type VII -Reta il (<15K square feet) Allowable Dwelling Units Not applicab le Building Height/ Stories 23 feet I two stories . See Attachment Number 4 in the Append ix . Bu i lding Location on Parcel See setbacks below . Setbacks and Building Orientation Structure shall foll ow all build-to li nes with no setbacks allowed on Civic Plaza elevation . Parking and Pedestrian Circulation Park ing is anticipated to come from Parce l 1.2 and Parcel 1. 9. Pedestrian circulat ion shall be from the east or west side of Parcel 1.3-C in ema . Vehicular Access/ Service Areas Drop-offs are possible via the Civic Plaza . Service can occur • from the Civic Plaza . Landscaping and Greenspace Not applicable . See Civ ic Plaza plan . Special Site Elements (SSE) & None are anticipated . Special Site Markers (SSM) Relation to Adjacent Parcel Expans ion of Parce l 1.4 may be increased into the footprint of Parcel 1.3-C inema/Entertainment. Special Note Any retail use is permitted . See other permitted uses under the Town Cen ter P.U.D . • 24 • • ---· ~i:::::; I 1 -fl ! / tl:i ! I -=:...:._-;/ / [) i; 'I lo /! ' I \CCOJICD:) Parcel 1.4 25 1 :100 ,/ 4.0 PARCEL CHARACTERISTICS • ~-- 4.1.5 -- Parcel Designation Parcel 1.5 District Plan Use Restaurant, Retail or Entertainment with a link to public transit uses District Plan Building Type Build ing Type IV -Restaurant or Build ing Type VI -Retail (<15K square feet) Allowable Dwelling Units Minimum : Not Applicable Building Height/ Stories 23 feet I two stories maximum for both Restaurant or Retail. See Attachment Number 4 in the Appendix . Building Location on Parcel See setbacks below . Setbacks and Building Orientation Structure shall follow all build-to lines with no setbacks allowed on C ivic Plaza elevation .. Parking and Pedestrian Parking is anticipated to come from Parcel 1.2 and Parcel 1.10 . Circulation Pedestrian circulation shall be from the east or west side of Parcel 1.3-Cinema/Entertainment or across the Civic Plaza . Vehicular Access/ Service Areas Drop-offs are possible via the Civic Plaza. Service can occur from the Civic Plaza . • Landscaping and Greenspace Not applicable . See C ivic Plaza plan. Special Site Elements (SS.E) & A SSE is indicated on the Civic Plaza . It shalf align visually with Special Site Markers (SSM) South Inca Street to the south . Relation to Adjacent Parcel Expansion of Parcel 1. 5 may be increased into the footprint of Parcel 1.3-Cinema. Special Note Any retail use is permitted . See other permitted uses under the Town Center P.U .D . • 26 • .. • • • : I 17 ii tt:f 'I ----; ! D .."/ 1s:i / i I I cn::xx::ccco Parcel 1.5 27 ·' 4.0 PARCEL CHARACTERISTICS • 4.1.6 Parcel Designation Parcel 1.6 .. District Plan Use Retail or Entertainment with a link to public transit uses • District Plan Building Type Building Type VII -Retail ( <15K square feet) Allowable Dwelling Units Not applicable Building Heightl Stories 23 feet I two stories . See Attachment Number 4 in the Appendix. Building Location on Parcel See setbacks below . Setbacks and Building Orientation Structure shall follow all build-to lin es. Parking and Pedestrian Circulation Park ing is ant ic ipated to come from for on Parcel 1.2 and Parce l 1.9 to the southwest of City Hall. Pedestr ian circulation shall be from the C ivic Plaza . Vehicular Access/ Service Areas Drop-offs are possible via the Civic Plaza . Service can occur from the Civic Plaza or possibly from the City Hall loading area • via the RTD bus turnaround loop . Landscaping and Greenspace Not app li cab le. See Civi c Plaza plan. Special Site Elements (SSE) & None are anticipated . Special Site Markers (SSM) Relation to Adjacent Parcel The building must be compatible with the RTD station , C ivic Plaza , and Civic Center. Special Note Any retail use is permitted . See other permitted uses under the Town Center P.U.D . • 28 • • •• ~~ // • Ii CJ ;; --·--// [) ·i 'r:i // "'' / "'' . ' / i / .: f;i I Parcel 1.6 29 4.0 PARCEL CHARACTERISTICS • 4.1.7 Parcel Designation Parcel 1.7 District Plan Use Civic Center, including City Hall , Public Library and a Cultural Arts Center District Plan Building Type Building Type Ill --Civic Allowable Dwelling Units Not applicable Building Height/ Stories 55 feet I three stories . See Attachment Number 4 in the Appendix. Building Location on Parcel Not applicable . Existing structure . Setbacks and Building Orientation Not applicable . Existing structure . Parking and Pedestrian Circulation . Parking is anticipated to come from Parcel 1. 9 to the southwest of City Hall. Pedestrian circulat ion shall be from the Civic Plaza and from the parking area on Parcel 1. 9. Vehicular Access/ Service Areas Drop-offs are possible via the Civic Plaza or Parcel 1.9. • Service can occur from the Civic Plaza or from the City Hall loading area off of the RTD bus turnaround loop . Landscaping and Greenspace See District Plan and Civic Plaza plan for recommended landscaping. Special Site Elements (SSE) & None are anticipated . Special Site Markers (SSM) Relation to Adjacent Parcel The Civic Center will be the major backdrop for the Civic Plaza . Special Note Any appropriate institu tional , office or retail use may be permitted. See other permitted uses under the Town Center P.U.D . • 30 ~··' • • •• -:b ,:!/ -/J .'I _; ! ---1 I .Q i; i i 'o l/ ~ .. !/ // '' ': ~/ i c::::r=:i I I . Parcel 1.7 31 4.0 PARCEL CHARACTERISTICS • 4.1.8 Parcel Designation Parcel 1.8 District Plan Use Reta il, Entertainment, Office above First Floor District Plan Building Type Building Type VI -Reta il (>1 SK square feet) Allowable Dwelling Units Minimum : 30 units/acre Building Height/ Stories 43 feet I one , two , or three story structure is perm itted . See Attachment Number 4 in the Appendix . Building Location on Parcel See se tbac ks be low . Setbacks and Building Structure shall follow all bu il d-to li nes , and shall respect the Civic Orientation Center Plaza . Parking and Pedestrian Park ing w ill be prov ided on Parce l 1.9 to the southwest of the Civic Circulation Center or Parcel 1.2. Pedestrian circulation shall be from the C iv ic Plaz a and from the parkin g on Parce l 1.2 or Parce l 1. 9. Vehicular Access/ Service Areas Drop-offs are possib le via the Civ ic Plaza or Parcel 1. 9. Service • can occur from the Civic Plaza or South Inca Street south of the C ivic Plaza . Landscaping and Greenspace See District Plan and Civic Plaza plan for recommended landscaping . Special Site Elements (SSE) & None are ant ic ipated . Special Site Markers (SSM) Relation to Adjacent Parcel The structure must be compatible with the Civic Plaza and all Zone 1 improvements . The street level base of the structure shou ld be articulated to resemb le a multi-tenant retail street level cond ition . Special Note Any reta il or appropriate use is permitted . Aux il iary uses to the C ivic Center are recommended . See other perm itted uses under the Town Center P.U.D . • 32 • I • I I ~ I I I c::::::::J -· i I c:::::=:i 33 r=r::i I ~ c:::::=:J I Parcel 1.8 1 :100 4.0 PARCEL CHARACTERISTICS • 4.1.9 Parcel Designation Parcel 1.9 District Plan Use Parking ; Initial development This parking is intended to function as shared parking for the adjacent parcels . District Plan Building Type Building Type VIII -Two Level Parking Garage or Multi-story Parking Garage of more than two levels Allowable Dwelling Units Minimum: 30 units/acre Building Height/ Stories 17 feet above curb as a two level parking structure ; 40 feet above curb as a mu lti-story parking garage Building Location on Parcel Any proposed structure should be located close to Santa Fe Drive and/or close to Hampden Avenue . The existing commerc ial structure at the intersection of Santa Fe Drive and Hampden Avenue shall also be accommodated by any new structure. Setbacks and Building Orientation Any proposed structure shall be set back from the Civic Center • (Parcel 1. 7) and Parcel 1.8. It sha ll oe oriented to provide an inviting elevation on both Santa Fe Drive and Hampden Avenue that should reflect typical Town Center character. Parking and Pedestrian Circulation Parcel 1.9 is a shared parking area that shall emphasize the ground level and second floor access to the south elevation of the C ivic Center. Access to th e Civic Plaza should be channeled between Parcel 1. 7 and Parcel 1. 8. Vehicular Access/ Service Areas Parcel 1.9 is intended to be accessible from Hampden Avenue and South Inca Street. Landscaping and Greenspace Any proposed parking structure shall provide landscaping along any pedestrian route to the Civ ic Center and accommodate trees indicated on the District Plan around the base of the Civic Center. Special Site Elements (SSE) & A SSM is indicated at the southeast corner of the parcel as part Special Site Markers (SSM) of a gateway across South Inca Street at Hampden Avenue . Relation to Adjacent Parcel The parking on Parcel 1. 9 is li nked most strongly to the Civic Center and secondarily to C ivic Plaza related uses . Special Note Any proposed structure should provide a favorable and inviting v isual impression of the Town Center due to its high visibility from Hampden Avenue and Santa Fe Drive . • 34 • • Hampden Avenue Parcel 1.9 • 35 4.0 PARCEL CHARACTERISTICS • 4.1.10 Parcel Designation Parce l 1.10 District Plan Use Parking ; Initial deve lopment Th is parking is intended to function as shared parking for the ad j acen t parce ls. District Plan Building Type Surface Parking or Bu ild ing Type VIII -Parking Garage Allowable Dwelling Units M in imum : 20 un its /acre The typ ical District Plan dens ity has been reduced to encourage a transit ion to the exis ti ng hous ing to the north . Building Height/ Stories 17 fee t above cur b as a park ing structure . See Attachment Number 4 in the Appendix. Building Location on Parcel Str uc tu re sha ll follow build-to li nes . Setbacks and Building T reat ment of the north face of th e Parce l 1.10 shou ld prov ide Orientation visual sc reen ing of park in g and respec t th e ne igh bo ri ng houses to th e nort h. Trea tment of all faces should reflect typical Town Cen ter character . • Parking and Pedestrian Pedestrians shou ld be able to eas il y move down the west and east Circulation side of the parcel. The street between Parcel 1. 1 O and Parcel 1.11 is to be tr eated as pedes trian zone that is open to veh icu lar traffic . Vehicular Access/ Service Areas Parcel 1.10 may be accessed vi a West Floyd Avenue , South Inca Street or South Galapago Stree t. Landscaping and Greenspace Park ing lot trees and parkway trees are required as a buffer to the houses to the north as well as to the south , east and west. See District Plan for recommended layout. Special Site Elements (SSE) & A SSM is ind icated at the northeast and northwest corner of the Special Site Markers (SSM) parce ls as part of gateways across South Galapago Street and South Inca Street respect ivel y. - Relation to Adjacent Parcel The park ing on Parce l 1.10 is li nked to Parcel 1.2. The street between Parcel 1.10 and Parcel 1.11 is to be treated as pedestrian zone that is open to vehicular traffic . Special Note A mu lti-story park ing ga rage of more than two leve ls with poss ible retail at the ground floor may replace the existing structure. Parcel 1.10 may also be developed with residential development similar to Parce ls 1. 11 and 1. 12 at a lesser density . He ight is determined by bu il d ing type . See other permitted uses under the Town Center P.U.D . • 36 • • • I / I 00 I ! ~t--------~ r-------·----1 r--------i Parcel 1.10 37 4.0 PARCEL CHARACTERISTICS • 4.1.11 Parcel Designation Parcel 1.11 District Plan Use Mixed use structure of Retail at the ground level and Residential uses above . District Plan Building Type Building Type I and Type II -Multifamily Residential & Residential above Retail Allowable Dwelling Units Minimum : 30 units/acre Building Heightl Stories 33 feet above curb for multifamily residential & 43 feet above curb for Residential above Retail A four story building is recommended as an optimal height whether Building Type I or Type II is used . See Attachment Number 4 in the Appendix . Building Location on Parcel Structure shall follow all build-to lines . The paved area to the north of the bu ilding footprint has been attached to this particular parcel. Setbacks and Building Treatment of all faces should reflect typical Town Center character. Orientation See Building Type Matrix in the Appendix . • Parking and Pedestrian Parking for the residential component shall be provided beneath or Circulation at ground level of the structure . Additional parking for retail and accessory uses is planned for the paved drive area to the north of the building and for Englewood Parkway to the south of the building. Pedestrians should be able to easily circulate around all sides of the parcel. See the Building Type Matrix for maximum allowable parking . Vehicular Access/ Service Parking access for the building on Parcel 1.12 shall be via the street Areas between Parcel 1.12 and Parcel 3.1 or South Galapago Street. Landscaping and Greenspace Parkway trees are required as per the District Plan . Trees, landscaping and lawns are required within any courtyard space . Special Site Elements (SSE) & A SSE is designated at the southwest and southeast corner of the Special Site Markers (SSM) parcel. The southwest SSE must be compatible with other SSEs on the Civic Plaza . Relation to Adjacent Parcel Parcel 1.11 is strongly linked to the Civic Plaza and the Englewood Parkway . The west face shall provide a transition to developments in Zone 2. It shall be compatible at a high level with any proposed structure at Parcel 1.12 . Special Note See other permitted uses under the Town Center P.U.D. • 38 • • • , ' I t:=:::i , Q ,/ b ~'/ I i .' f;).: Parcel 1.11 39 4.0 PARCEL CHARACTERISTICS • 4.1.12 · Parcel Designation Parcel 1.12 District Plan Use Mixed use structure of Retail at th e ground level and Residential uses above . District Plan Building Type Build ing Type I and Type II -Multifamily Residential & Residential above Retail Allowable Dwelling Units Min imum: 30 units/acre Building Height/ Stories 33 feet above curb for multifamily residential & 43 feet above curb for Residential above Retail A four story building is recommended as an optimal height whether Bu il ding Type I or Type II is used . See Attachment Number 4 in the Appendix . Building Location on Parcel Structure shall follow all build-to line s. Setbacks and Building Treatment of all faces should reflect typical Town Center character. Orientation See Building Type Matr ix in th e Appendix. • Parking and Pedestrian Parking for the residential component shall be provided beneath or Circulation at ground level of the structure . See the Bu il ding Type Matrix for maximum allowab le parking . Additional parking for retail and accessory uses is planned for the paved drive area to the south of the building and for Eng lewood Parkway to the north of the building. Pedestrians should be able to easily circulate around all sides of the parce l. Vehicular Access/ Service Areas Parking access for the building on Parce l 1.11 shall be via the street between Parcel 1.11 and Parcel 1. 