HomeMy WebLinkAbout1976-04-05 (Regular) Meeting MinutesCOUNCIL CHAMBERS
CITY OF ENGLEWOOD, COLORADO
April 5, 1976
REGULAR MEETING:
The City Council of the City of Englewood, Arapahoe
County, Colorado, met in regular session on April 5, 1976 at
7:30 p.m.
Mayor Taylor, presiding, called the meeting to order.
The invocation was given by Reverend Clayton Nietfield
of Grace Lutheran Church, 4750 South Clarkson. The Pledge of
Allegiance was led by Cub Scout Pack #153.
Mayor Taylor asked for roll call. Upon the call of
the roll, the following were present:
Council Members Williams, Sovern, Smith, Brown, Mann,
Clayton, and Mayor Taylor.
Absent: None.
The Mayor declared a quorum present.
Also present were: City Manager Mccown
Asst. City Manager Nollenberger
City Attorney Berardini
Acting Director of Community
Development Romans
Director of Public Works Waggoner
Director of Finance/City Clerk James
Deputy City Clerk Varner
• • • • • •
City Clerk James reported that the phrase "and setting
a public hearing for the regular City Council meeting on April 19,
1976" should be added to the first paragraph of page 7 of the
minutes of the regular Council meeting on March 15, 1976.
COUNCILMAN SMITH MOVED AND COUNCILMAN BROWN SECONDED A
MOTION TO ACCEPT THE MINUTES OF THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING
ON MARCH 15, 1976 AS AMENDED. Upon a call of the roll, the vote
resulted as follows:
Ayes: Council Members Williams, Brown, Mann, Clayton,
Taylor.
Abstain: Council Members Sovern, Smith.
Nays: None.
The Mayor declared the motion carried.
April 5, 1976
Page 2
COUNCILMAN MANN MOVED AND COUNCILMAN WILLIAMS SECONDED
A MOTION TO ACCEPT THE MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEET-
ING ON MARCH 22, 1976. Upon a call of the roll, the vote resulted
as follows:
Ayes: Council Members Williams, Sovern, Smith, Brown,
Mann, Clayton, Taylor.
Nays: None.
The Mayor declared the motion carried.
• • • • • •
Mr. Harold Rust, District Manager of Public Service
Company, 3470 South Broadway, was present to deliver the franchise
check for the first quarter of 1976. He presented a check in the
amount of $75,634.91 for gas and electric franchise.
• • • • • •
Mr. Harvey Martinez, 2940 South Emerson, was present
to request that Emerson Park be grassed this year. He submitted
a petition to City Council. Mr. Martinez stated that he has
approached the Parks and Recreation Department and was told
that money was not appropriated for this.
• • • • • •
Mr. M. M. Sununers, 3140 South Delaware, was present
to discuss a raise for City Council members. He stat~d that
they have not had a raise for over six years and that they
deserve a raise for their hard work. Mr. Summers proposed
the Mayor's salary be raised from $150/month to $350/month,
Councilmen's salary from $100/month to $300/month, and the
members of the Zoning Board's salary from $25/month to
$50/month. He also pointed out that by the City Charter
Council can raise the salaries but cannot participate in
the raises until their term is up. He suggested a Charter
amendment to be voted on at the state election this fall.
Mayor Taylor thanked Mr. Sununers for his confidence
in City Council and stated that the salaries are to help defray
expenses. Councilman Brown also thanked Mr. Summers. Council-I
man Clayton stated that one of the problems with the present
salary levels is that it discourages some people from running
for public office.
• • • • • •
Mr. Art Sines, 3220 South Grant, was present
representing Interested Citizens of Englewood to go on
record as opposing the location of the Senior Citizens
I
April 5, 1976
Page 3
Recreation Center at East Floyd Avenue and South Lincoln Street.
He stated that this group feels this location is not properly
suited for the senior citizens of Englewood or where it will do
the best for the majority. Mr. Sines suggested using the old
Police/Fire building because it would be centrally located to
Cinderella City, the library, City Hall, and downtown; it would
cost less; it would preserve a part of Englewood's history; and
because the occupants would not have to cross Broadway.
• • • • • •
Elwin D. Batchelor, 7101 South Webster, and Colbert
Cushing, 3791 South Sherman, were present representing the
Englewood Centennial-Bicentennial Foundation. Mr. Cushing
stated that they have raised approximately $94,000 and hope
to reach their goal by the Victory Dinner on April 30th. • • • • • •
Mayor Taylor: At this time we will open a public hearing for
Item 3a on the agenda.
Sovern: Your honor, I move we open a public hearing on an
ordinance rezoning a certain parcel of land within
the City of Englewood from R-3 high density residence
zone district to B-2 business zone district and amend-
ing the official zoning map accordingly.
Clayton: Second.
Mayor Taylor: It has been moved and seconded that the public
hearing be opened. At this time I would ask for the
roll call on the motion.
City Clerk James: Sovern?
Sovern: Yes.
James: Smith?
Smith: Yes.
James: Mann?
Mann: Yes.
James: Brown?
Brown: Yes.
James: Clayton?
Clayton: Yes.
April 5, 1976
Page 4
Jame s : Williams?
Williams: Yes.
James: Mayor Taylor?
Mayor Taylor: Yes.
James: Seven ayes, your honor.
Mayor Taylor: The motion is carried.
please step forward.
Ms. Romans, would you
Romans: Mr. Mayor and Members of the Council, the rezoning
application with which we are concerned this evening
was filed by Mr. Grady Franklin Maples, 22 Viking
Drive, Englewood, Colorado, and Mr. Richard
Hoffschneider, 4202 South Vrain, Denver, Colorado.
The area that is being considered for rezoning is
on the south side of Belleview; and, because it is
down at the very bottom edge of the zoning map on
the wall, I would like to refer to the maps that are
before you. These are identical maps showing the
area basically immediately to the north and south
of West Belleview Avenue and west of Broadway, this
being Belleview Avenue running through the lower
center of the map. The subject area is outlined in
green and is cross-hatched in green. This is the
area that we are discussing this evening. The
address of this area is 300 and 330 Wes~, ~~lleview
Avenue in Englewood, Colorado. The legal description
would be Block 16, Interurban Addition, except the
west 75 feet thereof, Arapahoe County, Colorado. It
consists of an area of 2.18 acres, more or less. The
owners of the land at 300 West Belleview are Grady
Franklin Maples and M. R. Vandiver. The owners of
the property at 330 West Belleview are Richard
Hoffschneider and Robert Hoffschneider.
The present zoning of the area that is being considered
this evening is R-3, which is a high density residence
district. It was zoned R-3 by Ordinance 53 of 1975,
becoming final in January of this year. The zone that I
is being requested is B-2, business. As I indicated,
the R-3 is a high density residence district. It does
permit, in addition to multi-family residential develop-
ment, professional offices, medical clinics, nursing
homes, and uses of that nature. The B-2 district is a
commercial zone that is ordinarily imposed upon property
along major thoroughfares. In addition to the retail
type uses that are permitted in the central business
district, the B-2 district permits drive-in type uses
Ap r il 5 , 1976
Page 5
Romans:
(cont.)
such as filling stations where you can expect some
traffic driving onto the property across the sidewalk.
This type of use is not permitted in the B-1 district,
where you have a heavy concentration bf pedestrian
traffic.
The reasons that were given for the requested zoning
upon the application are as follows: while there is a
50 foot strip bordering this property on its east
which is zoned R-4, its only use is for private off
street parking for a highly developed commercial use
(B-2) east to Broadway and south to Rafferty. The
proposed R-3 zone district in which these two properties
exist is approximately 2 1/2 city blocks wide (east to
west), and this district as a whole is obviously designed
to act as a buffer between the B-2 zone on the east and
the R-1 zone on the west and north. This application
would not disturb this buffer concept for these reasons:
(1) in so far as this particular property (all of block
6, Interurban Addition, except the west 75 feet thereof)
is concerned, it is bordered on both the east and west
by commercial uses. To its west is a property having
approximately a 75 foot frontage on Belleview which is
operating a business by right of prior non-conforming
use -an ambulance service. (2) If the present applica-
tion was granted, the remaining proposed R-3 district
would still provide nearly two blocks of "buffering"
between this use and the R-1-A district to the west.
(3) Due to the topography and present street patterns
within this district, the property here involved is
rather "isolated" in the sense that the natural access
to any multi-family development of the area to the
south and southeast would not be from Belleview but
would be from either Rafferty or Elati.
I would, at this point your honor, indicate that the
public notice of this hearing did appear in the official
City newspaper, the Englewood Herald Sentinel; and the
property has been posted. Now, if I may, I would like
to identify the areas to the surrounding zoning. As
was indicated, to the north of the subject site there
is R-1-A zoning and to the northwest. There is also
R-2 zoning immediately to the north. For your informa-
tion and the information of the audience, the R-1-A
zone is the most restrictive single-family zone classifi-
cation in the City requiring a minimum frontage of 75
feet and with certain restrictions as to floor area and
precludes any home occupations. The R-2 is a medium
density zone district. This is a land use map and shows
the location of all the structures. You can see that
there are two structures on this property. It is not
completely developed. To the northeast of the subject
site there is an R-3 zone classification, the zone
April 5, 1976
Page 6
Romans:
(cont.)
classification which is indeed imposed on the property
that we are considering this evening. This is the
location of the Carmel Park development •. Now coming
down south of Belleview to the east of the subject site
immediately to the east is a 50 foot strip of R-4 which
is a residential-professional zone district. At the
time that this zone classification was adopted, it was
the intent that this would serve as a "buffer" between
zone districts and development of higher intensity and
those districts and development of a lesser intensity.
Then to the east of the R-4 is the B-2 zone district
which is the location of K-Mart. The R-4 site is part
of the K-Mart property and is used for maneuvering.