1 O, South Inca Street or South Galapago Street Landscaping and Greenspace Parkway trees are requi red as per the District Plan . Trees , landscaping and lawns are required within any courtyard space. Special Site Elements (SSE) & Two SS Es are designated at the northwest corner of the parcel. Special Site Markers (SSM) One SSE is designated at the northeast corner of the parcel. The northwest corner SSEs must be compatible with other SSEs on the Civic Plaza . Relation to Adjacent Parcel Parcel 1.12 is strongly linked to the Civic Plaza and the Englewood Parkway . The west face shall provide a transition to developments in Zone 2. It shall be highly compatible with any proposed structure at Parcel 1.11 . Special attention shall be given to the south elevation due to it s visibility from Hampden Avenue . • Special Note See other permitted uses under the Town Center P.U.D. 40 • • 0 '$ $ $ Hampden Avenue Parcel 1.12 • 41 4.0 PARCEL CHARACTERISTICS • 4.2.1 Parcel Designation Parcel 2 .1 District Plan Use Retail use (reserved for a sing le large tenant) & Parking; Initial development. District Plan Building Type Type VI -Retail (>20K square f eet); Surface Parking or Building Type VIII -Two Level Parking Garage Allowable Dwelling Units Minimum : 30 units/acre Building Height/ Stories An average of 36 feet above st reet curb w.ith no portion of the bu il d ing to exceed 60 feet. Development of t h is parcel is not subj ect to the bu ilding he ight restr iction set forth in Attachment Number 4 in the Appendix . Building Location on Parcel The Dis t rict Plan indicates t he bu i ld ing to be located to the north on the parcel with parking to the north and south of Eng lewood Parkway. Setbacks and Building Orientation Se t backs are flex ib le. The main entry to t he building should be oriented to Englewood Parkway. The north elevation shall respect t h e houses to the north and the ir views of the north • elevation of any proposed bu il d ing . The st reet level base of the structure should be articulated to resemble a multi-tenant retail street level condition. Improvements shou ld reflect typical Town Center character. See Sect ion 3 .8-Spec ial Retail Guidelines. Parking and Pedestrian Parking is provided to the south of the building. Access across Circulation Englewood Parkway between the two parking areas is to be facilitated via traffic signage controls and paving. Pedestrians shou ld be able to travel on both South Galapago Street and South Elati Street as well as across the surface parking area to Parcel 2 .3 . Vehicular Access/ Service Areas A vehicular drop-off area is ind icated on the south side of the building at the main entry and a delivery access and service area is indicated on the north s ide. The east side is ind icated as a secondary service area to accommodate auxiliary retail functions. Access to the park ing area is from both South Galapago Street and South Elati Street between Parcels 2.1 and 2 .3 as well as from Englewood Parkway. Landscaping and Greenspace The park ing lot trees and parkway trees indicated on the District P lan a re intended to buffer and reduce the impact of the surface parking and service areas. Special Site Elements (SSE) & A SSM gateway is indicated at the west side of the intersection of Special Site Markers (SSM) Eng lewood Parkway and South Elati Street. • Relation to Adjacent Parcel Strong architectural details and landscaping help to integrate this s ite with the rest of the Town Center development. Special Note Retail and surface parking area are the intended uses for this 42 • • • Special Note site . See other permitted uses under the Town Center P.U.D . Futu re redevelopment should encourage multi-use buildings located on Englewood Parkway . 43 • • • --~1; IJ ;: "i5 /: 'o i,.• r-------+;Q....., @:€} Parcel 2.1 44 1:100 -- • 4.0 PARCEL CHARACTERISTICS 4.2.3 Parcel Designation Parcel 2.3 (consists of Parcel 2.3a to the west and Parcel 2.3b to the east.) District Plan Use Two retail structures are proposed with a surface parking lot in between. Parcel 2.3a and Parcel 2.3b are differentiated by the proposed retail structures District Plan Building Type Parcel 2 .3a is Building Type VII (<20K square feet) Parcel 2.3b is Buildinq Type VI (>20K square feet) Allowable Dwelling Units Minimum : 30 units/acre Building Height/ Stories Parcel 2 .3a: 23 feet above street curb. Parcel 2.3b: 26 feet above street curb. See Attachment Number 4 in the Appendix. Building Location on Parcel Proposed buildings shall be located to the east and west edges of the parcel. Proposed build ings should be adjusted to the north to accommodate services areas ind icated to the south. Setbacks and Building Orientation Any proposed structure shall align with the eastern and western • parcel edges. Improvements should reflect typical Town Center character. Parking and Pedestrian Parking is to be shared between the two retail uses. Pedestrians Circulation should be able to travel on bo t h South Galapago Street and South Elati Street as wel l as across the surface parking area to both Parcel 2.3a and Parcel 2 .3b. Vehicular Access/ Service Areas Access to the parking area is fro m both South Galapago Street and South Elati Street between Parcel 2.1 and Parcel 2 .3 . Service for Parcel 2.3a is via West Hampden Avenue or South Galapago Street. Ser\tice for Parcel 2 .3b is from South Elati Street. Structures and parking must be coordinated with the existinq bank facility parkinq to the south Landscaping and Greenspace T he parking lot trees and parkway trees indicated on the District Plan are intended to buffer and reduce the impact of the surface park in q and service areas . Special Site Elements (SSE) & None are anticipated . Special Site Markers (SSM) Relation to Adjacent Parcel Parcel 2 .3a and Parcel 2 .3b must be integrated with Parcel 2.1 . Special Note In conjunction with Parcel 2 .1, a mixed-use development similar to Parcel 1.12 may be possible. See other permitted uses under • the Town Center P.U.D . 45 • • • ... a I' ·t:=::J I I -Q // --.,, ; D l/ Ii 'o ; I Hampden Avenue Parcel 2.3 46 4.0 PARCEL CHARACTERISTICS • 4.2.4 Parcel Designation Current use is a public space with a water feature District Plan Use Public Open Space District Plan Building Type Public Plaza Allowable Dwelling Units Not applicable Building Height/ Stories Not applicable Building Location on Parcel Not applicable Setbacks and Building Orientation Any improvements should reflect typical Town Center character and present an appropr iate face for the Town Center to Hampden Avenue They should also provide appropriate visual termination to the view south from Parcel 2.1 and an acoustic/visual screening of Hampden Avenue from the Town Center. Parking and Pedestrian Circulati on Existing diagonal parking should be accommodated in any redevelopment activity and it should be coordinated with • proposed vehicular circulation patterns . Access to the improvements on Parcel 2.4 should be easily accessible from Parcel 2.3a and 2.3b and from the existing facilities on Hampden Avenue . Vehicular Access/ Service Areas Any redevelopment should maintain appropriate site lines for vehicular access to the site from Hampden Avenue. Landscaping and Greenspace Any redevelopment should provide appropriate landscaping that reflects the Town Center character . Special Site Elements (SSE) & None are anticipated on site . A SSM is indicated at the Special Site Markers (SSM) northeast corner of the intersection of Hampden Avenue and South Galapago Street and forms a gateway with a SSM across Galapago Street. Relation to Adjacent Parcel The current improvements act as an amenity to the current bank structure to the west. Any redevelopment should continue this function or accommodate any future tenants . Special Note Existing conditions are to remain . Any redevelopment should reflect the character of the Town Center, be compatible with existing structures to the west and east and provide a positive presence on to Hampden Avenue . See other permitted uses under the Town Center P.U.D . • 47 • • --· .,. • I/ t:::::J I , IJ : : 1 ! §:@ §:§ §:§ ~ §:§ ~ ~ @:§ @=@ ~ §:§ §::@ Hampden Avenue Parcel 2.4 48 1 :100 4.0 PARCEL CHARACTERISTICS • 4.3.1 Parcel Designation Parcel 3.1 (includes Parcel 3.1 a to the west and Parcel 3 .1 b to the east) District Plan Use Two Retail structures are proposed with a surface parking lot in between . District Plan Building Type Parcel 3.1 a is Building Type VII -Retail ( <20K square feet) Parcel 3.1 b is Building Type VII -Retail ( <20K square feet) Allowable Dwelling Units Not app li cab le Building Height/ Stories Parcel 3.1 a: 23 feet above street curb . Parcel 3.1 b: 23 feet above street curb . See Attachm ent Number 4 in the Appendix. Building Location on Parcel Proposed buildings sha ll be located to the east and west edges of the parcel. Proposed buildings should be adjusted to th e south along Hampden Avenue to accommodate service areas to the north . Setbacks and Building Orientation Any proposed structure shall ali gn with the eastern and western parcel edges. Improvements should reflect typical Town Center character . The buildings all have four sided architecture . • Parking and Pedestrian Circulation Parking is to be shared between the two retail uses with any overflow parking being prov ided by Parcel 3.1 . Pedestrians should be able to travel on bo th South Galapago Street and South Inca Street into the Town Center. Pedestr ians should also be able to cross the surface parking area between the bu il dings to Parcel 1.12 as well as to the parking on Parcel 1. 9. Vehicular Access/ Service Areas Access to the parking area is off of both South Galapago Street and South Inca Street. Landscaping and Greenspace Parking lot trees and parkway trees are indicated on the District Plan . The trees are intended to buffer and reduce the impact of the surface parking area . Trees are required along the south edge of the parcel screening Hampden Avenue . Special Site Elements (SSE) & A SSM gateway is indicated across South Inca Street and Special Site Markers (SSM) across South Galapago Street. The SSMs are indicated as being incorporated into the bu il dings , but they may be freestanding . Relation to Adjacent Parcel Parking on Parcel 3 .1 may be by shared with Parcel 1.9. Special Note See other permitted uses under the Town Center P.U.D . • 49 • 3.1.2 3.1.6 I 0 I $-··-·-------: ---·----~ I Hampden Avenue • Parcel 3.1 2.1 -··· 50 Appendix • Attachment Number 1: District Plan Attachment Number 1A: Civic Plaza Plan Attachment Number 2 : District Plan Zone Designations Attachment Number 3: District Plan Parcel Designations Attachment Number 4: Building Type Matrix (2 sheets) Attachment Number 5: Road Type Plan Attachment Number 6: Road Types ( 11 sheets) Attachment Number 7 : Approved Design Elements Attachment Number 8: City of Eng lewood Landscaping Standards Attachment Number 9 : City of Englewood Sign Code • • 51 • ~ (1q • ~ (D ~ 0 U8 E U 0 r· tJ 8 u 0.... 8 u V> 8 u ....; EU ;;» s u ~ n ....; 0 "O ~ r >- z ~ ' o I "' I "'! :i'~ n )> ~ (D = Ill 0 :::T ~ 3 (1) ::::J -°' cZ ~ rt iii" c: :!. 3 (D 0 C"' -C1> ~ ., DI ..... ::I •• H • =a = ~__J//u-:ucuLl -= D =rE I _ ~::-= IJ - I ------~q o ~{JDG O s::i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~- DI STRICT PLAN ZONE DESIGNATION I E n g 1 ewood Town Center ZONE I -~~ ""' ~--=--==-- . ( a·,-~, : l L.Ul'4.t. J . ~ J, .l.J l-.rl);:::d I ~ .. -~ 50' 150' 600' ' I. ' ----. I .I -....... R~""' 0 700· 300 ' ---- Attachment Number 2: District Plan Zone Designations • • • • • DISTRICT PLAN P A R C E L DES!GN :\TION Englewood T o w n !Wnpden Ave. (H wy 285) t 1 r 1 r 1 r 1 r * DENOTES SPECIAL SITE ELE.\fE:-JT • DENOTES SPECIAL SITE MAR.KER • • I Center ====~= 50' 150' 600' ----0 100' 300' Attachment Number 3: Di strict Plan Parce l Designations • • • BUILDING HEIGHT TYPE I Multifamily Residential E n g 1 e w -I ... TYPE II 11 TYPE-:rn--1 1 . Residential ABOVE Retail i Civic \ ======= TYPEN Restaurant 0 I I I I I BUILDJ'.'JG T Y P E S I 0 d T 0 w n c e n TYPEV Cinema 11 ii TYPE VI ~ I ·1 TYPE VII TYPE VIII Retail (> 20 K s. f.) Retail (<20K s.f.) Parking Structures I I Ftr~. I ~I i ~....,,., :I 1cr I 1cr 1cr ~. :: R~· . _ d P.Rcr 33' l I n --"' I I 138' -II I . " tcr I (INDICATEDBUllDlNG ·' --------1 171' I ! \26 ' ·1 ~ 23' . H~ RECO~~HEIGHT;i 13' 13' 13' 13' I 17 ' 20 · I J J J !I I 13' I ,J; i ~· t A10%VAA!l.TIONIS ,MIN .80%0Ff-'o.DEMUSTBE ll·MIN .80%0FFAo.DEMl:STBE I MIN .80%0FFAUDEMUSTBE ll 1\ II II '11· L_J AllOWABL.E.) l 3STORIESOR32". 4STORIES OR 42". I SS'.(20%,L<YEXTENDT06S) I ! ·==========! BUILDING i FAUDESHAUBEBUILT UPTOTHE 11 FAo.DE SHAUBEBUil.TUP ii FACADESH.ill..BEBUIJ..TL"P !1 FAUDESHAUBEBUU.TUP l ZONE!• F.K.\DESHAll.BE :1 FAC.\DESHAUBEBUL.TUP 'i PLACEMENT : ~ PROPERTY LINE ALONG 80% O F THEIR I' I TO THE PROPERTY I.DIE 11 TO THE PROPERTY LINE TO THE PROPERTY LINE ' BUil.T l.J-P TO THE PROPERTY . I TO THE PROPER TI' t..:NE 1 · LE.~Gnt WITHOUT A.."'N SETBACK TO A ALOSG 80"/, OF ntE.IR ALONG 80'/o OF THEIR ALONG SQ"/, OF TiiEIR LINE ALO~G 00'% OF THEIR i I ALONG 80"1• OF TilEIR I MINIMUM HEIGHT OF THREE STORIE.5. LE.'\JGTH \rITHOLI A..'4"Y ! LE.NGTH trrrnOL"T ANY LENGTH \'t'TT1-10Lrr :\1'1Y , LENGTI-l 1XTTHOtrr :\NY LENGTH \rITHOUT Ar-.."l' 'I SETllACK. 11 SETIIACK. : SETIIACK. ; I SETllACK. 1. ! SETllACK. FAC\DE SHAU BE BUil. T UP TO THE PROPERTI' LINE ALONG 80% OFTiiEIR LE.'\lGTH wrrnotrr AJ'l't. SETBACK I ! 1·1 '1 I '1\ ZONE 2 ·'-"'D 3, SEE : : I '1· ' i I . . t .. DlSTillCT PL-\N AND '. ! NOTE.o NO SETllACKS NOTE.o NO SETllACKS I NOTE1 so SETllACKS I NOTE1 NO SETBACKS ' DESIG N ST.l.. ... 'DARDS FOR NOTE.o NO SETBACKS All.OWED 1N ZONE 1. AllOWED IN ZONE L All.0\ITD IN ZONE L I All.OIX'ED 1N ZONE L I REQUIRED BUILDING I All.OWED 1N ZONI'. !. . All.OWED I i:::::=======I ' 1. 1 1 LOCATION . I i I ll i~TIONS !'i' D !'. D I D !\ D :1 [J I D :\~I "--'-'==.;:::=:;=1==11 NOTE.: '.'JO SETBACKS N ZONEL BUILDING ' I 'I I l LJ VOLUME I I i ~ : ~ . I ~ I RECESSED BALCONIES & I RECESSED BALCONIES & i 1' RECESS ED BALC ONIES & I RECESSED BALCONIES & ENTRIES ARE ill.OWED A 6' I i ENTRIES ARE All.OWED A 6' i I I ENTRIES ARE AllOWED A 6' I ENTRIES ARE .ill.OWED A 6' SETBACK FROM BLDG. FACE . '. RECESSED BALCONIES & 'SETBACK FROM BLDG . FACE . ·.: RECESSED B.\LCONIES & I REC ESSED BALC ONlf.S & '' SETBACK FROM BLDG. FACE. SETllACKFROM BLDG . FACE. BUTl'OTWITHIN 25· OF BLD G. I II ENTRIES ARE All.OWED A 6' ii BUTNOTWITHIN 25'0F BLDG. ' ENTRIES ARE .ill.OWED A 6' ENTRlESARE All.OWED A 6' jBu'T NOTWITHIN 25' O F BLDG. f:========::; CORNER. SETllACK FO RM BLDG. : CORNER 1 I SETBACK FORM BLDG. I SETllACK FORM BLDG . i CORNER 1 ~J'1 ': 1.ssPACES uNrr II .s~!~~u;roF ii 2mACES 1CXX>s.F. ii 2o sPACES 1CXX>s.E :\ 1sPACE JsE.m I\ s.ssP.\CES 1CXX>s.F. 11 'I I S SPACES 1 lCXXl S.f SHARED PARKNG IS REQUIRED I I ENTRANCE ,1 ENl1lIES MUST BE WELL I ENTRIES MUST BE 1t'E!1. 11 ENTRIES MUST BE WELL I DEFINED AND MAY BE DEFINEDANDMAYBE :1 DEFINED AND •tW BE RECESSED AS NOTED IN i v~~s":6'~~G I RECESSED AS NOTED ~ VAA!!.TIONS TO BUILDING VAA!!.TIONS TO BUILDn<G VOLUME VOLUME VOLUME GLASS !GLAZING SHAU BE a.E.AR OR GLAZING SH.ill.. BE CL.E..o.R O R : I Ii GLAZING SHAUBEa.E.AR O R GLAZING SHAU BE ClL\R OR GLAZING SH.o\ll. BE CU.\!\ OR 11 GL>.ZJNG SHAU BE CLEAll O R UGHTL Y TINTED NON-UGHTI..YTINTEDNON· UGHTLYTINTED~ON-,I UGHTI...Y 'I'ThrrED NON-UGHTLYTINTED NON· II UGHTL Y TINTED NON- REFLECTING GLASS REFLECTING GLASS. RE.FLECI'DJG GL<\SS. i REFLECTING GLASS REFLECTING GLASS . i I REFLECTING GLASS GLAZING@ PLAZA LEVEI. STREET FROt-..'TAGE WALLS 1 STREET FROl'<'TAGE WALLI i SHAU BE MAXIMIZED TO SHAU CO ITTAIN 60"/• OF I SHA.LL COZ...'7A.Thl 6QIA OF 1 PROMOTE PEDESTRL\..N I UNOBSTRt:CTED GLAZING I UNOBSTRUCTED GU:'.ING 'I I ACTIVITY l1 I e r Attachment Number 4: • • • Building Type Matrix (Sheet 1 of 2) • • STREET LEVEL MATERIALS B C L D I N G T Y P E S L E n g 1 e w 0 0 d T 0 w n c e n TYPE VI TYPE VII I TYPE VIII ·I ·[ Retail (>!SK s.f.) I' Reml (<15K s.f.) Parking Structures !l TYPE I TYPE II i TYPE III :I TYPE IV i1 TYPEV 1 I Multifamily Residential 1· Re sidential ABOVE Retail ! Gvic ii Resourant ,I Cinema ii I jf li ,! A 15' HJGH BA5E OF A 15' HlGH BA5E OF ! I A 15' HlGH BASE OF · 1 A 15" HJGH BA5E OF 'I A 15' HlGH BASE OF A 15' HJGH BA5E OF d A 15' J{]GH BASE O F : l A 15' HJ GH BA5E O F mc1cENous STOKE OR INDIGENous STONE OR I ThlDIGEN ous sro~E o R 1 I INDIGfil.:ous srosE o R I INDIGE.-..:ous STONE OR INDIGENous STONE o R r>;DIGE'.\Jous sro:;-.c oR INDIGENous STONE oR BRICK OR CONCRETE BRICK O R CONCRETE I BRICK O R COl'CRETE BRICK O R COl'CRETE '1 I BRICK OR CONCRETE BRICK OR CONCRETE BRICK O R CONCRETE t BRICK OR CONCRETE MASONRY UNITS 1 MASONRY LTNTrS +; MASONRY UNITS SH.\ll BE JI MASO!'-.'RY Li'JITS SHA.LL BE \t.ASOr-.:RY \..~ITS SH.AU. BE ~f.ASONRY UNITS SH.All BE \1.ASO~"RY UNITS Si-l\.ll. BE I' \L\SONRY L~ SHAll BE I I CONSISTE.'IT ALO!'G so.·. OF I CONSJSTE."-r .'.LONG 80% OF I CONSISTENT ALONG 80% OF CONS!STE.'IT .'.LONG 80% OF CONS!STI.. ..... -r ALONG 80'1, O F j I CONSISTE!'.'T .'.LONG 80% OF I. BASE SH.ALL BE CONS!S!Dff .• Bf.SE SH.ALL BE CONSISTENT TiiE BUIUJC'<G B.