To the south and to the west of the subject site the
property is zoned R-3, even though there is some singl e
family development in the area. On to the west of the
R-3 district there is an extension of the R-1-A zone
district, or the single-family zone district. On the
subject property at this time there are two single
family houses. Immediately to the west of the subject
site, as was indicated in the application, is a non-
conforming use of an ambulance service.
I believe at this time I would like to ask, in as much
as Council has received copies of the staff report that
was submitted to the City Planning and Zoning Commission
and copies of the findings of fact and conclusions
adopted by the City Planning and Zoning Commission,
that these reports be part of the record of this hearing.
This matter was considered by the Planning Commission,
Case #37-75, and their public hearing was held on
December 17, 1975. No decision was made at that hear-
ing. However, at the meeting on January 6, 1976, the
Planning Commission did move to deny the application.
Just a bit of history if I may, and I will try to be
brief but inclusive. The area that we are considering
tonight was a part of an annexation that came to
Englewood in 1964. During the time that we were
annexing this area, there were many meetings held
with property owners. Possibly many is an over-
exaggeration, but there were several meetings held
with property owners within the area to discuss what
the proper zoning should be. As a result of those
meetings, this area was proposed to be zoned R-3-B,
which was a medium density or high residential zone
district. At that time we had both an R-3-B and an
R-3-A which, as you know, has been repealed. The
area was indeed zoned by Ordinance 27, 1964, and
following that action the annexation was contested
and Judge Nago voided the annexation and the area
was given back to the county. While this area was
in the county, the county zoned the property fronting
on Broadway and Belleview for the K-Mart site and
Apr1J 5 , J 76
Page 7
Romans:
(cont. )
indeed permits were issued for the foundation and
footing of the K-Mart building. The land was then
returned back to the City and, because the K-Mart
stor~ was then a fact, the City took action to place
it in a commercial zone district so it would not be
a non-conforming use because it had been originally
proposed to be zoned partly R-3. Because zoning must
begin and end at some point, the City at that time
determined that they would apply a 50 foot buffer
strip on the westernmost side of the K-Mart property
which would act as a buffer between the R-3 and the
B-2. This was an effort to protect the property to
the west from the extension of commercial zoning.
Mr. Maples and Mr. Vandiver applied for rezoning in
1972 applying for a zone change from R-3-B, high
density residential zone district, to B-2. At that
time the Commission did recommend the zoning to
Council, but after a public hearing Council did
deny the zoning. As I indicated before, the R-3-B
zone district was repealed by Ordinance 31, 1975,
and the property was recently zoned R-3 by Ordinance
53 J 1975.
The conclusions that were adopted by the City Planning
and Zoning Commission are as follows: (1) proper
public notice of the public hearing, which I indicated
before was held before the Commission on December 17,
1975, was given; (2) the owners of residential property
in the adjacent area have relied upon the multi-family
residential zoning designation on the property with
which the application is concerned; (3) the Comprehen-
sive Plan does not project further commercial develop-
ment along West Belleview Avenue; (4) the extension of
the commercial zoning as proposed would not be compatible
with existing single-family uses in the area to the north
and west of the subject site; (5) it has not been
demonstrated that the original zoning was in error;
(6) no plans for the development of the subject site
have been presented other than that the land is to be
on the market for sale; (7) it has not been demon-
strated that the property cannot be developed under
the present zoning; (8) there has been no substantial
change in the nature of the immediate area which would
preclude the use of the land under the present zoning;
(9) the zone classification of R-3 will continue to
conserve and stabilize the value of property, prevent
undue concentration of population and traffic, secure
safety from fire, danger, noise and other affects which
would be detrimental to existing residents and to pro-
mote the health, safety, morals and general welfare of
all in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan. It was
with this recommendation, your honor and gentlemen of
April 5, 1976
Page 8
Romans:
(cont.)
Council, that the Planning Commission did not recommend
the zoning to City Council.
If there are any questions Council may have of me I
would be glad to attempt to answer them.
Mayor Taylor: Councilman Mann?
Mann:
Romans:
Mann:
Romans:
Mann:
Romans:
Mann:
Romans:
I would like to ask about that buffer, the R-4. Who
owns that, does that belong to K-Mart?
Yes, it does.
Is that being used presently for K-Mart?
Yes, it is used for maneuvering and access to the
rear of the building.
That means that it is being used for deliveries from
their trucks and so forth to the back of K-Mart.
Yes.
Would you consider it still to be a buffer?
By zone and by the fact that there are no buildings
within that area.
Mayor Taylor: Councilman Smith?
Smith:
Romans:
I understood you to say that it did not fit the
Comprehensive Plan? It looks to me when I looked at
it that it does.
The generalized land use map in the Comprehensive
Plan, Councilman Smith, is simply that, a very
generalized map. I think it would be safe to say
that the generalized land use map does not show any
extension of a commercial strip along Belleview in
either direction. It has the node of commercial
development at the intersection of Belleview and
Broadway with no extension.
Mayor Taylor: Councilman Mann?
Mann:
Romans:
Did I understand you to say that when this was sub-
mitted there were no plans for development submitted
with it?
This is the statement that is in the conclusions of
the Commission.
Mayor Taylor: Councilman Williams?
I
Apri l 5 , 1976
Page 9
Williams: Ms. Romans, did you say that that ambulance section
was classified as a buffer?
Romans: No, sir, that is a non-conforming use. It also was
permitted while the area was in the county and it has
continued as a non-conforming use. This simply means
that it is not a permitted use within the R-3 district
and they can continue to operate but they cannot expand
the use.
Williams: How much of a buffer would you need on the west side
there then to conform with the B-1 or B-2.
Romans: I think this would depend upon the development or the
intensity of the development.
Mayor Taylor: Councilman Smith?
Smith: Before that is developed would the PUD have to be
submitted, would a plan have to be submitted before
that was developed?
Romans: Not under the B-2 zoning as the ordinance is written
at this time.
Clayton: Ms. Romans, if this were a B-1 would we have to have
a PUD?
Romans: No, sir, we would not. Not the way the ordinance is
written. Let me hasten to say, however, that the plan
development district overlays all the property within
the City so that any owner of property within the City
can apply for plan development if they wish to have
more flexibility in the development.
Clayton: What zones, and I am aware that the R-1 zones do not,
what other zones require a plan development?
Romans: The R-2 would require a plan development if there were
four or more units attached. The R-3 for a high density
residential use would require a plan development.
Clayton: Then the zone R-3 which is next to this would require a
PUD?
Romans: Yes, if it were developed for a high density residential
use.
Mayor Taylor: Any other questions of Ms. Romans?
Clayton: I don't want to lead our discussion astray in this
hearing this evening, but I have heard considerable
mention in the City departments and from people who
have been on the Planning and Zoning and citizens
April 5, 1976
Page 10
Clayton:
Romans:
(cont.) throughout the City that we need a mixed zone
or a transition zone that would allow many of the things
that are now in an R-3 zone, some of the things that are
in a B-1 zone I understand, and possibly even including
some of those things that are in R-2 zones as well as
the R-3. Do these types of proposals properly drawn
carry considerable merit in your mind for this area?
The mixed use zone district that we have discussed in
primarily with the Chamber of Commerce could, I believe,
be applied to this area. This is a matter that is before
the Planning Conunission and we will be working together
to try and prepare this zone classification very soon.
Mayor Taylor: Thank you for that answer, Dorothy. We must stick
to the issue.
Clayton: Can I ask one more question about the R-3?
Mayor Taylor: Yes.
Clayton: In this R-3, how many units could be put on this land
that we are discussing tonight under the present zone?
Romans: The R-3 zone classification permits 40 units per acre
with a provision for a bonus for the acquisition of
additional land. I think on this particular area you
would have to figure taking out about 25% for streets
and access to the property. I don't think you could
just as a rule of thumb say that because you have two
acres you are going to have 80 units, because you would
have to provide considerable land for access into the
area and land for landscaping. Just strictly according
to the Code, you would be able to provide 40 units per
acre.
Clayton: What is your best judgement in complying with the Code,
how many units could be put on that parcel of land?
Romans: I think that we are assuming with an answer to that
question that the land will only be developed with
multi-family, and you will recall that I did indicate
earlier that professional offices, medical clinics,
nursing homes, and other uses are permitted in the
R-3 zone district. It would be my opinion that if
this was to be developed to its highest density that
it would be able to approach about 80 units because
of the bonus provision. But I think that would be an
assumption on our part that the owner would want to
develop it with apartments, which may be an ironious
assumption.
Mayor Taylor: Are there any other Councilmen that would like
to speak to the subject on the B-2 zoning? Thank
April 5 , 1976
Pa ge 11
Mayor Taylor: (cont.) you Dorothy. Is the applicant represented
by anyone but yourself? Would you like to speak? First,
state your name and address; and then you have the right
to ask questions of Ms. Romans on the subject.
Maples:
Romans:
Maples:
My name is Grady Franklin Maples. I live at 22 Viking
Drive. I am a businessman in Englewood. I am not here
tonight representing either of the businesses I own in
Englewood. I am here tonight representing myself as a
citizen and 75% owner of 300 West Belleview. I would
like to ask Ms. Romans because she is the authority,
for a definition of R-4 before I start talking please.
Mr. Maples, the R-4 is a residential zone district; and
I should have defined it. I apoligize. It permits a
mixture of uses. It permits any use in the R-1-C or
single-family zone district; it permits any use in the
R-2 or medium density zone district; it also permits
professional offices with a 100 foot frontage; and it
permits off-street parking, not storage of cars, but
off-street parking in connection with a business use.
Obviously it can't be used for office because it has
50 feet, and you just heard her say it has to have a
100 foot frontage. And you heard her say it is resi-
dential, but if you will go up there and look. And
tonight I would like to point out the fact that there
has been substantial change in the nature of the area.