\SE I THE Blill.DING BASE I TiiE BL"ll . .D!NG BA5E THE BUU.D!NG BA5E TiiE BUIUJING B.\SE 1' THE Blill.DING BA5E 'I ii t ,, .'.LONG 80% ~'.:.s~ Blill.DING ; i,· ALONG 80% ~'.:.s~ Blill.DL'IQ'' I I i ! I , I '• =====,;::::======= 11 ! !! 11= ===== 1 : BUILDING WAI..LS MAY BE BUil..DrNG \'t"All..S ?-.f.AY BE I BUllDING WAU..S \l-\Y BE 11 BUILl)[SC 't"AU..S \tAY BE BUilJ)r-:G \'fA.I..l..S t.iA Y BE BUILl)rNG \VAI..l...5 ~t-4. Y BE BL'Ul)[..ZG WAU.S \t\Y BE EXTERI OR WALLS MATERIALS BUll.DING WALLS 'IAY BE CLID L~ srucco OR :\ .. 1' ... Y oF: ! CL.\.D IN WOOD, srucco O R CLill IN sn:cco OR ."-1."'...i-Y OF ' a_m L'l STI.JCCO OR .\XY OF ii Cl.AD L'i STIJCCO OR ·"-'··y OF ! I CL\D L'\'. sn.icco OR A..i'IY OF CLl.D [N sn;cco OR ru-...J' OF I! CL\D IN STI..'CCO O R :\ .... '""{ OF ' . ANY OF THE ABOVE LISTED TiiE ABOVE LISTED BASE THE ABOVE LISTED 6.\SE I TiiE ABOVE LISTED B.\SE . THE .>JlO\'E LISTED B.\SE THE ABOVE LISTED BA5E I TiiE AfOVE LISTED BA5E BASE MA'!CR..lALS MATI:RL\.LS I MATERL\LS 'I ~1ERL>\l...S \L\TERL\LS MATERL\LS I \f.ATERL>\l...S 'I I ii !• :1 :I ii I I ' I• 'I IBE ABOVE LISTED BASE MATERJ.'.LS i i 11 1'L 11 '!. , I 1 1 11 i !! ii !, r========1r============-===============-============'..!::=============-============-===============-========================= COLORS LIGHTING I i COW RS MUST BE C-."DIGE.'iOUS AN D CO~fl>U-\CE.1'1 ARY TO THE BUU.T .\.'\.'D ~A 11JRAL El"NlRO~MENT OF ENGLEWOOD. FACADE CO LORS SHAU. BE LOW REFI..£CT.ANCE. SUBTLE. SElJTilAL OR E.\RTii TONE COLORS . TI£E USE OF HlGH INTENSITY COLORS. METALJ.l C COLDRS. BLACK O R FLUORESCE.'IT COLORS IS PROHIBITED. 'I GREENS PACE AREAS WITiiTN i I ENI1UES AND PLAZ..\ LEVEL 'I I PARKING ARE.\S 'ruST TiiE RESIDEN""TL\L SPACES '!UST REMAIN UT REMAJN UTTHROlJGHOv"r DEVELOP~ MU ST THROt:GHOliTTHE E.'-"TIRE THE ENTIRE NIGHTTIME I MAINTAC'< APPROPRIATE I NIGHTTIME PERIOD PERlOD TIME PERI OD I LIGHTING LEVE.LS I THROUGHOv"rTHE E.NT!R.E NIGHT m!E PERIOD •i I Ii ====== LAND SCAPE !! --·--··-·-· H-U ---INDIGENOUS l..ANDSL'\.t'ING SHAU. BE IN CO RPORATED t><"TO PL.AZ.A /STREET :>ESIGNS · ATrEJ..'TION MUST BE GIVE."J TO YEAR ROU!'ID FOLIAGE APPEARANCE & ~t.AINT.A.C'ENCE REQC1.R.E..\£ENTS f1 II ,,. ii i I 11 I 11 ACCEPTABLE TREE SPEOESo i. ACCEPTABLE TREE SPECIF.So ACCEPTABLE TREE SPEOESo I ACCEPTABLE TREE SPECTESo ! I ACCEPT.>JlLE TREE SPEOESo . ACCEPTABLE TREE SPECTESo 1 ACCEPTA9LE TREE SPEOESo · ACCEPTABLE TREE SPECIES. MAPLE. LOCUST. CRAB I ~L'J'LE, LOCUST, CRAB MAPLE. LOCUST. W-UE.'I. '1 MAPLE. LOC11ST, UNDEN. 1· MAPLE. LOCUST. LINDEN. I ASH. MAPLE. LOCUST. CRAB I .\SH. MM'l.E. LOCUST. CRAB 11 A5H. MAPLE. LOCUST. CRAB I HAWTiiO R.'<E HAWTl<ORNE I 1-1-'"'11-!0 R.'IE '1 11 . LINES OF TREES SH.ALL BE OF I 1..I:'<ES OF TREES SH.ALLBE OF LINES OF TREES SHAU.BE OF I LINES OF TREES sH.ALLsE o F I LINES oF TREES SHAJ..L BE o F ' LJNES oF TREES sH.ALL BE OF LINES oFTR.EESSH.-\l..L BEOF 1 LINES OF TREES SH.ALL BEOF . TiiE SAME SPECIES O R IN A Ii TiiE S~!E SPEOES OR IN A I THE SAME SPECIES OR IN A i THE SAME SPEOES OR IN A TiiE SA.\!E SPECIES O R IN A 'I THE SAME SPECTES O R lN A 'I THE SA.'!E SPEOES OR IN A I THE SAME SPEOES O R IN A REGULAR PATIERN OF i REGULAR PATIERN O F REGu"UR PAITER:< OF 11 REGv1...\R PATTERN OF REGL"LAR PAITER.'< O F I REGULAR PATIERN OF I REGULut PATTER." OF REGv"UR PATIERN oF DIFFERJNG SPECTES 11 DIFFERJNG SPECTES I DlFFERJNG SPEOE.5 I 1 DIFFERING SPEOES 1 I DIFFERING SPECIES 11 O!FFERJNG SPECTES I DIFFERING SPECIES 11 DIFFERJNG SPEOES l PERENNIALS & DEOOl!Ot:S SHRUBBERY MUST BE INCORPORATED INTO TiiE OVERAJ..L LANDSC.\PE DESIGN e r Attachment Number 4: • • Building Type Matrix (Sheet 2 of it R O:\D T Y PES I Englewood T o w n Center 50' 150' 600 ' 0 !00' 300' Attachment Number 5: Road Type Plan • • • • • • • R OA D T YPE-JA i PROFILE PLAN SPEED LIMIT STREET LIGHTING STREET LANDSCAPE P AVING Eng 1 ewood T o w n C e n t e r TYPE 1A -,_ -.--1 ---.--:_ I ;-~~;Bi-~IJ~_ c, 1' -..~ \~if .. ::<-::->~-~~(. 'i~\ .. d{i:'~~~~~ ···'=j(.~··-i" .1.•: ~.X!'i :.: • ,, ·, ,. ,,,.. I .1 v:·.:-.·c~" ;, . .. . 'll ..... , --~' "-$· .. ··~ .,. -~~ lh ~' ;r··· •;,iN' ... __ ... _ ... ,~~.<~''> .. -.......... .,,.~.· .'·,::·-,'.'. '"'·· ~!"~' ..... ,, '.-. l!'\""' ~il't ~ ··1·r , __ r · ·;!: rr , v =t".;.~.. I ·:":, ~. ~ ~ ''f . ,_...... ~ ==:::l 5' 5' 5' 12' 11' 12' I 5· 5' 5' I/ I/ I/ :, I/ I/ I/ I/ ..... I/ I/ [, , ' , , , , .1 , , ' 2'-6"'/ 35' \.'.21-611 I/ "' , , CROSSWALK / 10/4ASPHALT -1YP . CROSSWALK ( ----x--I"--' v rx--J f ~ ~~PLANTIN G PLANTIN Gtt ~~~) _..........., ~v AREA AREA 0 ~~l v~b1 ° 17 ri_SID EWALK SID EWALKy ,-r\ STREET LI GHTS: 12' POLE LIGHTS @ 60' O .C. . TYP. BOTH SID ES. TYP E C PEDESTRIAN SIDEWALK LI GHTS : NONE BOLLARD LIGHTS : NONE STREET TREES : 4" MIN . CALIPER TREES @ 60' O .C. -TYP. BOTH SIDES -SEE MASTER PUN ORNAMENT AL: 3" MIN . CALIPER TREES @ 60' 0 .C. -TYP . BOTH SIDES . SEE MASTER PL\N STREET: AS PHALT CRO SSWALK: COLO RED CONCRETE SIDEWALK: CONCRETE CURBS /GUTTERS : CONCRETE BIKE PATH: NONE Attachment Number 6: Road Type Matrix (Sheet 1 of 11) 20 l\LP .H. • • ROAD TYPE-I Bl PROFILE P LAN SPEED LIMIT STREET LI GHTING STREET LANDS CA P E PAVIN G Eng 1 ewoo d T o w n C e n t e r ·-..... -.: ..... l ' --. ';-...... TYPE1B (LOOKING EAST) ~~~*'~,_;~~}~ · '·-rr ·~~rr 5' 10' 5' v l 12' v v v 11' 12' , , , , ' ' . 2'-6"~ 35' ,, 5' 5' 5' " v . ' ' ' ' \...'.2'-6" v STREET LIGHTS: 12' POLE LIGHTS@ 60' O.C. -1YP. BOTH SIDES -1YPE C PEDESTRL'\N SIDEWALK LIGHTS: NONE BOLI..ARD LIGHTS: NONE STREET TREES: 4" MIN. CALIPER TREES@ 60' O.C. -1YP. BOTH SIDES -SEE MASTER PLAN ORNAMENTAL: 3" MIN . CALIPER TREES@ 60' 0 .C. -Til'. BOTH SIDES -SEE MASTER PLAN STREET: ASPHALT CROSSWALK NONE SIDEWALK CONCRETE CliRBS /GUTrERS: CONCRETE BIKE P.\TH: CONCRETE Attachment Number 6: Road Type Matrix (Sheet 2of11) • • • ROAD TYPE-2A I PRO FILE PLAN SPEED LIMIT STREET LIGHTING STREET LAN DSCAP E PAVIN G Eng 1 ewoo d T o w n C e n t e r 6' VARIES ,, ,, ,, , 2'-6"'_) v , TYPE2A 12' 11' 12' VARIES 6' v v v " v ' , , , , 35' "-'.21-6 11 " , ~ 10 /4ASPHALT-1YP .v ~>---­ PLANTING AREA SIDEWALK SIDEWALK 1, 30 M.P.H. STREET LIGHTS: 25' POLE LIGHTS@ 100' 0 .C. -TYP. BOTH SIDES -STAGGERED LAYOUT ACROSS STREET -TYPE A PEDESTRIAN SIDEWALK LIGHTS: NONE BOLI..ARD LIGHTS: NONE STREET TREES: 4" MIN. CALIPER TREES@ 30' O.C. -TYP. BOTII SIDES -SEE MASTER PLAN ORNAMENTAL NONE STREET: ASPHALT CROSSW ALI<: NONE SIDEWALK: CONCRETE CURBS /GUTTERS: CONCRETE BIKE PATH: NONE Attachment Number 6: Road Type Matrix (Sheet 3of11) R OA D • PROFILE • PLAN SPEED LIMIT STREET LIGHTING STREET LANDSCAPE PAVING • Eng 1 ewood T o w n C e n t e r 1YPE 2B (LOOKING NORTH) , .... -~ <:~~ j -~ ~-~t :;;_~s;~ ;-~~::Jji~ ~-~ ~-.,:,,,.,'(; __ ,.,,~~-~,'.{¥~-~ -~~.: ... -;._,~~ '-' ·~ >"" /, ~ :;v~_,·· "',,., (:t;' ·-~--~Y't· i:;·,r·""'' ~-. 1:; ";('~' . '. .· . . :-;·~;·~l ~: . ~··": -~; .. = ~ r __.,__ ::;m;:::: - 6' VARIES 12' 11 ' 12' 3' 4' 3' t. 1. '· (., [, '"''"' '"' '"' '"' , , , , ' , , 2'-6";) 35' \..'.2 1-6 11 ,, ,, , , t2 ~ 1---I ~ 10/4 ASPHALT 7 I, ~ I ~P~mG~ t-: -L--- PENING FOR TREE l ~ f-. EW ALK SID EWA T ~ '---- ~o I- ~ ~ J ·--\ 30 M.P.H. I/ "- STREET LlGHTS: 2.5' POLE UGHTS@ 100' O.C. -TYP. BOTH SIDES -STAGGERED LAYOUT ACROSS STREET· TYPE A PEDESTRIAN S!DEW ALK UGHTS: NONE BOLLARD UGHTS: NONE STREET TREES: 4" MIN. CALIPER TREES@ 30' O.C. -TYP. BOTH SIDES -SEE MASTER PL'\N ORNAMENTAL NONE STREET: ASPHALT CROSSW A1.K: NONE SIDEWALK: CONCRETE CURBS /GUTTERS: CONCRETE BIKE PATH: NONE Attachment Number 6: Road Type Matrix (Sheet 4of11) • • • ROAD TYPE-3 I PROFILE PLAN SPEED LIMIT STREET LIGHTING STREET LANDSCAPE PAVING Englewood T o w n C e n t e r TYPE3 ,_...._, :•c : 6' VARIES 12' 11' 12' VARIES 6' , ,, , ,, , , , , , , , , , 2'-6"'_) 35' ~2'-6" ,, I/ 30M.P.H. STREET LIGHTS: 25' POLE LIGHTS@90' O.C. -TYP. BOTH SIDES -STAGGERED LAYOUT ACROSS STREET -TYPE A PEDESTRIAN SIDEW ALIC LIGHTS: NONE BOLLARD LIGHTS: NONE STREET TREES: 4" MIN. CALIPER TREES@30' O.C. -TYP. BOTH SIDES -SEE MASTER PL>\N ORNAMENTAL: NONE STREET: ASPHALT CROSSWALK: COLORED CONCRETE SIDEWALK: CONCRETE CURBS /GUTTERS: CONCRETE BIKE PATH: NONE Attachment Number 6: Road Type Matrix (Sheet 5of11) • • • R OA D TYPE-4 I PROFILE PLAN SPEED Lu\1IT STREET LIGHTING STREET LANDSCAPE PAVING Englewood T o w n C e n t e r TYPE4 ---... . --"'' ........ -. ' ~ ·:~~} :_~~ :,~;~;: . ·:·. i~ -·-~ . ;:·~;-:~<~ ~\;:<-"·. ·'·· .... :i~~ ~-Xt; __ 1 -~:;;'..1 ~ ;:,·~; ~ .. r "i'r 'ff ·. \;~ -~ . = bd __.,__, -- ~ ~ 12' 11' 12' "' "' "' "' . .,, , , ' , ' , 2'-6"Y 35' \'.21-6" "' IJ , l ___ I) r 10/4 ASPHALT -1YP i/ v v v .PLANTING AREA I f\ ~LANTING AREA , y _ lS M P.H. STREET LIGHTS : 30' POLE LIGHTS @60' O.C. -1YP. BOTH SID ES -STAGGERED LAYOlIT ACROSS STREET -1YPE B PEDESTRIAN SIDEWALK LIGHTS: NONE BOLLARD LIGHTS: NONE STREET TREES: NONE ORNAMENTAL 3" MIN . CALlPER TREES @ 20' 0 .C. -1YPE. BOTH SIDES STREET: ASPHALT CROSSWALK NONE SIDEWALK: NONE CURBS /GlITTERS: CONCRETE BIKE PATH : NONE Attachment Number 6: Road Type Matrix (Sheet 6 of 11) •• • • R OAD T Y P E -5 I PROFILE PLAN SP E ED LIMIT ST REET LIGHTING STREET LANDSCAPE PAVING E n g e w o o d T o w n C e n t e r TYPES (LOOKING WEST) ...... -.'"-;;. t ,. _ _;:;;, ( .-~-~ . ---~ ~> .• :;·t, ;Cf Id~~~ . ·-· '· ."'."*'. ~;4~:\i~~ ~-1~ ,; ....._.y y:. ....... -~;~.. • ' ~--·n>. ~'<-~·,,_,It,~ ,. ·": '·~ .. l>'_.:i"~;· ..., 0:: .. z--/, --... ~11'~, \., •f'.'"'i · :p ·'. "\.>~r.~·,'., '-~··": ... ';_~· L•: ·"'-·:;-1 · . =-,___...... ~ ~ ~ i 6' 5' 12' 12' 12' I 5' 12' ,, ,, ,, ,, ,, "' v v v , , ' .1 , , 2'-6"'_) 36' \'.21-6 11 .... .... , , ~ ~ / 10/4ASPHALT -TYP. - jL_: v ~CONC RETE ~~PLANTING AREA --./-MASON RY ( ..... r--r-Will -.__ i-1---._ SIDEWALK ~ 1---o-I 0 6'-0" HIGH .__ I ) BIKE PATH \ 30 1"LP.H. STREET LIGHTS: 30' POLE LIGHTS@ 120' O.C. • TYP. BOTH SIDES . STAGGERED LAYO UT AC ROSS STREET · TYPE B PEDESTRIAN SIDEWALK LIGHTS : NONE BO LLARD LIGHTS : NONE STREET TREES: 4" MJN. CALIPER TREES @ 30' O .C. ·TYP. BOTH SIDES· SEE MASTER PLAN ORNAMENTAL: NONE STREET: ASPHALT CROSSWALK: COLO RED CONCRETE SIDEWALK: CONCRETE CURBS /GUTTERS: CONCRETE Bl.KEPA'I1-I: AS PHALT Attachment Number 6: Road Type Matrix (Sheet 7of11) • • • R OAD TYPE-6 I PROFILE PLAN SPEED LIMJT STREET LIGHTING STREET LANDSCAPE PAVING Englewood T o w n C e n t e r TYPE 6 (LOOKING NORTH) .. --·-·'='' -__ ('~f ;~~-;_§iii :3iJ~i~~ 1~~ "~~~~ ~<\~~n~ -t ·.tt :;~,; y}.: ,3.0~ ~ ~ ...... 1 ..• ~~( •. "£"·'-> 1 ... 'C""0~~ .. ·v ir ·'i: ~~-\; ~r ~" . '· ~-. • v ~. "•t .. ~·y .. = .!.... .2. u ___... ~ -- ~ 11' 10' 11' 6' 10' i.. i.. i.. " " " .., . ; ' ' ' ' ' 2'-6"'.) 32' \'.2'-6" ·~ i.. £ -10/4 ASPHALT-m. j "~ BIKE PAo/t::=. i--r\ ) 0 L---'.-PLA.t'JTING AREA~ 0 ~ v i'-!"--) ' \ ) 3011-LP .H STREET LIGHTS: 30' POLE LIGHTS @ 150' 0.C. • 1YP. BOTH SIDES -STAGGERED L\YOUT ACROSS STREET -1YPE B PEDESTRIAN SIDEWALK LIGHTS: NONE BO Li.ARD LIGHTS: NONE STREET TREES: 4" MIN. CALIPER TREES @ 30' O .C. -1YP. BOTH SIDES -SEE MASTER Pl.AJ.'1 O RNAMENTAL NONE . STREET: ASPHALT CROSSWALK: NONE SIDEWALK: NONE CURBS/GUTTERS : CONCRETE BIKE PATH: CONCRETE Attachment Number 6: Road Type Matrix (Sheet 8of11) R OA D TYPE-7A I • PROFILE • PLAN • SPEED LIMIT STREET LIGHTING STREET LANDSCAPE PAVING Englewood T o w n C e n t e r 10' IJ ( \ ~ 5' TYPE7A (LOOKING NORTH) 12' 11' 12' IJ ,. ,. ,. "' ' . ' 5' ' 2'-6"'_) 35' \'.2'-6 11 ,. " , -- r!0/4 ASPHALT -y PLANTING AREA 0 -lo- BIKE PATH ,\ ~ -0 _j..----- SIDEWALK"-._ 6' ,. " ' cs I) r---- r---- / 30 i\LP .H. STREET LIGHTS: 25' POLE LIGHTS@ 100' 0 .C. -TYP. BOTH SIDES -STAGGERED LAYOUT ACROSS STREET -TYPE A PEDESTRIAN SIDEWALK LIGHTS: NONE BOLLARD LIGHTS: NONE STREET TREES: 4" MIN. CALIPER TREES@ 30' O .C. -TYP. BOTii SIDES -SEE MASTER PLAN ORNAMENTAL NONE STREET: ASPHALT CROSSWALK: COLORED CONCRETE SIDEWALK: CONCRETE CURBS /GUTTERS: CONCRETE BIKE PATH: CONCRETE Attachment Number 6: Road Type Matrix (Sheet 9of11) • • • ROAD TYPE-7 81 PROFILE PLAN SPEED LIMIT STREET LIGHTING STREET LANDSCAPE PAVING E n g e w o o d T o w n C e n t e r TYPE 7B • -:-:0' , --s -..::1 _, ,· :~~~ ~~*-~:: ;,~£!~~~~ ~ -' . ..,,. -~),. ~~ ;;~ -::i~:i?i%~ 1 ~~V~.;. ~~I~' ; .. \~':i$~ i. ~ ~ "~'-<' ··'); •. ;;{ft:; . , '"· '' ~ '-'{· .. "', >!~~ ~.'<~>:·;r .... ·.:; ~('-~' r:.'.-. ,,,;,-~r--. ~-~.--~l ' .. . ~--·;,~; .. -I ·---"'-· ll-4 ~. -I, 5· 6' 5' 12' 11' 12' 6' iJ , , , lJ J lJ , , , ' , 'I , , 2'-6"_'.) 35' \_'.z'-6" , , 7 ~ ~ /10/4ASPHALT-r :s ( -tr PLANTING AREA -- ['\ >----~ -l .-0 SIDEWALK --....-I) SIDEWALK\ v - ~ / 30M.P.H. STREET UGHTS: 25 ' POLE IlGHTS @ 100' O.C. · 1YP. BOTH SIDES -STAGGERED LAYOUT ACROSS STREET -1YPE A PEDESTRIAN SIDEWALKUGHTS: NONE BOLLARD IlGHTS: NONE STREET TREES : 4" MIN. CAilPER TREES@ 30' 0 .C. -1YP. BOTH SIDES -SEE MASTER PLAN ORNAMENTAL NONE STREET: ASPHALT CROSSWALK COLORED CONCRETE SIDEWALK CONCRETE CURBS/GUTTERS: CONCRETE BIKE PATH: NONE Attachment Number 6: Road Type Matrix (Sheet 10of11) • • • R O :\D TYPE -B I Englewood T o w n TYPE B -BOULEVARD PROFILE C e n t e r ........ 1 .. :~;l~~ ·".fr(" 2').JL.,~1,,_l __ 3_1' --+h..,_l2'--6" ____ ss_·-0 · ____ 2_'-6",it,iH"----31_' ---.1f 1~. PLAN SPEED LlL\1IT STREET LIGHTING STREET LANDSCAPE PAVING ~0/4 ASPHALT - STREET LIGHTS: 12' POLE LIGHTS @ 40' O .C. -TYP. BOTH SIDES -TYPE C PEDESTRIAN SIDEWALK LIGHTS: 12' POLE LIGHTS@40' O .C. IN PARKWAY -TYPE C BOLl.ARD LIGHTS: LOCATED AT CROSSWALK AREAS STREET TREES: 4" MIN . CALIPER TREES@30'0.C. -TYP. BOTH SIDES OF STREET AND OF PARKWAY ORNAMENTAL 3" MIN . CALIPER TREES@20' 0 .C. AT PARKWAY O NLY STREET: ASPHALT CROSSWALK COLORED CONCRETE SIDEWALK COLORED CONCRETE CURBS /GUTrERS: CONCRETE BIKE PATH: NONE Attachment Number 6: Road Type Matrix (Sheet 11 of 11) • • • Approved Design Elements Building Fac;ade Materials Brick Masonry Concrete Masonry Units Stone Precast Concrete Siding Exterior Plaster Metal Roofing Paving Materials Street Paving Sidewalk Paving Plaza Paving Curbs and Gutters Misc. Ornamental Elements Trees and Shrubbery Street Trees Ornamental Trees Evergreen Prohibited Trees : 6 ,000 psi face brick , type FBS, grade SW Arch itectural grade CMU , textured or split-face , integral color All natural stone or synthetic stone products Textured with integral color Natura l wood siding , varnished Portland Cement based mod ified stucco , smooth finish Natura l metals or prefinished sheet metal Metal roofing, terra cotta tiles , concrete tiles or asphalt shingle roofs Asp halt , concrete , brick pavers , concrete pavers Colored or regular concrete , brick pavers , concrete pavers Br ick or concrete pavers Concrete Natural stone or synthetic stone Norway Maple , Red Sunset Maple , Autumn Purple Ash , Patmore Ash , Honeylocust , American Linden, Redmond Linden Tatarian Maple , Thornless Cockspur Hawthorn, Eastern Redbud , Golden Rain Tree , Newport Plum , Aristocrat Pear, Japanese Tree Lilac , Flowering Crabapple Austrian Pine , Scotch Pine , Colorado Green Spruce , Pinyan Pine , Eastern White Pine , Bristlecone Pine , Colorado Blue Spruce Chinese Elm , Silver Maple , Box Elder, any Poplar species , any Willow species Attachment Number 7: Approved Design Elements • • • • Streetscape Elements * Parking Lot Lights Street Lights Pedestr ian Sidewalk Lights Bollard Lights Benches Bicycle Stands Trash Receptacles Bollards Drinking Fountain Planter Pots Fencing Fo rm 10 Square by Gardco , Inc., high pressure sodium. max imum height: 20'-0" Final Master Plan Selection (to be determined) or Type A : Architectural Area Lighting SLSR30, metal halide Final Master Plan Selection (to be determined) or Type B: Cambridge I by Spauld ing Lighting , Inc .. metal halide Final Master Plan Selection (to be determined) or Type C : Avalon by HessAmerica , AV 650TV. 150 watt metal halide Final Master Plan Selection (to be determined) or DG2 Bollard With Light by Urban Accessories , Inc. or Kim Lighting Bollard VRB1 Bay Bench by Urban Accessories , Inc., clear fir wood Bike Rack Model D by Urban Accessories , Inc. Receptacle T-14 by Urban Accessories , Inc. DG2 Bollard Without Light by Urban Accessories, Inc. Fountain by Murdock MC76-2 Final Master Plan Selection (to be determined) or Aventine Series by StoneWear or Avenue (crossform base) by Kl , Inc. Masonry walls or wrought iron/painted steel fences with vertical pickets * The following cut sheets are included for design direction . Approved elements of equal quality and design will be approved . Attachment Number 7: Approved Design Elements • • • ,.._Gardco '-""~ FORM 10 EH/H ARM MOUNT GENERAL DESCRIPTION: The Gardea arm mounted Square Form 10 products are sharp cutoff luminaires for high intens ity di sc harge lamps up to 10 00 watts . The EH units are manufactured from mitered extruded alum inum and fi nished in an Architectural Class 1 an odi zing . The H style luminaires are dieformed alum inum with a thermoset polyester fi nish . Both products can accept on e of six (6) int erc hang eable and rotatab le precision segmented opt ica l systems. ORDERING SIZE CONFIGURATION DISTRIBUTION WATTAGE >------< 400MH VOLTAGE FINISH OPTIONS Extrud ed EH Fabricated H Extruded EH Fabricated H Fabricated H Fabricated H 14" 14" 19" 19 " T19 " 26 " (Hori zontal Lamp) 3 (Horizontal La mp ) 4x· • (Horizontal Lamp ) a (Horizontal Lamp) FM (Horizont al Lamp) VS ' (Vertical Lamp) SEE TA BLE BELOW 12 0 208 240 277 347 480 QUAD EH and H26 BLA Black An odized BRA Bronze Anodized NA Natural Anod ized SC Speci al Color Paint H/HT Stvle SAP Bronze Pa int BLP Black Paint SC Spec ial Color Paint AD CD HF HS LF MF PC PCR POL Y as MU us AP AT SG PTF TYPE PREFIX SIZE CONFIGURATION DISTRIBUTION WATTAGE VOLTAGE FINISH OPTIONS WATTAGE OPTIONS Housing 14" 19 " T19"'0 26" AD Amber Drop Diffuser (EH style only ) MU 10° Uptilt Bracket Qu ick Disconnect for Ba llast Tray Adjustable Knuckle 100 HPS 250 HPS 750 HPS 750 HPS 100 MV 250 MV 750 MH 750 MV CD Clear Drop Diffuser (EH style only ) UB HF In-Head Fus ing NOTES 100 MH ' 250 MH 150 HPS 1 400 HPS 17 5 MV 40 0 MV 175 MH 400 MH 250 MV 250 MH 1000 MH 1000 HPS 1000 MV HS Int ernal House Side Sh ield AP LF In-Line Fusing MF Mast Arm Fitter AT PC Receptacle and Photocontrol' PCR Photocontrol Receptacle only SG POLY Polycarbonate Sag Lens (in li eu of flat glass )''' OS Quartz Restrike " -Po le Mount " Adjustable Knuckle -Tenon Mount Sag Glass (Supplied Standard with Type 4X and 26" VS ) PTF Pole Top Fitter 1. Furn ished with acrylic sag lens . Type VS 6. 