The R-4 is not being used as residential and there is
no way it can be because it i s being used by big six
wheel trucks. It is not being used for parking or
buffer, it is being used for commercial. And, there-
fore, in actuality, regardless of the zoning or
definition of what makes it R-4, that is commercial
right up next to the property which we are talking
about. And the ambulance service which is directly
to the west of the property is a non-conforming zone
but is really a non-conforming commercial zone. So
we have in effect the property which has been outlined
by Ms. Romans very skillfully, manifestly, and alertly;
and we have commercial on both sides.
Now let me prove to you that there has been a sub-
stantial change in the nature of the area. I have
with me a 1965 map traffic count provided by the
Division of Highways. Belleview at · Broadway at that
time had 12,300 traffic count a.w.d., average week day.
On Santa Fe at that time Belleview had 14,700. And I
submit to you Councilmen that a count of 12,300 compared
to an approximate 20,000 traffic count today on Belleview
does create a substantial change in the nature of the
area. Ms. Romans said in her explanation to you that
usually the zoning which we are asking for is on a major
April 5, 1976
Page 12
Maples: (cont.) thoroughfare. I submit to you that a growth
from some 12,000 a.w.d. Highway Department figures, not
propaganda, to approximately 20,000 today creates a
major thoroughfare. And that is exactly what we have
here on Belleview between Santa Fe and Broadway. So
there has been a substantial change in the nature of
the area.
Now I shall not repeat the reasons we have submitted to
you and to the Planning and Zoning Commission for our
wanting, this change, but I would like to. point out a
few other things. And we do have the pictures to prove
that we did post this property. She has so stated to
you that the 300 West Belleview is 75% owned by me,
Grady Franklin Maples, and 25% by Mr. M. R. Vandiver.
The property consists of one acre and 117.74 feet along
Belleview and a depth of 370 feet. The land adjacent
to it immediately to the west of my property between
my property and the non-conforming commercial use by
the ambulance is about 1.2 acres, 138.47 feet along
Belleview, and 370 feet in depth. As she stated to
you, Richard Hoffschneider and Robert Hoffschneider
are the owners of that property.
I am not represented by an attorney tonight. I am
going to appeal to your common sense and judgement,
to go up there and look at it for yourself; and I am
sure some of you have already. Other very substantial
changes at the present time at 5095 South Broadway at
Belleview on the north side of Belleview at Broadway
a Majestic Savings and Loan building is being put up.
Right across the street from Majestic Savings at 5101
South Broadway at Belleview there has been another
substantial change in that particular area because
you cannot separate this area completely from all of
Belleview because there are so many commercial
establishments already. At 5101 South Broadway at
Belleview Avenue is Tuffy Mufflers and .Brakes and
Shocks, 50 West Belleview is A & W Rootbeer, going
toward the property we are talking about is the
Belleview Drive-In, 90 West Belleview is Leaning
Tower of Pizza, and there are more buildings and
more commercial entities than K-Mart there. There
are several more. At 150 West Belleview is Dolly
Madison Dairy Store. At 152 West Belleview is Magic
Comb Beauty Salon. At 200 West Belleview is K-Mart.
We are talking about 300 West Belleview and 330 West
Belleview. At 358 West Belleview directly west and
contiguous to bounding on the west side of the property
we are talking about is a non-conforming commercial use.
As much as we have a commercial use on this side regard-
less of the fact that it is called R-4. At 500 West
Belleview is another lady, Helen Caskey, who also owns
April 5, 1976
Page 13
Maples: (cont.) 520 West Belleview, 321 West Belleview, and
325 West Belleview who would like very much to be in
the City of Englewood, too, on the same kind of zoning
we are asking for. Let's go on west towards Santa Fe
and there are some apartment buildings, a park, and
then we have the fairgrounds. Then we come to Windermere
and on the other side of Windermere at 1600 West Belleview
is R. E. Willit Realty, 1700 West Belleview is a large
office building with several businesses in it, and going
on down to Santa Fe are numerous other businesses. So
if we will really travel Belleview between Santa Fe and
South Broadway, we will find that it is highly commercial-
ized already.
I have no quarrel with the people who have their houses
down there. Let them do what they want to do with them.
All I am asking is that they let me do with my property
what I want to do with it.
So every time I come to one of these hearings I hear
people say there has been no substantial change in the
area, and there has been a substantial change in the
area. When you go from the traffic count I told you
about which is the official highway count of 1965, and
I can repeat this for emphasis 12,300, you now have
approximately 20,000 and that is a major thoroughfare.
Therefore, there is -using the words of Ms. Romans -
justification for this change to the commercial zoning
we are asking for. That is all I would like to say at
this time Mr. Mayor and Councilmen, because I am sure
there are some rebuttal items I would like to make. I
understand we will be given that opportunity, am I
correct?
Mayor Taylor: Yes you are. First I think there may be some
Councilmen that would like to ask you some questions.
Councilman Mann?
Mann:
Maples:
Mann:
Maples:
Do you think that because the Highway Department in
1965 decided to enlarge Belleview and make it a four
lane instead of a two lane that that would compensate
for that extra traffic you are talking about?
I don't know, Mr. Mann. I am just giving you the
figures. I suppose there would be other factors, too,
speaking about the increase of traffic or the build-up
on both sides of Santa Fe and on the other side of
Santa Fe west.
Do you think that that decision by the Highway Depart-
ment might have created this?
I don't know, sir.
April 5, 1976
Page 14
Mann:
Maples:
And that we are just following in the same footsteps
if we redo the zoning?
I don't know, sir. I have no way of knowing what the
engineering data that the Highway Department uses on
which to make decisions.
Mayor Taylor: Mr. Smith?
Smith:
Maples:
Mr. Maples, in your listing of the existing commercial
buildings, how many did you get between Santa Fe and
Broadway, or did you count them?
I haven't counted them, but I can count them for you
a little later on ••• not to hold up the hearing. It is
substantial.
Mayor Taylor: Any further questions from Mr. Maples? Is there
opposition that is represented here tonight?
Loser: Mr. Mayor, my name is Ronald Loser. I am an attorney.
Mayor Taylor: Just stay at the podium, would you Grady please?
Loser:
Pardon me.
I am representing Mr. and Mrs. Bashor who own the
property immediately to the west of the subject rezon-
ing. And if I may I would like to cross examine Grady
at this time.
Mayor Taylor: All right. This is a public hearing.
Loser: Mr. Maples ••••
Mayor Taylor: I think since this is a quasi-judicial hearing
you will have to be sworn in.
City Attorney Berardini: I think Grady should be sworn in now.
City Clerk James: I have to swear you in.
Maples:
James:
Maples:
Loser:
I would rather be sworn in than sworn at.
Do you swear to tell the whole truth and nothing but
the truth so help you God in this matter now before
the City Council?
I do.
Mr. Maples, you heard Dorothy Romans indicate that your
property, and I assume you are also speaking for the
people -the Hoffschneiders -who own property adjacent
to you, that that property was rezoned to R-3 by the
I
I
Ap r il 5 , 19 76
Page l?
Loser:
Maples:
Loser:
Maples:
Loser:
Maples:
Loser:
Maples:
Loser:
Maples:
Romans:
Maples:
Loser:
Maples:
Romans:
Maples:
Loser:
Maples:
Los e r:
Maples:
Loser:
Maples:
(cont.) resolution that became effective in January
of 1976. Were you aware of that change of zoning on
your property?
Yes, sir.
And were there public hearings concerning that particu-
lar change of zoning by the Planning Conunission and
City Council?
Yes sir, as she stated a while ago.
And did you attend those public hearings?
Yes, sir.
Did you make objections to the zoning at that time?
Yes, sir.
When did you acquire the property that you and your
partner own?
Approximately ••• excuse me, when did we have the public
hearing, Ms. Romans, the last time?
1972.
In 1972.
And what was the property zoned at that time?
Residential, but it was changed. I don't know. I
would have to ask Ms. Romans.
R-3-B.
R-3-B? Thank you.
You were aware when you bought the property that it
was zoned R-3-B?
Correct, sir.
And as I recall at that hearing which I also attended,
the entire parcel that is subject to this zoning hearing
was included for that particular rezoning?
Under different ownership, yes.
Who made the sale to the Hoffschneiders?
Mr. Lisey himself.
April 5, 1976
Page 16
Loser:
Maples:
Loser:
Maples:
Loser:
Maples:
Loser:
Maples:
Loser:
Maples:
Loser:
Maples:
Loser:
Maples:
Loser:
Maples:
Loser:
Maples:
Loser:
Maples:
Loser:
Maples:
And do you recall when that sale was made or the
approximate time of that sale?
It was made about mid 1975.
Mid 1975. So the zoning did carry a residential zoning
at the time?
Affirmative.
When you bought the property, did you have the idea
that you would develop it as it is zoned?
Negative.
In other words, you bought the property with the thought
in mind that you would attempt to rezone the property?
Affirmative.
You, of course, are not in the residential development
business?
Affirmative.
Have you investigated any financial -institutions your
ability to obtain financing for residential developments
on that particular property?
Yes, sir.
Who did you talk to about that?
Some of the officers of the First National Bank, plus
two individual money men.
But you have no thought in mind that you would yourself
develop it residential?
No, sir.
Prior to this particular public hearing, you did attend
a Planning Commission meeting in reference to the
rezoning?
Yes, sir.
Have you had any contact prior to this meeting with any
of the City Council?
Personal or telephonic?
Well, either one.
Yes, sir.
I
Ap ri l 5 , 19 7
Page 17
Loser:
Maples:
Loser:
Maples:
Loser:
Maples:
Loser:
Maples:
Loser:
Maples:
Loser:
Maples:
Loser:
About this particular rezoning case?
Yes, sir.
Did you attempt to support your position as far as this
rezoning?
No, I merely asked that they take a look at it and
decide for themselves.
Was this all by telephone?
With the exception of one, yes.
And what was that exception?
Don Smith.