175W max on 14" units not available with 14" mogul base units 2. Medium base lamp 3. 150H PS ballast operates 55 volt lamp 4. Not ava ilab le in 480V . 1000w max. 5. EH and 26 " H unit s only 7. 19 and T19 units only 2661 Alvarado Street 8. Furn ished with sag glass lens San Leandro . CA 94577 9. Not available with 4X U.S. 800/227-0758 . . CA 510/357-6900 10 . HT19 750MH lum1naires use BT37 lamp s only FAX 5101357 .3088 11 . Contact factory for ava1lab11tty. -http ://www .thomaslighting .co m 12 . Only available w/1 and 2 way luminaires @ 180° ~..-"THOM J\ S . GARDCO LIGHTl:'\G I 1, Ii 1' i I, I! 11 I I I t I (. <CAMBRIDGE t & It . .tAPPLICATIONS Planned co-mmunities, parl<s, walkways, ~rl<ing areas, stairs, entrances , residen- . rial ·streets , marinas, school campuses , and other ·no-glare applications. CONSTRUCTION FEATU~ES Housing -One piece die-Cast alu- minum housing with soft radius comers. L9n5 -door is also cast aluminum with soft ,radius corners. Lens is a clear tempered, :impact resistant, glass held in place with .· ·sealant and retaining clips. A continuous -.:. gasket seals the door assembly to the housing. Mounting -An extruded aluminum arm, using four bolts, is provided for rigid . attachment of luminaire to pole. · Optical Assemblies -Specular ano--~. . . dized aluminum reflectors provide · ·square symmetrical (type V), forward · throw . (type IV) or narrow asymmetrical '(type ··Ill)· lighting patterns. Reflector is .;mounted with hinges and captive locking . !i.screws into hous ing for easy access to ballast. ·.Ballast Assembly -Starting rated to ~~20°F. Ballasts for Metal Halide are con- . stant wattage autotransformer type. 9allasts for High Pressure Sodium are ..onstant wattage autotransformer type .f us ing ,an electronic starter. Ballasts are '· .. mounted directly to die-cast housing for , reduced temperature and increased life . All ballasts are high power factor. -· Lamps -Luminaires accommodate ·:1 Metal Halide and High Pressure Sodium ·. mogul base lamps . : Lampholder -Mogul base glazed , porcelain sod<et with spring loaded, nick- . el plated center contact and reinforced .-lamp grip scrf!!N shell. High Pressure Sodium sockets are pulse rated. ,-:Anlsh -Durable baked-on polyester Paint finish is available in 1 O standard colors. Other finishes are available. /ypeIT CEl-400M/30SQS511-DBZ tSPAULDING [L~@[}=ff1f~[NJ @ 9 ~[NJ©o CEI Effective Projected Area 1.6 ' . ,, ,, : :: :r 3 ::::: : :: :1 4 .68 L-----+-L....J L....J : l _ • ..___ 10 __. .. ~J ~ .. =======~-30 ___________________ ....,,_ .. :I _L_--J 3.18 T 10 l_ T 2 1 T CE II Effective Projected Area 2.9 '--------'1 •· • • n1. AVALON The Avalon lumina ire offers clean , simple styling in th ree siz es . External louvers shi eld th e lamp . reducing gla re . Option al internal louver is avail- able for additional shielding or asymmetric distribution. Lumin aire , pole and mounting brackets are matc hed for proportion. Stepped or option- mQQ :-31.5·-1 l ==:;~*=:::i AV650 1--25.6" --1 I 19 J" I llil.Q 15.4" I AVALON MODEL INFORMATION A -POST TOP I • W I I ...: ... _J .. - al trellis pole des ign integrates th e fixtu re into a variety of surroun d· in gs. Ch oice of metal hal id e or hi gh pressure sodium. Stand ar d finish is automotive quality enamel in matte metallic silver. darl< bronz e or black. Specia l colors availa ble. B -PARA BRACKET C · TRI BRACKET ~ TRELLIS POST TOP ' ' D -TRI WALL BRACKET Model lamp Pole Mounting AV520 AV650 AV650TV AV BOO ®LISTED Spe cifications su bject to ch ange without notice. Photometric data · See Technical Section . C,..1 ... At ............ ;,. ........... ,..,.. ... ;,...,.1 70 MH/HPS 150 MH/HPS 150 MH/HPS 250 MH/HPS 8' -10' A-B-C-0-E 10' -12' A-B-C-0-E 10' 12 ' -14' A-B-C-0-E .hess~rra A JJI LIGHTI NG GROUP COMPANY 639 Washburn Switch Road P.O. Box 430 Shelby, NC 28151 ,..._ _ _ _ ,.,. , , ..... ........ .. r _ ,,.. , ',~ -. "'"' r • Streetscape Elements Bollard Lights DG2 Bollard With Light by Urban Accessories . Inc. DGl • • Attachment Number 7: Approved Design Elements • Streetscape Elements Benches Bay Bench by Urban Accessories , Inc., clear fir wood • BAT ' ·.:-.. . • Attachment Number 7: Approved Design Elements • Streetscape Elements Bicycle Stands Bike Rack Model D by Urban Accessories , Inc . • MODEL D • Attachment Number 7: Approved Design Elements • Streetscape Elements Trash Receptacles Receptacle T-14 by Urban Acc esso ri es , Inc . • T-14 • Attachment Number 7: Approved Design Elements •••• Streetscape Elements Bollards DG2 Bollard Without Light by Urban Accessories , Inc . DG2 • • Attachment Number 7: Approved Design Elements -• • --• • • 0 • Streetscape Elements Planter Pots AU 4817 AU 36 13 48 36 Aventine Series by StoneWear Aventine Series '-,,/' 17 13 33 26 20 47 38 28 ~ 13 10 7 15 12 9 110 60 0~ Urn s 2 1 'ilJnd<lrd ~1L es onlv ,, ,hnwn on Cllan . All dimen.o;ions m 1ncJles : dSSUm~ minor 1<1na1ions . Al l well!hts 1n pounds ; va nes with rinish type . Attachment Number 7: Approved Design Elements • • LANDSCAPING STANDARDS City of Englewood • Attachment Number 8 • • 16-5-26: LANDSCAPING STANDARDS: A. PURPOSE: This section establishes landscape standards for new development and for redeveloping properties in order to enhance , improve, protect and preserve the appearance, character and value of such properties and their surrounding neighborhoods. This section is further intended to: 1. Enhance the aesthetic appearance of development in the city by providing standards relating to quality, quantity , maintenance and the functional aspects of landscaping; 2. Aid in stabilizing the environment's ecological balance by contributing to the processes of air purification , oxygen regeneration, storm water runoff reduction and ground water recharge , and to encourage water conservation through water conserving devices and xeriscape principles ; 3 . Reduce the noise , heat and glare generated by development; and 4 . Protect public health , safety, and welfare by minimizing the impact of all forms of physical and visual pollution, screening incompatible land uses , preserving the integrity of neighborhoods , and enhancing pedestrian and vehicular traffic and safety . B. APPLICABILITY: This section shall apply to any development located within the City of Englewood at such time as an application is made for any of the following: 1. A building permit for a new structure; 2 . A building permit for existing structures that results in the expansion or increase of the gross floor area and/or off-street parking area by fifteen percent (15%) or more, or a total of five hundred square feet (500 sq.ft .) gross floor area, whichever is greater; 3 . A site plan ; or 4. A rezoning of property . 5. This section shall not apply where a building permit is issued for the restoration, within twelve (12) months, of a building that has been damaged or destroyed by fire, explosion , storm or accident of any kind , unless such restoration exceeds the expansion provisions of E.M.C. 16-5-26-B-2 above . • I • I • C. LANDSCAPE PLAN REQUIREMENT: A landscape plan shall be required as part of a building permit, site plan, and/or rezoning application as defined in E.M .C. 16- 5-26-B applicability . The landscape plan shall meet the intent of this section by exhibiting a comprehensive design program in terms of materials, location, size/scale, function, theme , and similar attributes. Landscape plans shall be reviewed by the city to determine whether they meet the requirements of this section . The time periods allowed for review shall be the same as those for site plans . Landscape plans shall be drawn to a minimum scale of one inch (1") to fifty feet (50') and shall provide the following information: 1. Date, graphic and written scale , north arrow , name and location of the development, and the name (s) of the owner, name , address and phone number of the person/firm preparing the plan , and the name of the contact person for the project; 2 . The locations and dimensions of all property lines, proposed topographic contours , adjacent streets and rights-of-way, significant drainage features, buildings and structures, off-street parking, loading and vehicular use areas , driveways , underground and/or overhead utility lines , existing and proposed water meter pits and water valves, and traffic sight distance triangles; 3. The landscape plan shall also address the relationship between the drainage of landscaped areas and the drainage of the remaining features of the site ; 4 . The landscaped areas on the site , including : a . Locations , dimensions and square footage of all landscaped areas; b . Types of landscape materials (i.e . grass , shrubs , groundcover, trees , etc.); c. The species , number, ca li per and locations of all required plantings; d . The species, location and caliper of any existing plant materials to be preserved ; e . The location, size and treatment of all non-living landscaping ; 5 . A description of proposed irrigation methods ; 6 . A description of how existing trees, which are proposed to be preserved , will be protected during site preparation and construction ; 7 . A plant schedule with botanical species, common name, size installed, total quantity provided; • • • 8. Planting notes to include but not limited to: utility protection, daily clean-up of right-of-ways, guarantees, maintenance, soil amendments; 9 . In situations where it can be documented that existing landscaping meets or exceeds the total landscape required , the city may waive the landscape plan submission requirement. 0 . LANDSCAPED AREA REQUIREMENT: Properties shall provide a minimum level of area landscaping as follows , except as may be permitted in accordance with E.M.C. 16-5-26-0-2, (South Broadway Corridor Properties), or E.M .C. 16-5-26-E, (alternative compliance). 1. Zone district requirements : a. All zone districts : b . 1) Single-family detached, single-family attached and two-family uses : one hundred percent (100%) of the front setback area and no less than forty percent (40%) of the lot area, exclusive of driveway , shall be landscaped ; 2) Multi-family uses : at least twenty-five percent (25%) of the total site shall be landscaped. Residential districts: 1) Non-residential uses ; a minimum of twenty-five percent (25%) of the total site shall be landscaped. c. Business districts; a minimum of fifteen percent (15%) of the total site shall be landscaped . d. Industrial districts; a minimum of fifteen percent (15%) of the total site shall be landscaped. e. PUO district landscaping requirements shall be determined on a case-by- case basis. Consideration shall be given to the type of development use and adjacent uses. PUO landscape requirements shall be guided . The district's predominant development use and by requirements established for similar developments in similar zone districts . f. Water, wastewater treatment and other similar large-scale public facilities; where compliance to district zone requirements may not be feasible or practical, an alternative compliance plan may be submitted. • I • I • 2. South Broadway Corridor properties : redeveloping properties fronting on south Broadway shall be required to provide no less than a minimum of ten percent (10%) of the total site to landscaping upon completion of the redevelopment , renovation , and/or expansion of the existing development. Landscaping shall be required in the front yard area . In cases where the landscaping provision may not be practical due to existing area conditions , an alternative compliance plan may be cons idered by the city. Properties developing between and including the 3200 to 3600 blocks of South Broadway are encouraged to develop with traditional , commercial patterns established within those blocks. 3. Multiple-zoned properties : where one property is composed of more than one zone district the landscape requirements of the more restrictive zone , as provided in this chapter , shall apply . Should the landscape area requirements be impractical , the city may consider alternative compliance plans . E. ALTERNATIVE COMPLIANCE : In cases where the percentage of required landscaping may not be pract ical or feas ible , the app li cant may consider an alternative compliance landscape plan . Alternative compliance is a process that allows modifications to ex isting regulations due to unique site cond itions. The proposed plan must equal or exceed ex isting requirements . 1. Alternative compliance landscape plan criteria : under the specific conditions listed below , the city may rev iew and approve an alternat ive compliance landscape plan upon determining that such plan meets the general intent and purpose of this section : a. The property has unique natural features such as topography , geological characteristics , water features , or significant existing landscap ing ; b. The property consists of peculiar-shaped lots; or c . The property has space limitations which exist as a result of the location of existing structures, paved areas and other bu ilt features. 2 . Fee-in-lieu : only after it has been determined by the city that an alternative compliance plan is not practical or feasible , a fee-in-lieu equivalent may be considered as part of an overall site plan application . The fee-in-lieu shall be calculated to be an amount equivalent to one and 15/100 dollars ($1 .15) per square foot of total required landscaped area . This fee shall be paid to the Englewood general fund and an accounting shall be made for landscaping and beautification of public areas as determined by the city council. • • • Fee-in-lieu shall not apply to new development in any zone district. Fee-in- lieu shall apply only to redevelopment , renovat ion , remodel , or expansion to the following zone distri cts and/or uses : 8-1 , 8-2 , 1-1, 1-2 and non-residential uses in R-3 and R-4 zone districts . F. GENERAL REQUIREMENTS : Landscaped areas shall meet the following general requirements : 1. Landscaped areas shall include a combination of the following types of living plant materials : trees , shrubs , annual and/or perennial plants , vines , grass , and/or ground cover. Non-living , durable materials commonly used in landscaping , such as , but not limited to , wood mulches , rocks , pebbles , sand , water features , decorat ive paved surfaces , excluding asphalt or non- patterned concrete , may also be used in landscaped areas ; 2 . Perv ious , decorative paving materials and br ick pavers may be included in the form of walkways or driveways through landscaped areas ; however, off- stree t parking areas paved w ith such materia ls shall not be considered as landscaped areas ; 3 . The use of non-living materials shall not exceed thirty-five percent (35%) of the total landscaped area ; 4 . All landscaped areas shall have an approved irrigation system ; 5 . All landscaped off-street parking areas shall be protected from veh icular traffic by concrete curbing or other dev ices acceptable to the city which proh ib it vehicular acces s to and encroachment upon these areas ; 6 . A landscaped area shall have a minimum dimension of three feet (3 ') on any side ; 7 . All water meter pits and/or water valve boxes shall be maintained at finished ground level and provision shall be made to insure that they remain at grade , vis ible and readily accessible for easy operation , maintenance and repair ; 8 . At maturity , a minimum clearance of three feet (3 ') shall be required between all trees , shrubs and/or landscaping features and fire department spr inkler connections , fire hydrants and/or alarm notification devices ; and 9 . No art ificial trees , shrubs , turf or plants or other non-living plant materials shall be used to fulfill the liv ing plant material requirements of this sect ion . G . Landscaping in off-street parking areas: Landscap ing of off-street parking areas is i ntended to improve the aesthetic appearance of parking lots and to • I • I • protect and preserve the appearance , character and value of surrounding property . If a site which is subject to this section includes an off-street parking area, the following shall apply : 1. Landscaping in off-street parking areas shall be counted toward the minimum total landscaping required ; 2 . Landscaped perimeters , islands , medians, or peninsulas shall have a minimum dimension of three feet (3 ') on any side ; 3. Interior landscaping of off-street parking areas shall serve the purposes of aesthetically breaking up pavement and guiding the circulation of vehicles and pedestrians within the parking lot. At least ten percent (10%) of the interior of a parking lot shall be landscaped if the lot contains more than twenty (20) parking spaces or is more than six thousand square feet (6 ,000 sq.ft .) in area; 4 . The perimeter of all off-street parking areas adjacent to the public right-of-way shall be landscaped regardless of lot size or number of parking spaces. Perimeter landscaping at the alley is encouraged ; 5. All perimeter and interior landscaping shall comply with traffic sight distance triangle requirements as determined by the city traffic engineer; 6. Interior landscaping requirements of this subsection shall not apply to outdoor display areas , 7 . It is recognized that because of the wide variety of types of developments and parking configurations associated with them , minor deviations may be granted by the city , whenever such deviations are more likely to satisfy the intent of this section. H. Landscape material requirements: At least one (1) tree and five (5) shrubs shall be provided per seven hundred and fifty square feet (750 sq. ft .) of landscaped area required by the provisions of this section. Should the landscaped area be less than one thousand square feet (1 ,000 sq . ft.), a minimum of two (2) trees and ten (10) shrubs shall be required . The planting of trees and shrubs shall comply with the following installation requirements : 1. Landscape areas shall have plant material selected and planting methods used which are suitable for the soil and climatic conditions of the region and the specific requirements of the site . Sizes of the plant materials shall conform to the following mix: Trees: 50%, 2" caliper deciduous or 6 foot tall evergreen 50%, 3" caliper deciduous or 8 foot tall evergreen • • • Shrubs: 100%, 5 gallon Groundcover: 100%, 1 gallon spaced for coverage within 2 years 2 . Trees shall be of a long-lived and clean character. Further they shall require little maintenance, be structurally strong , insect and disease resistant, and require little pruning. 3. All rocks and stones used in landscaped areas shall be a minimum of 3/8 inches in size , and installed to a minimum depth of two inches (2 ") or as necessary to adequately cover the area. 4 . Minimum mulch depth shall be four inches (4"). 5. The following species shall be prohibited: Box Elder (Acer Negundo), Cottonwood (Female Populus Oeltoides), Siberian Elm (Ulmus Pumila). 6 A water permeable landscape fabric shall be required in all shrub beds . 7. All grassed or bed areas shall be amended with a minimum of three cubic yards(3 cu . Yd .) of organic matter (compost) per one thousand square feet (1 ,000 sq.ft .) of area. Organic matter shall be tilled into the soil to a minimum depth of 4-6 inches (4"-6 "). 8. Clump or multi-stem trees shall be considered as a unit ; that is , as one (1) tree . I. Credit for preservation of existing trees: Applicants may receive credit towards the tree requirements of E.M .C. 16-5-3-H by the preservation of existing trees , as outlined in the following schedule : Existing Trees Tree Credit 1 tree, 2" to 6" caliper 1 tree , >6" to 12" caliper 1 tree, >12" to 15" caliper 1 tree , greater than 15" caliper 1 2 3 4 The following conditions must be met in order for these tree credits to apply: 1. Each existing tree shall be in a healthy and growing condition ; dead limbs and branches shall be pruned ; • I • I • 2. Before site preparation and during construction , each existing tree shall be protected by the placement of a barrier around the area outside the drip line of the tree canopy; 3 . A minimum of seventy-five percent (75%) of the area below the drip line of an existing tree shall be maintained as a permanent, landscaped area at the undisturbed grade which existed prior to site development unless special provisions are made for the protection and survival of the tree . Such special provisions, including but not limited to the use of permeable paving materials, shall be subject to the approval of the city. 4 . Should any tree for which credit is received under the prov1s1ons of this subsection die at any time, the owner shall. within ninety (90) days, replace the tree with the equivalent species or a tree which will obtain the same height, spread and growth characteristics . The replacement tree shall have a minimum caliper of three inches (3") when planted. 5 . No credit shall be allowed for prohibited species . J . Landscaping within public right-of-way: 1. Landscaping required: The unpaved portions of the public right-of-way abutting a street shall be landscaped. Corner lots shall landscape front and side right-of-way areas . This landscaping shall contain a minimum of one (1) tree of at least three inches (3 ") cal iper for every thirty feet (30') of frontage . Should total street frontage be less than thirty feet (30'), a minimum of one (1) tree is required. Landscaping within the public right-of-way shall be counted as part of '.he total landscaping requirement, provided, however, that such credit shall not exceed one-half (1/2) of the required landscaped area of the site. 2. Restrictions: a. Shrubs and other similar low-growing landscape materials which may exceed two feet (2') in height shall not be installed in the sight distance triangle. b. The city shall not be responsible for the maintenance of landscaping installed in public right-of-way , nor shall the city be responsible for the replacement of landscape materials which must be removed during the repair or maintenance of utilities or other public improvements. c . Underground sprinkler systems shall not be installed within street right- of-way, except upon written agreement between the city and the property owner upon terms and conditions set by the city which shall • • • d. e . f. g . include an acknowledgment by the owner that no compensation shall be paid to owner for any damages to or relocation costs of the sprinkler system resulting f rom future public work w ithin the rights-of-way . Trees planted near public curbs and attached sidewalks shall be slower- growing species , have a limited root structure and shall be installed with a root barrier system as to prevent physical damage to sidewalks , curbs , gutters and other public improvements . Where trees are planted in paved areas , they shall have a protective tree grate . Tree grates shall be cast iron , aluminum and/or other acceptable tree grate materia l. A root barrier system shall be used . Use of shrubbery and vines shall be encouraged along all walls a nd fences ad j oining public rights-of-way . Plants shall not by their growth habits obstruct, restrict or conflict with the safe use of any roadway , s idewalk, alley or utilities . K . Screening requirements: Landscape screening is intended to physically buffer and visually shield adjacent land uses that are not fully compatible . 1. Every development, shall provide sufficient screening so that adjacent properties are effectively shielded from any adverse impacts of that development, or so that the new use screens itself from potential impact s from uses already in operation . 2 . Screen ing shall be requ ired between the following land uses and/or zone districts : a. Residential uses and all other land uses ; b. Commercial and industrial uses ; c. Parking lots and public right-of-way ; and d . As determined by the city . 3 . Screening requirements shall be in addition to landscaping requirements . 4 . Whenever structures such as fences or walls are used to create a screen , plants shall be located on the sides of the structure which are visible from adjacent right-of-way ; 5. Screening criteria: • I • I • 6. a. Screening may be composed of a solid fence , semi-opaque landscaping, or combinations thereof; b. Screening shall be a minimum of three feet (3') in height; c. Fencing shall comply with E.M .C . 16-4-17 ; d. Screening shall not extend into the traffic sight distance triangle ; It is recognized that because of the wide variety of types of developments and the relationships between them , minor screening requirement deviations may be granted by the city , whenever such deviations are more likely to satisfy the intent of this section . L. Planting criteria: 1. Trees shall be of species which normally grow to a mature height of at least fifteen feet (15 ') in the Denver metropolitan area . A list of recommended trees for Englewood may be obtained from the city . 2. Trees of species whose roots are likely to cause damage to public roadways, sidewalks, other public works and off-street parking facilities , shall not be planted closer than twelve feet (12') to such facilities . 3. Trees , shrubs , annual and/or perennial plants , vines , grass , and ground cover planted to meet the requirements of this section shall be good , healthy nursery grown stock . 4 . Grass areas shall be planted in species normally grown as permanent lawns in the Denver metropolitan area . Grass areas may be sodded , plugged, sprigged or seeded, except that solid sod shall be used in swales or other areas subject to erosion . 5. All plantings shall meet or exceed standards established by the Colorado Nursery Act (Colorado Department of Agricultu re) and the American Standards for Nursery Stock (American Association Of Nurserymen). 6 . Shrubs and other plant materials with thorns, spines , seedpods or large fruits shall not be permitted within ten feet (1 O') of sidewalks . 7. Trees shall be planted so that at maturity they do not interfere with overhead utility lines . • • • M. Visibility: landscaping shall not obstruct the visibility of pedestrians and vehicular traffic at intersections or points of ingress and egress. No landscaping which exceeds an elevation of the top-of-curb plus two (2) feet shall be allowed in such areas, except for single trunk trees which are of such size and so spaced that no visible obstruction and/or traffic hazard is created. Dete rminations regarding visual obstructions shall be made by the city traffic engineer. N. Water conservation (xeriscape) principles: Applicants are encouraged to follow xeriscape, or water conservation, principles in meeting the requirements of th is section. Xeriscape principles include the use of mulches, native and adapted lower water demand plants, limited turf areas , and efficient watering methods; resulting in significantly lower water use and decreased maintenance. 0 . Appeal: Appeals which allege error in any order, requirement, decision or determination made by the city in the interpretation cif the provisions in this section shall be heard by the board of adjustment and appeals, pursuant to E .M.C . 16-3-1, Hearing and Appeals . P . Completion: The city shall not issue a certificate of occupancy for any building, use or structure to which this section applies until t he landscaping has been installed in accordance with the approved landscape plan. In extenuating circumstances, such as adverse weather, where occupancy is requested prior to completion of landscaping , the owner shall enter into an agreement with the city guaranteeing that the required landscaping will be completed within one hundred and eighty (180) days or a date specified by the City. Q . Irrigation: the irrigation of all landscaped areas shall be p rovided for by one of the following methods : 1. A fully automatic or manual underground irrigation system; or 2 . A hose attachment within one hundred feet (100') of all landscaped materials. R. Maintenance: 1. Maintenance of approved landscaping shall consist of regular watering, mowing , pruning, fertilizing, clearing of debris and weeds, the removal and replacement of dead plants, and the repair and replacement of irrigation systems and integrated architectural features. Plant material which dies shall be replaced with plant material of similar variety and size within one hundred eighty (180) days . 2 . Prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy, t he property owner shall file a maintenance agreement. The agreement shall ensure that if the landowner, or subsequent owners, fails to maintain the required/ installed site • I • I • improvements, the city will be able to file an appropriate lien(s) against the property in order to accomplish the required maintenance . 3 . Property owner and tenant are responsible for landscape maintenance and associated liabilities. 