And what took place as far as Mr. Smith is concerned?
We drove up and down Belleview.
And again, were you attempting to support your position
on this rezoning case?
No more than I am supporting tonight, sir. I did not
ask him how he would vote, yes or no.
I have no further questions at this time.
Mayor Taylor: Thank you. Any one else present like to question
the witness? You may step down, Grady. Is there any
James:
Bashor:
James:
Bashor:
one else in the audience that would like to speak against
this proposal? First, maybe I should clear it. Is there
any one else in the audience that would like to speak in
favor for this proposal for the rezoning? Any one else
who would like to speak to the affirmative side of this
zoning change? Ok. Would you be sworn in, please.
Please raise your right hand. Do you swear to tell the
truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth so help
you God, in this matter now before the City Council?
I do.
State your name and address, please.
I am William H. Bashor, 5250 Miramonte Road, Englewood,
Colorado. At this time, your honor, I would like to
submit to the Council petitions in opposition to the
requested zoning change and made a record hereof.
Mayor Taylor: These petitions are accepted and the record shall
be made hereof.
April 5, 1976
Page 18
Bashor: Thank you. I would like to ask a question of the Council
if I may. For the benefit of the other people in the
audience that might wish to speak, are they allowed to
talk only once or twice?
Mayor Taylor: It has been the purpose of these hearings that the I
people that wish to talk appoint someone to talk for
them. If they have something pertinent that they would
like to add to the hearing that has not been brought out
before, we will be glad to listen to them.
Bashor: More specifically, would I be allowed to talk again at
a later date, a later time this evening?
Mayor Taylor: Yes.
Bashor: Thank you very much. Gentlemen, I had a fully prepared
speech this evening and I am going to scrap it. I, too,
am going to prevail on your good judgement. I find that
we must go back to the basics of this rezoning applica-
tion, and with your permission I'll proceed. I am not
as adapted as Dorothy at using both hands here so I am
going to direct it principally to you gentlemen. First
of all, we spoke of uses and zoning. Sometimes they may
be confused but they are quite different. Many years
back, and I can give you dates if it is necessary, but
not for the moment here. We are going to reason. The
R-4 buffer zone was established for one purpose and one
purpose only, and that is to stop the progress of the
commercial zoning on down Belleview. The ambulance
service was in existence prior to annexation into
Englewood and it went in under a non-conforming use.
There has been no change there. It is a somewhat
commercial use. As far as changes since the 1972 City
Council decision to reject a similar application for a
B-2 zoning, there I maintain has been no change. The
changes mentioned by Mr. Maples are confined in an
already existing B-2 zone. We talked of the Majestic
Savings which is perfectly acceptable and agreeable
and desired in the community in a B-2 zone. The same
with Tuffy's Mufflers and right down the line we have
discussed huge numbers all within the existing B-2 that
has been there for many years. We have skipped, quite
obviously, and we have called these uses commercial
use here for trucks and so forth, but I want to remind
you that this was a buffer zone to stop business zoning.
We have jumped clear down to Santa Fe and that is in
the City of Littleton and the County and have no
reference to the City of Englewood. And they have
been there for a long time.
Mayor Taylor: I must ask that the applause be held. Any one
that wishes to speak may speak or designate someone to
speak for them. This is not a football game, and I
Apri l 5 , 19 76
Pa ge 19
Mayor Taylor: (cont.) would appreciate it if you would hold
your applause and your boos. This is your City
Council.
Bashor: The other thing that I would like to point out is that
the area north of the subject property is some of the
finest single-family residential districts in the City.
And you are being asked tonight by the applicant to
introduce more commercial use to the detriment of the
R-1-A districts, not only here but on Elati Drive. I
happen to live in the R-3 area. I say that there has
been no change to constitute a re-request of both the
Planning and the City Council for a zoning change. And
I think I would take exceptance to myself wherein there
has been one additional change, and that is that we have
gone through a very severe economic setback. And Mr.
Maples has tried desperately to sell this piece of
property to get rid of it. Since that time you couldn't
sell a piece of R-3 ground because of increased cost of
materials and labor and services -gas, sewer, and
water. Interest rates are at an all time high. The
developer, investor, builder, could not build an apart-
ment house in an already overbuilt apart·ment situation
and hope to show a plus cash flow. This condition
exists today and it is going to exist for some time
to come until one of the factors change to enable an
investor to show a little bit of return. We have an
overgrowth situation, and I know you have all exper-
ienced it and you know it. The point being that the
change was not zoning. It was based strictly on
economic conditions that could not let the property
be sold under its present use. And I submit to this
Council that we have the zoning ordinances and we have
the Planning Commission rules and we have Master Plans
that a lot of people put much time in, all three of
these. And they were established to set up guidelines
so people in your positions could evaluate proper and
improper rezoning requests and changes. And I submit
that there has been no change to deviate from the
findings of the 1972 City Council on September 11th,
nor the Planning Commission of this year.