16-8-1: Definitions: Annual Caliper Drip line Evergreen Mulch New development Outdoor display area Perennial Redevelopment Root barrier system Shrub A plant that completes its life cycle in one growing season . The inch diameter of the trunk of a tree measured six inches (6") above grade for new trees. A vertical line extending from the outermost branches of a tree to the ground . A plant with foliage that persists and remains green year round. Nonliving organic and synthetic materials customarily used in landscape design to retard erosion and retain moisture. Development of a site where less than fifty percent (50%) of the existing structure(s) is retained and incorporated into the new structure . An outdoor , unroofed area where merchandise or vehicles are displayed for more than twenty-four (24) hours. A plant that regrows from the same root stock year after year. Development of a site where fifty percent (50%) or more of the existing structure(s) is retained and incorporated into the new structure . A physical or chemical barrier that prohibits or disccurages lateral root growth under sidewalks and other hardscape areas . A self-supporting woody perennial plant of low or medium height characterized by multiple stems and branches continuous from the base , usually not more than ten feet (1 O') in height at maturity . -• • • Tree Xeriscape Large , self-supporting woody perennial plant which normally grows to a mature height of at least fifteen feet (15 '), usually with one main stem or trunk and many branches . May be deciduous or evergreen. Landscape methods which conserve water through the use of drought-tolerant plants and planting techniques . • • SIGN STANDARDS Englewood Town Center PUD • Attachment Number 9 • Table of Contents 3.6.1 General Statement 3.6.2 Sign Requirements and the Design Review Process 3.6.3 Signs Subject to Permits 3.6.4 Signs Not Subject to Permits 3.6.5 Signs Subject to Temporary Permit 3.6.6 Illumination Requirement 3.6.7 Permissible Sign Materials • 3.6.8 Permissible Sign Types 3.6.9 Maximum Permitted Sign Volume I Area 3.6.10 Permissible Sign Locations & Methods of Installation 3 .6.11 Auxiliary Graphics 3.6.12 Joint ID Signage 3.6.13 Residential Signage 3.6.14 Office Signage 3.6.15 Maintenance and Upkeep • 1 • • • Introduction A Vision for CityCenter Englewood CityCenter Englewood is the realization of a master plan to create a unique urban environment that enhances the economic, social, physical and cultural life in the Denver metropolitan area. This project offers a strong sense of community to people moving to the metroplex and to our active lifestyle, by combining art in public places, live performance venues and an urban mix of retail shopping and residential. CityCenter creates a memorable , distinctive and human environment that is easily accessible by the light rail transit. The convenience of diagonal parking in front of the retail district reinforces the feel of community within an urban fabric. Supported Values The City encourages retail tenants and residential property owners to take advantage of the three-dimensional sign criteria allowed by the "Creative Signs" standards. These standards give preference to creative signs utilizing three-dimensional volume, unique angles , shapes, materials, color and lighting to express the character of the business and the surrounding urban environment. • The volume signs capture the viewer's eye as he/she travels around the volume of the sign. This creates longer and greater viewing of the business exposure while adding entertainment value to the experience. The rights of the retail tenants should not subordinate the rights of their residential neighborhood. The mix of retail and residential must respect the balance of the urban village. All areas exposed to public view within and surrounding the Planned Unit Development (PUD), will be reviewed by the Creative Sign Standards Criteria. Retail tenants, residential entry identification and common areas shall avoid linear or boxy forms in preference of dynamic curves, angles , materials and lighting of signs with volume. 3.6.1 All retail tenants and residential development owners are encouraged to express their own unique design statement within the parameters of the design criteria for signs and "common area" street graphics. 2 • • • General Statement The City of Englewood recognizes that signs within Englewood Town Center PUD are a necessary means of visual communication for the convenience of the public and that it is the right of those concerned to identify their businesses or services. Therefore, the City encourages unique and innovative urban signs and street graphics, not only to aid in the creation of shopping and commercial areas but also to enhance and improve the character of the PUD as a whole. 3.6.1.1 Signs shall be well-designed, legible and appropriate to the uses permitted, as well as compatible with their surroundings and with the buildings to which they pertain. Special consideration must be given to the following: 1 . Materials 2. Illumination 3. Scale 4. Color 5 . Dimension, relief or projection 6. Architectural quality 7. Movement 3.6.1.2 Signs must be structurally sound and constructed of high quality, durable materials appropriate to an urban setting. 3.6.1.3 Signs must strike a reasonable balance between the right of the individual to identify his or her business and the right of the public to be protected against the visual discord resulting from the unrestricted proliferation of signs and similar devices. 3.6.1.4 Signs should not obscure the vision of motorists, and/or compete or conflict with necessary traffic signals or other regulatory devices. 3.6.1.5 Signs should be uniquely designed to create a harmonious relationship with their surrounding environment. 3 • • • 3.6.2 Sign Requirements and the Design Review Process 3.6.2.2 Sign Specifications In order to help Tenants of the PUD design and install signs that perform these functions, the City Council has deemed that proposed signs should comply with the specifications set forth in Sections 3.6.6 through 3.6.11 . Proposed signs that do not comply with these specifications may be approved only where compliance with these specifications are not practical or feasible or where they would prohibit a design solution that embodies the spirit of this Ordinance. 3.6.2.3 Design Review Process Prior to installing any sign, the Tenant (or Owner or Authorized Agent) must complete the Design Review Process. 1. Application for Review Not later than seven (7) days after taking occupancy in the PUD, the Tenant shall submit three (3) copies of the application for the proposed sign to the City. The application shall consist of drawings for the proposed sign and a copy of the permit application specified in section 3.6.3.1 . The City shall verify that the application is complete. Any incomplete applications will be returned to the Tenant. Within seven (7) days of receiving the application, the City shall verify that the proposed sign complies with the specifications set forth in sections 3.6.6 through 3.6.11, and: a. If the proposed sign is found to comply with the specifications, the City shall forward the application to the Design Review Board within three (3) days. b. If the proposed sign is found not to comply, the City shall notify the Tenant. Within seven (7) days, the Tenant shall have the option to modify the design and re-apply or to notify the City that he or she requests a variance from the specifications. In the latter case, within three (3) days the City shall submit the application and a non-compliance report to the Design Review Board . 4 • • • 2 . Design Review All proposed signs shall be reviewed by a three-member Design Review Board ("the Board") consisting of an independent design professional appointed by the City Council, the PUD site plan Architect and the PUD Plan Administrator. No later than ten (10) days after receiving all applicable materials from the City, the Board shall review the proposed sign and notify the Tenant in writing of either: a. Approval , in which case the Tenant is subject to obtaining a permit and subsequent installation of the sign. b. Rejection. c. When rejecting a proposed sign, the Board shall list the reasons for the rejection. The Tenant shall then have ten (10) days to either: 3.6.2.4 1 . Submit a new application to the City and begin the Design Review Process again. The new application can be for either a new design or for a version of the original design modified according to the Board's comments ; or 2. Begin the appeals process as outlined in Section 2: Administration of this PUD . Sign Modifications Any Tenant wishing to modify an approved sign must complete the Design Review Process set forth in this section for the proposed modification . 3.6.2.5 Supplemental sign elements Supplemental elements in addition to the primary sign may be included as part of the primary sign . The maximum area of supplemental sign elements may be up to thirty (30) percent of the primary sign area. Secondary sign elements can consist of shapes that accent the sign visually but do not pertain to the message of the primary sign. These elements may project beyond the allowable volume at the discretion of the Design Review Board. 3.6.2.6 Postal Address Requirement All storefronts must display a pla i nly visible and legible postal address. The address must be located above the door frame of the main entrance and must be made of vinyl - applied , painted or foil leaf characters three (3) inches in height in a contrasting color to 5 • • • the surrounding materials. Style and application of these addresses shall be uniform throughout the PUD. 3.6.2.7 Storefront Signs Sign Design Criteria for In-line Tenants Include: • Sign height above floor: Bottom of sign to be 8' minimum. • Letter size: Proportional letters required. See specific guidelines set within each of the four (4) different tenant sign types. Note: Letter dimensions of greater proportions may be considered if, in the Design Review Board's opinion, the sign design is of exceptional merit and architectural quality. • Location on storefront: 15' maximum height from grade in multi-tenant buildings and 8' minimum except window signs. • Neon rheostat controls are to be integral with transformers for Design Review Board's adjustment. No skeleton neon -all neon is to be backed by a solid shape or open metal channel outlining on exterior signs. • Box or cabinet type of signs are not allowed. • Electrical raceways are not to be visible. • Signs must comply with all codes and regulations, must bear the U.L. label and must have current sign permits . 3.6.3 Signs Subject to Permits It shall be unlawful to display, erect, construct, relocate or alter any sign without first filing with the City an application in writing, paying applicable fees and obtaining a sign permit. If a sign has been displayed, erected, constructed, relocated or altered without such permit or not in accordance with the terms of such permit, the sign must be removed within five (5) calendar days of official notice. When a sign permit has been issued by the City, it shall be unlawful to change, modify, alter or otherwise deviate from the terms or conditions of said permit without prior approval of the City. A written record of such approval shall be entered upon the original permit application and maintained in the files of the City. 3.6.3.1 Application for Permit Application for a sign permit shall be made by the owner or tenants of the property on which the sign is to be located, his or her authorized agent or a sign contractor licensed by the City of Englewood. Such applications shall be made in writing on forms furnished by the City and shall be signed by the applicant. The City shall, within five (5) working days of the date of the application, either approve or deny the application -or refer the 6 • application back to the applicant in any instance where insufficient information has been furnished. If the City finds that work under any permit issued is not in accordance with the information supplied in the permit application and/or is in violation of this or any other pertinent ordinance; or should it be found that there has been any misrepresentation in connection with the application for the permit, (including a non-sufficient funds check), the sign owner, lessee or erector shall be notified of such findings and that the violation must be corrected within five (5) working days of notice. If such correction is not made, the permit shall be revoked and written notice thereof shall be served upon the sign owner of erector. No person shall proceed with any part of such work after such notice is received. The owner, lessee of the sign or the owner of the property on which the sign is located shall have the right to appeal the decision of the City in the manner proved for in subsection 16-2-8A of the Englewood Municipal Code. If actual work either on-or off-site is not commenced under any sign permit issued within sixty (60) days from the date of such permit, the permit shall automatically become null and void. Delays which are not a result of willful acts or neglect of the contractor, owner or person obtaining the permit may be excused and the City may grant an extension of time in which to start of resume operations. All requests for extensions and approval thereof shall be in writing. • When any permit has been revoked under the terms of this Section, permit fees shall not be refunded. • 3.6.3.2 Plans, Specifications and Other Data Requested The application for a sign permit issued by City shall be accompanied by the following plans and other information: The name, address and telephone number of the owner or person entitled to possession of the sign and of the sign contractor or erector; the location by street address of the proposed sign structure; complete information as required on application forms provided by the City, including a site plan and elevation drawings of the proposed sign drawn to scale, caption of the proposed sign and such other data as is pertinent to the application; plans indicating the scope and structural detail of the work to be done, including details of all connections, guy lines, supports and footings and materials to be used; application for an electrical permit for all electrical signs and the required information for such application; and a statement of value or cost of the sign. 3.6.3.3 Permit Fees A permit fee shall be paid to the City for each sign permit issued under this Section. The permit fee shall be in accordance with the fee schedule established by the City Council. 7 • • 3.6.3.4 Identification and Marking of Electrical Signs Each electrical sign hereafter erected or remodeled shall bear thereon a clearly legible identification plate not exceeding six (6) square inches in are, stating the name of the person, firm or corporation responsible for its construction and erection, with installation date and permit number and shall be marked with input amperes at full load input. Identification plates, labels or stickers must not be visible from any part of the common area. 1 . All electric signs shall be constructed of non-combustible material. An electric sign shall be rain tight, but service holes fitted with waterproof covers may be provided to each compartment of such sign. All electric signs installed or erected in the PUD shall meet or exceed standards set by the Underwriters Laboratories, Inc. 2. No electric sign shall be erected or maintained that does not comply with City electrical code . 3 . No electric equipment or electrical apparatus of any kind that causes interference with radio or television reception shall be used in the operation of an illuminated sign. Whenever interference is caused by a sign that is unfiltered, improperly filtered or otherwise defective, or by any other electrical device or apparatus connected to the sign, a member of the Design Review Board may order the sign disconnected until it is repaired. Licensing and Insurance Requirements Any person, firm or corporation engaged in the business of installing, erecting, moving or maintaining a sign in the City of Englewood shall be duly licensed by the City. 3.6.4 Signs Not Subject to Permits No permit shall be required to carry out maintenance to a conforming sign if no structural changes are made. The following signs displayed for non-commercial purposes, may be erected and maintained within the PUD without permit. Such signs shall be in addition to all other signs permitted in the PUD, providing such signs do not require direct electrical wiring and conform to setbacks and other physical characteristic requirements of the designated PUD. Even though permits are not required for the following signs, wall- mounted signs shall be located only in the signable area and window signs shall conform to the specifications set forth in Section 3.6.8.3. This restriction shall not apply to holiday decorations or to short-term advertising as provided in subsection 3.6.4.11 . 8 • • • 3.6.4.1 Bulletin Boards Bulletin boards for public, charitable or religious institutions, which are not over twelve (12) square feet in area and which are located on the premises of said institutions. 3.6.4.2 Election Signs Election signs shall not be posted more than forty-five (45) calendar days prior to the election to which the sign relates and shall be removed within fifteen (15) calendar days following the election to which the sign relates. Election signs must be window or wall- mounted signs and shall not be a banner of paper or cloth. Each election sign shall not exceed twelve (12) square feet of total sign area. 3.6.4.3 Flags Flags of nations or an organization of nations, states and cities, and not exceeding thirty-five (35) square feet in area. 3.6.4.4 Holiday Decorations Signs in the nature of decorations, clearly incidental and commonly associated with any national, local or religious holiday; provided that such signs shall be displayed for a period of not more than sixty (60) consecutive calendar days. Such signs may be of any type, number, area, height, location, illumination or animation and shall be located so as not to conflict with traffic regulatory devices. 3.6.4.5 Ideological Signs Two ideological signs not more than twelve (12) square feet in total sign area. 3.6.4.6 Memorial Signs Memorial signs or tablets giving the name of building and date or erection, when cut into any masonry surface or inlaid so as to be part of the building. 3.6.4.7 Public Signs Signs required or specifically authorized for a public purpose . 9 • • • 3.6.4.8 Symbols Symbols or crests of national, state, religious, fraternal, professional and civic organizations. 3.6.4.9 Contractor Signs A sign not more than thirty-two (32) square feet in total sign area, which names the contractors or sponsors engaged in construction on the property where the sign is located. 3.6.4.10 Real Estate Signs Signs which advertise the sale, rental or lease of the premises upon which said signs are located shall comply with the following standards: 1. Residential uses shall be permitted one sign of not more than six (6) square feet per face in area. Such signs shall not extend or project over any property line. 2. Commercial, office and industrial uses shall be permitted two (2) signs of not more than sixty-four (64) square feet total. 3.6.4.11 Short-Term Advertising Signs In addition to other permitted signs, Tenants may display short-term advertising signs, provided such signs are limited to window or wall-mounted signs. Short-term window signs shall not cover more than ten (10) percent of the window are in addition to that specified in subsection 3.6.8.3. Short-term advertising signs shall show the date installation or display and shall be limited to a two (2) week period of display, after which a permit shall be required. 3.6.5 Signs Subject to Temporary Permit The following signs may be displayed under the conditions described, upon granting a temporary permit. 3.6.5.1 One special event sign may be permitted in addition to all other signs. Such signs shall be limited to wall or window signs. Such sign shall not be more than twenty (20) square feet in area and shall not be displayed for more than thirty (30) calendar days . 10 • • 3.6.6 Illumination Requirement All signs must be illuminated during hours of darkness and only during the tenant's normal business hours, subject to the following provisions: 3.6.6.1 Means of Illumination Permissible means of illumination include incandescent, halogen, fluorescent, neon and exposed neon tube. Internally illuminated or non-illuminated paniflex/plastic canopies or individual plastic letters are prohibited. 3.6.6.2 Maximum Brightness The maximum brightness of illuminated signs shall be fifty (50) foot-lamberts as measured one (1) foot from the source of light. 3.6.6.3 Color of Light Signs may be illuminated with a variety of colors, provided the colors do not conflict with traffic signals . 3.6.6.4 Flashing illumination Prohibited on all signs are lights or illuminations that flash, move, rotate, scintillate, blink, flicker, vary in intensity, vary in color or use intermittent electrical pulsations. 3.6.6.5 Animated Graphics Animated signage and graphics are encouraged, provided that proposals for such meet all requirements in this ordinance. 3.6.7 Permissible Sign Materials Fabrication and installation shall comply with all applicable local, state and national electric codes. All signage materials shall be UL rated for exterior use. And, all signs are subject to the following provisions: 11 • • • 3.6.7.1 Paper, paniflex material , formed plastic , injection-molded plastic and typical box-type signs are strictly prohibited. 3.6.7.2 Sign fabricator plates , labels or stickers must not be directly visible from any part of the common area . 3.6.8 Permissible Sign Types 3.6.8.1 Projecting Signs A projecting sign is a sign attached to and projecting from the building wall into a different plane than that of the building wall. Generally, these are 3-dimensional sculptural signs composed of dimensional letters and iconic forms relating to Tenant's identity . (see example in 3.6.9.2) 3.6.8.2 Individual Letters 1. Silhouette or Halo-Illuminated Letters . Fabricated metal letters with polished, brushed or baked enamel painted finish , backlit with warm white neon or neon in a contrasting color. Letterforms must have a return thickness of a minimum of three (3) inches in depth . 2. Exposed Neon . Exposed luminous tubing letters or graphic forms . The acceptable range of neon tubing is between twelve (12) and sixteen (16) millimeters in thickness . Dimmer transformers must be used on all exposed neon tubes. No exposed tubing crossovers , raceways or transformer boxes are permitted. A minimum of two (2) colors must be used. All exposed wall-mounted neon , except secondary neon graphic elements, must be graphically supported with similar graphic shape or contained within a channel. 3 . Applied Letters on Glass. Silk screened paint , foil leaf or machine cut vinyl letters or logos. Letters or logos must be applied to the Tenant's side of the storefront glass as least three (3) feet above fin ished floor. Letters or logos may not exceed four (4) inches in height. 12 • • • 3.6.8.3 Window Signs Window signs shall not occupy more than ten (10) percent of the total area of the window in which they are displayed. This ten (10) percent maximum coverage shall include all signs except short-term advertising signs. Signs displayed twelve (12) inches or less from the interior of windows shall be debited against the square foot area allowed a permitted use. Window signs in windows above the ground floor are limited to letters or logos , not to exceed four (4) inches in cap height. 3.6.8.4 Wall-mounted signs Any material that coordinates with the character and design of the Tenant's storefront and features the Tenant's name and/or logo in a flat, decorative, two-dimensional plane with 3-dimensional-looking painted, applied or carved/sculpted relief graphics. Wall- mounted sign graphics must consist of graphics in a dimensional manner or dimensional graphics at least one-half (1/2) inch thick. A border/reveal of at least three (3) inches must be maintained. Rectangular, box and flat signs are discouraged. 3.6.8.5 Canopies Shade and decorative structures over the storefront entry and/or windows must be constructed of a rigid metal frame with an exterior grade fabric covering. Internally illuminated or non-illuminated paniflex/plastic canopies are strictly prohibited. 3.6.8.6 Banners Banners and flags that provide information related to the goods and services shall be constructed of exterior grade fabric . 3.6.8.7 Movement in Signs Signs may employ visible mechanical movement by means of moving, revolving or rotating parts. Gauges and dials may be animated to the extent necessary to display correct measurement. Signs with movement are subject to the regulations stated under Subsection 3.6.6.4 . 13 • • • 3.6.8.8 The Following Sign Types Are Encouraged: • 3-Dimensional volume signs • Reverse channel, halo illuminating letters as part of a projecting 3-Dimensional volume sign . Guaranty Bank, Denver, CO • Exposed neon recessed in open metal channel letters . JAX Fish house, Denver, CO 14 • • • • Internally-lit routed fascia with push-through plexiglass letters or graphics . Tommy Tsunami 's , Denver, CO • • Edge-lit, sandblasted glass (continuous light source , no spot lights) . Cast metal letters , raised or flush w ith fascia surface . • Gold leaf on glass or stone . • Silk-screened glass or metal panels . • Threshold signs flush with flooring -wood , tile , stone, metal are allowed inside tenant entry, but are NOT allowed in exterior common area. • Indirect illumination on non-internally illuminated signs . 3.6.8.9 Prohibited Signs • Vacuum formed or injection-molded plastic signs. • Cabinet or "can " signs with illuminated translucent backgrounds and silhouetted letters. • Exposed skeleton neon applied directly to fascia element. • Freestanding tripod signs. • Flashing , scintillating, moving , sequencing , audible or odor producing signs. • Paper, cardboard and styrofoam signs . • Credit card and advertising placards , decals , stickers or trademarks. • Manufacturer labels. • Carpet or rubber entry mat signs . • Internally illuminated awnings . 15 • • • 3.6.9 Maximum Permitted Sign Volume I Area 3.6.9.1 Basis for Computation of Sign Volume I Area For the purpose of determining the total allowable sign area for buildings with more than one frontage, the following criteria apply: 1 . Buildings with more than one Tenant are defined as "Multi-Tenant Buildings". Buildings where a single Tenant occupies the entire building envelope are defined as "Single-Tenant Build ings ". 2. Signs may be located on any side of the building but the total sign area on any one side of the building may not exceed the area permitted on the basis of that frontage considered independently of other frontages. 3 . If a building has more than one frontage, the maximum sign area for the building is based on the total horizontal length of not more than two contiguous frontages. 3.6.9.2 Single-tenants in a free-standing pad or tenants with over 10,000 s.f . Tenants with more than one frontage in a free standing single tenant building are allowed one wall-mounted or projecting sign per frontage , to a maximum of three (3) building faces. Each sign shall be a maximum size as noted in section 3.6.9.3. All tenants in the PUD are allowed the following sign types with a combined maximum signable area per frontage as noted in section 3.6.9.2 and 3.6.9.3. In-line tenants in a multi-tenant building with two frontages on Englewood Parkway and the parking side of the building facing the Hampden Avenue arterial, may have the following combined sign types on both accessible frontages: 16 • • a. Wall-mounted and projecting volume signs are limited as noted in section 3.6.9.4 . b. Blade signs are flat, projecting signs, double-faced with a maximum of two (2) s.f. per side. Blade signs may be internally illuminated. One (1) blade sign per frontage is allowed , in addition to wall or projecting signs . 17 • • • . I Havana's Fine Cigars , Denver Pavilions/Denver , CO c. One window sign with a maximum s ize of two (2) s.f. if used in combination with other sign types on the same frontage (ie: canopy signs & blade signs), applied to the interior side of the glass. '. ; . I t . l . ,,. ...... I • I , t .. . . ( ,. ~ Starbucks Coffee , 16th Street Mall/Denver, CO 18 • • a. One (1) sign per canopy , either the bus iness name in text only on the canopy fascia or the symbol/logomark excluding logo type identification per canopy. The logo/symbol not to exceed two (2) s.f . in size , centered on the slope canopy surface. -Maggiano's Little Italy , Denver Pavilions/Denver, CO Formula for surface area of projecting volume signage and wall-mounted signage To encourage use of volume signs: To determine the total area, count the area of the largest face of a volume sign, drawing a line around the rectilinear form to include t he largest two dimensions . A B Volume signage Example : Volume signs offer three (3) sides (A , B, C ) for calculat ing signable area (3 ' x 5 '; 4 ' x 5 '; 3 ' x 5 ') for a total signable area of fifty (50) sq . ft. However, only the area of the largest • face will be counted (4 ' x 5 ' = 20 sq . ft.). 19 • • • I 5' ....___________ l 1---4' ---I Flat, wall-mounted signage Flat , wall-mounted signs offer one (1) side for calculating signable area (4 ' x 5') for a total signable area of twenty (20) s.f . The example of a volume sign allows 50 s.f . of actual signable area. To encourage use of 3-dimensional volume signs, only the area of the largest side will be calculated and counted toward the tenants' total allowed square footage. (In this example 20 sq. ft.) Only the Tenant occupying the ground level of a building may install a projecting volume sign and projecting volume signs are limited to one (1) per Tenant. Volume Projecting Signs on Multi-Tenant Buildings The total allowable area for projecting signs on multi-tenant buildings shall be based on the length of a tenant's frontage along the p rimary facade , according to the following calculation: Tenant Building Frontage x .7 = Maximum Allowable Sign Area Example: 125 ' of Frontage x .7 = 87 .5 s.f. 3.6.9.3 Signs subject to a Limit on Area (Non-projecting Signs) These signs , referred to collectively as "non -projecting signs", include the following: individual letter signs , wall-mounted signs , c a nopies , banners and flags . The maximum permitted area for non-projecting signs sha ll be computed according to the fo llowing provisions: 1. Regular Shape . In computing the are a of a sign , this section shall be administered using standard mathematical formulas for regular geometric shapes, including , without limitation , t riangles , parallelograms , circles , ellipses or combinations thereof . 2 . Irregular Shape . In the case of an i rregularly shaped sign or a sign with letters or symbols directly affixed to a building , t he area of the sign is the entire area within a single continuous recti linear perimeter of not more than eight straight lines 20 • • • 3. 4 . 5 . 6 . enclosing the extreme limits of any writing , representation , emblem or any figure of similar character , together with a ny material or color forming an integral part of background of the display if used to differentiate such sign from the backdrop or structure against which it is placed . More than One Element. The total surface area of non-projecting signs composed of more than one sign element includes the vertical and horizontal spacing between each element of the sign . Length . The length of a non-proj ecting sign shall not exceed fifty (50) percent of the length of the wall or the width of the leased space of the wall on which it is located , whichever is less. Non-Projecting Signs on Multi-Tenant Buildings. The total allowable area for non- projecting signs on mu lti -tenant buildings shall be based on the length of a tenant's frontage , according to the following calculation: (multiple frontages allow the same formula for each fro ntage) Total Building Frontage x 1.2 = Maximum Allowable Sign Area Thus , a tenant with thirty-five (35 ) li near feet of frontage would have forty-two (42) square feet of allowable sign are a (35 x 1.2 = 42) . Single-Tenant Buildings. The total allowable area for non-projecting signs on single-tenant buildings shall be based on the area of the building, according to the following calculation : Total Building Area x .020 = Maximum Allowable Sign Area, not to exceed 1,000 square feet. Thus , a tenant occupying a 20 ,000 sq uare-foot building would have 400 square feet of allowable sign area (20,000 x .020 = 400). 3.6.9.4 Type A Freestanding Retail Tenant Requirements (50,000 s.f. or greater) The following requirements apply specificall y to all Type A Tenant signs : 1. One wall-mounted or volume s ign is permitted per store frontage . Volume signs are limited to one per tenant. Tenants occupying corner spaces may utilize one sign per elevation with a maximum of three (3) signs. One of these signs may be a volume sign on a corner when facing the interior of the development on both effected frontages. To encourage volume signs , the corn e r is the only option to give exposure to the fourth side of the building . 21 • • • 2 . In all cases where blade signs are used, blade signage area is not to exceed four (4) s.f., with total sign area including armature not to exceed six (6) s.f. Total blade sign s.f. of building signage on the street side. 3. Maximum height of letters on storefronts shall be limited to: All Caps: Two size letters: 72" 96" Lead ing letter 72" Remaining text 4. All signs must be 3-Dimensional, finished on all sides with a maximum return of six (6) inches . (No flat, painted pane l signs). 5. Tenants shall follow all additional General Requirements as listed. Type B Freestanding Retail Tenant Requirements (20,000 s.f. to 49,999 s.f.) The following requirements apply specifically to all Type B Tenant signs: T I -----------20' Liu~r feet for siga at 50% of b1 ildiag froatage {i• liaear feet). 1. One sign is permitted per store frontage . Tenants occupying corner spaces may utilize one (1) sign per elevation with a maximum of three (3) signs. One of these signs may be a volume sign on a corner when facing the interior of the development on both effected frontages. To encourage volume signs , the corner is the only option to give exposure. 2. In all cases where blade signs are used, blade signage area is not to exceed four (4) s.f., with total sign area includ ing armature not to exceed six (6) s.f. per side. Total blade sign s.f. effects maximum s.f. of building signage on the street side . 22 • • 3. Maximum height.of letters on storefronts shall be limited to: All Caps: Two size letters: 40" 48" Leading letter 40" remaining text 4 . All signs must be 3-Dimensional, finished on all sides with a maximum return of four and one-half (4-1/2) inches. (No flat, painted panel signs). 5. Tenants shall follow all additional General Requirements as listed. Type C Freestanding and ln/ine Retail Tenant Requirements (10,000 s.f. to 19,999 s.f.) The following requirements apply specifically to all Type C Tenant signs: T 20' Li•ear feet for sig• at 50% of h• ildi•g fro•tage {i• li•ear feet}. 1. One sign is permitted per store frontage. Tenants occupying corner spaces may utilize one sign per elevation with a maximum of three (3) signs. One of these signs may be a volume sign on a corner when facing the interior of the development on both affected frontages . To encourage volume signs, the corner is the only option to give exposure to t he fourth side of the building. 2. In all cases where blade signs are used, blade signage area is not to exceed four (4) s.f., with total sign area including armature not to exceed six (6) s.f. Total blade sign s.f. effects maximum s.f . of building signage on the street side. 3. Maximum height of letters on storefronts shall be limited to: 4. All Caps: Two size letters: 34 " 42" Leading letter 34" remaining text All signs must be 3-Dimensional, finished on all sides with a maximum of 4-1/2". (No flat , painted panel signs). 23 return • • • 5. Tenants shall follow all additional General Requirements as listed . Type D Freestanding and lnline Retail Tenant Requirements (up to 9,999 s.f.) The following requirements apply specifically to all Type D Tenant signs: 1. One sign is permitted per store frontage. Tenants occupying corner spaces with two (2) frontages may utilize one sign per elevation with a maximum of two (2) signs. One of these signs may be a volume sign on a corner when facing the interior of the development on both affected frontages. End-cap tenants in a multi-tenant building, with three (3) frontages will be allowed a maximum of three (3) primary signs. 2 . End cap tenants in a multi-tenant building, with three (3) frontages will be allowed a maximum of three (3) primary signs. 3 . In all cases where blade signs are used , blade signage area is not to exceed two (2) s.f., with total sign area including armature not to exceed four (4) s.f. Total blade sign s.f. effects maximum s.f. of building signage on each frontage. 4 . Maximum height of letters on storefronts shall be limited to: All Caps: Two size letters: 18" 24" Leading letter 18" remaining text 5. All signs must be 3-Dimensional , f inished on all sides with a maximum return of four and one-half (4-1/2) inches . (No f lat , painted panel signs). 6. Tenants shall follow all additional General Requirements as listed. 3.6.10 Permissible Sign Locations & Methods of Installation 3.6.10.1 All signs shall be mounted in accordance with the City of Englewood's definition of " Signable Area": that area of a building facade up to the roof line which is free of windows and doors or major architectura l detail and may be enclosed by an imaginary rectangle. No sign may extend above the roof line of a building except as permitted in Section 3.6 .10.7, "Parapet-Mounted Signs ". If , because of the design of the building, a Signable Area cannot be identified , the Design Review Board and the Tenant will determine a suitable area for signage . 24 • • • 3.6.10.2 Height Signs shall not be taller than one (1) floor or fifteen (15) feet in height, whichever is less. When different tenants occupy adjacent floors of a multiple-story building, signs may extend only from the windowsill of one tenant's floor to the windowsill of the neighboring tenant above. 3.6.10.3 Projecting Signs 1. Clearance. All projecting signs shall have a clearance of eight (8) feet from grade level to the bottom of the sign. 2 . The minimum horizontal distance between projecting signs on a building shall be fifteen (15) feet. 3 . Any projecting sign shall be mounted no less than six (6) inches and no more than one (1) foot away from the building wall or the farthest projecting element (belt courses, sills, etc.) that is adjacent to it on the building fa~ade. 4. Maximum projection shall be five (5) feet from the building. 5. Projecting signs shall be centered on the nearest vertical column-like coursing closest to the tenant entry. 3.6.10.4 Wall-mounted Signs 1. The total area of all wall-mounted signs on a face of a building may not exceed fifteen (15) percent of the area of that portion of the building face between ground level and the roof line or a line fifteen (15) feet above grade level, whichever is less. 2. No part of a wall-mounted sign may be located more than fifteen (15) feet above grade level on a multi-story building . 3. No wall-mounted sign may be attached to or displayed against any parapet wall that does not extend around the entire perimeter of the roof enclosed by the parapet. 4 . No wall-mounted sign may be displayed on the wall of a mechanical room or penthouse or other such enclosed space which is not habitable by the occupants of the building. 3.6.10.5 Canopy Signs 1. Structural metal and glass canopy . Signs must be mounted parallel to the front edge of the canopy . 2. Rigid metal frame or retractable canopies must have an exterior grade fabric covering. Signs must be applied to the front edge, top/sloped face of the canopy per Section 3.6.9.2 . 25 • • • 3 . Retractable canopy with an exterior grade fabric covering. Signs shall be applied to the front edge of the canopy. Additional graphics may be applied to the top of the canopy. 3.6.10.6 Suspended Signs A suspended sign may not exceed ten (10) square feet in total area; may not project beyond the outside limits of the architectural projection to which it is attached; and shall have a minimum clearance above the sidewalk of eight (8) feet. The minimum permissible horizontal distance between suspended signs is fifteen (15) feet. 3.6.10.7 Signage Envelope Adjacent to Residential and Offices Where first floor inline retail tenants signage is permitted up to a maximum of fifteen (15) feet from grade/surface level, the following applies. • No lighted projecting volume sign, whether interior illuminated, exposed neon or spot lighting may create a glare into residences or offices in the upper levels of multi-level buildings. • Illuminated signs may only be on during business hours. • The signage envelope is defined as a radius of 2' -0" from window or glass door on the second level. 3.6.11 Auxiliary Graphics Auxiliary graphics are signs or graphics that a re physically separate from the sign required by Section 3 .6.5.1. Auxiliary graphics are permitted, subject to the following limitations: 3.6.11.1 Menu displays A Tenant may mount a display to list available menu items or services. Menu displays must be mounted adjacent to the Tenant's entry and they must complement the architectural context of the buildings to which they are mounted. Menu displays shall comply with the following conditions: 1. 2. The total area of a menu display shall not exceed two (2) square feet. The area allowed for menu displays is in addition to the allowable area or volume for the Tenant's primary signage. The source of illumination of menu displays must not be visible to pedestrians. All mounting hardware and electrical ducting must be concealed or integrated into the display design . 26 • • • 3.6.12 Project and Joint Tenant Monumentation Signage 15"' 25 1 18 1 , rr·1():f'JT FR ' . ' Max Juice MafmfWDMmt [CON_... Sea le: 0.25"' • 11 Permitted Location for Project and Joint Tenant Monumentation • Minimum one (1) ft. setback from property line or sidewalk , whichever creates the greatest safety for pedestrians. • Monument signs must not visually encroach on architecture of freestanding pads within the PUD • Electronic message boards are prohibited . • No movement allowed in the boundary monument signs . • Maximum of 6 tenants per face on the monument sign, double sided plus project identification. • Max height of tenant listings on joint tenant monument signs is fifteen (15) inches. • Type A tenants are limited to twenty five (25) s.f. per side. • Type B, C & D tenants are limited to ten (10) s.f. per side. • The Residential project may have a separate monument sign with C.C.E. project identification as a text listing or logotype . 27 • 3.6.12.1 Joint ID monument signs shall be permitted for PUD tenants. Only four (4) joint ID monument signs shall be permitted in the PUD. A maximum of four (4) to be located on the West Hampden Avenue frontage. The maximum area of each joint ID monument sign shall not exceed one hundred-fifty (150) square feet. The maximum area of each individual tenant sign within the joint ID monument sign shall be based on the following formula, but in no event less than ten (10) square feet, nor more than twenty-five (25) square feet. No more than 6 tenants per joint tenant monument sign, double faced. The individual tenant listing in text or as a logo must not exceed fifteen (15) inches in height. 3.6.13 Total tenant building area= Maximum tenant joint ID monument sign area Tenants less than 50,000 s.f. = 1 O s.f . Tenants over 50,000 s.f. = 25 s.f. max Residential Signage All residential properties may have signage near or above each main entrance. Residential entry signs shall be permitted up to fifty (50) cubic feet of projecting sign volume or thirty (30) square feet of non-projecting sign area. • Additionally, the following two (2) types of signage are permitted: • 3.6.13.1 Canopies Canopy signs must conform to the specifications outlined in Section 3.6.9.2 3.6.13.2 Applied Letters on Glass Window signs must conform to the specifications outlined in Section 3.6.8.3 and 3.6.9.2 3.6.13.3 Directories for Multi-Tenant Residential Buildings Residential building tenants on the second or upper level floors may be listed on an exterior wall mounted directory not to exceed six (6) square feet. Directories may project up to one (1) foot from the face of the building . It may be both internally and externally illuminated. No light source may be visible to pedestrian traffic. 3.6.14 Office Signage "Offices" are defined as commercial or business spaces without direct street access. 28 • • • 3.6.14.1 Projecting signs for offices are prohibited. 3.6.14.2 Office Entry Canopies A single graphic identifying a common identity , such as the name of the building , street address or shared space name is permissible. 1. Signage may occur on canopy surfaces that are parallel to the building fac;:ade to which the canopy is attached . 2. Because canopies are architectural features that may only incidentally incorporate signage , not all the area of the canopy will be counted as signage. The volume of the canopy to be calculated as signage will be verified by the City according to the following criteria : 3.6.14.3 a. The face area of typography and graphics . b. The two (2) maximum dimensions of iconographic 3-Dimensional sign figures. Office building entry features other than canopies may be erected , subject to the Design Review Process. 3.6.14.4 Directories for Multi-Tenant Office Buildings Office building tenants on the second or upper level floors may be listed on an exterior wall mounted directory not to exceed six (6 ) square feet. Directories may project up to one (1) toot from the face of the building. It may be both internally and externally illuminated . No light source may be visible to pedestrian traffic. 3.6.15 Maintenance and Upkeep Tenant's must maintain the sign on their premises , in good structural condition at all times . All signs , including all metal parts and supports thereof that are not galvanized or of rust-resistant metals , shall be kept neatly painted . A member of the Design Review Board is authorized to inspect and may order the painting , repair , alteration or removal of a sign that constitutes a hazard to safety , health or public welfare because of inadequate maintenance, dilapidation or obsolescence . 29 • tn ' • ~ \ (Jq .......... (D ~ 0 n 0 < p_. n "" (] IJ r ~ ;;... N ;;... ~ 0 "" • ~ r ;;... 7. ::l n rt • • • ~ DI 0 :::T 3 (!) ::I --cz Cl c: ., 3 • 'C" (!) ..., ~~ Cl ~ ::::J •• 0 ,..,, ;;I <=< <=<1-J q t:n ~ (Jq f--' (D n ~ r-0 0 p_. 0 n rt z (l r >- z • ~ rn • ::::l (Jq ~f .......... (D ~ t:!l c 0 (/) . g " > . g 0 z . g tJ 9 • $ CL df. 3 t:!l . 3 . m ;><; . " ~ en "' 0 0 c ~ ,_, • en (/) ::::l 0 '"' c;I q q I u; ~I q n _,/ )> ;::; q (D ni n :::r OJ 3 [) -::::l ~ CD Ill ::J -:J -0. z a-------------------rt 0 --------- OJ c: q ~3 .~O" (D 0 ~ s. ...... (!) I\,) C/l •• H • • • )> ::: G'> Dl .., n Cl> ::r ~ 3 -ct> 0 ::::J "O ..... Cl> z :J r:: .g>3 • II) C'" 0 ct> Cl> .., :!! ..... II) w :J •• ' u u 0 -------- 0 z 0 0 -0 CL z 0 n rt V> n r ;>- z • • • BOB SIMPSON 12/27 /99 09:25 AM To: Lou Ellis/City of Englewood@COE cc: Subject: Re: Ordinance 82, Series of 1998 ~ Lou, Yes, I will work closely with you. The error is not substantive. Bob Lou Ellis Lou Ellis 12/15/99 02: 12 PM To: Bob Simpson/City of Englewood@COE cc: Gary Sears/City of Englewood@COE, Dan Brotzman/City of Englewood@COE, Frank Gryglewicz/City of Englewood@COE Subject: Ordinance 82, Series of 1998 I have been apprised of the problems with the attachments we have on file for Ordinance 82 of 1998. When you file the correct PUD with our office would you please include a note that states this was a clerical error, not substantive . Thanks! 12£16199 O~t.2 PM . W $impionlClty of Englewood@COE c:c: Gary SearslCJty of Englewood@COE, Dan Brotzman/City of Englewood@COE, Frank Gryglewicz/City of EftgleAoodOCOE - Subject: On:ll•ice 82. Series of 1998 > ' I have been apprised Of the problems with the attachments we have on file for Ordinance 82 of 199&.· • < When you file the correct PUD with our office would you please include a note that states this was a clerical .ror, not IUl>ltantive. -·---~~- • • n:...""U:.A"l\.TANCE NO . dJ.. SERIES OF 1997/1998 COUNCIL BILL NO . 82 INTRODUCED BY COUNCIL MEMBER WAGGONER AN ORDINANCE APPROVING AN AMENDMENT OF THE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT FOR CORNERSTONE PARK (SOUTH SUBURBAN PARK AND RECREATION DISTRICT) AJ.'l"D INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT FOR THE INCLUSION OF 2 IN-LINE HOCKEY RINKS , 1 SKATE PARK, 4 INFORMATION KIOSKS, 4 SHELTERS WITHOUT RESTROOMS AND 107 ADDITIONAL PARKING SPACES . --:;--=.. , · ~ ~il approved the South Suburban Park and /jaJJ:/11 ~ U(} ~·mt with the passage of Resolution No. 95 , -~ WHEREAS , the Englewood Planning and Zo following recommendations to the District: 1. The District should improve from the Southeast corner of th defined crosswalks and side 2. The District should mitigate t surrounding residential uses means t o prevent intrusion of and -- 3 . An in-depth review of lighting skating areas be undertaken b as height of standards, deflec rating of bulbs. A lighting pl minimum, shall be prepared mitigation of the impact of the and the parking lots on the su !"RAI. - .c B ~A