Again, you are being asked to change this to a B-2
to make it easier to sell at the expense of the R-1-A,
the R-3's, and possibly the R-2 1 s. I think there are
others, and I don't want to duplicate what someone
else might say tonight that can sum it up better than
I. I implore you to search your sense of reason on
this zoning request to see if you want to break this
boundary and let business go right on down Belleview.
Mayor Taylor: Mr. Maples, would you please stand at the podium.
Do you have any questions?
April 5, 1976
Page 20
Maples: I would like to examine the petitions that Mr. Bashor
has submitted. I think that is in my prerogative. I
remember the last time they had people who lived in
the 3500 block to sign the petitions.
Mayor Taylor: While you are examining those, Mr. Maples, I'll I
ask ••• Mr. Bashor, thank you. Now is there anyone
else that would like to speak?
Bashor: Would it be any benefit if I would read to the Council
and the people in the audience the petition? Not the
names but what the petition requests.
Mayor Taylor: The title of the petition?
Bashor: Yes.
Mayor Taylor: I think that would be in order.
Bashor: All right. It is labeled "Petition" and starts out:
"The undersigned, being over the age of twenty-one,
and property owners and residents within the City of
Englewood, State of Colorado, do hereby object to the
Petition ~or Rezoning, entitled 'Maples Rezoning'
Case No. 34-75, filed with the City of Englewood,
for the property commonly known as 300 West Belleview
and 330 West Belleview, requesting rezoning of said
property from R-3 (Multi-family residential) to B-2
(Business), on the grounds that the public necessity,
convenience, health, safety, morals, general welfare,
or good zoning practice does not justify the granting
of this rezoning request. We recognize the implica-
tions of this rezoning case and its possible effect on
future zoning decisions in other parts of the City,
and we object most strongly to its approval."
Mayor Taylor: Thank you. Would you please stay at the podium.
We have some Councilmen that would like to ask you
some questions. Mr. Williams?
Williams: Mr. Bashor, this is quite a serious affair. I would
like to ask you what type of zoning could you live
with other than B-2 and R-3? In other words, what I
am getting at is if you would object to a doctor's
office or an office building or something of that
nature in that area.
Bashor: You are speaking of uses?
Williams: Yes.
Bashor: For many years we have been prepared to live with those
uses permitted under an R-3, excuse me R-3-B zoning and
which was later changed to the R-3 zoning.
Apri l 5 , 19 76
Page 21
Williams: But you would not tolerate an office building or some-
thing of that nature? I am not talking about drive-in
restaurants or anything like that •. I am talking about
an office building.
Bashor: Sir, I would prefer not to have an office building
there because it would require a B-2 or a B-1 zoning.
I am not positive of which one, B-1 I believe it is.
This would open the door for additional rezoning as
was pointed out by the applicant by Mrs. Caskey who
would also like to have the B-2 zoning. And I think
others would like to have a B-2 zoning. So it is,
where do you stop.
Williams: Thank you.
Mayor Taylor: Mr. Smith?
Smith:
Bashor:
Smith:
Bashor:
Smith:
Bashor:
Smith:
Bashor:
Smith:
Mr. Bashor, how many single-family residences are in
that area just west of Mr. Maples property in the
area that you live?
In our particular ownership?
In that immediate area, yes.
In our particular ownership there are three residences.
Aren't there some further on down, single families?
Then on over into the R-1-A there is quite a few.
I understand. I was talking about immediately west.
The ambulance service is here. Then one, two, three
residences here. It doesn't show on the map, but there
are three residences.
Ok. I thought there were more.
Basho r: No.
Smith: Thank you.
Mayor Taylor: Anybody else have questions of Mr. Bashor?
Mann:
Bashor:
Mann:
Bashor:
I have one. Mr. Bashor, has there ever been any con-
sideration of rezoning R-3 to an R-1-A that you can
recall since you have been living there?
On the property that we own?
Where you live, yes.
While it was in the Englewood City limits?
April 5, 1976
Page 22
Mann: Yes.
Bashor: No, sir.
Mayor Taylor: Mr. Maples?
Maples:
Bashor:
Maples:
Bashor:
Maples:
Bashor:
Maples:
Bashor:
Maples:
Bashor:
I would like to ask Mr. Bashor some questions. Mr.
Bashor, whose name is this right here?
I am reading it from the thing, it reads Billy J.
Patrick.
Is that the owner of Patrick's Shoe Store?
I can't tell you that.
He doesn't live in Englewood, Mr. Bashor. Besides
that, that is 3448 South Broadway and you have done
some of the same kind of things you done before when
you got petitions. Here is the name of a person who
lives at 2958 South Lincoln and that is even north
of Hampden. Another one, 2958 South Lincoln. Another
one 3369 South Grant. It says up here "residents within
the City of Englewood", and Bill Patrick lives out here
on Coalmine Road unless he has moved. Here is another
signer of this petition who lives at 3776 South Sherman
Street. And so I suggest Mr. Bashor that it would seem
to me if you are getting petitions in objection to this
rezoning that it would be better to try to get the names
of people to sign this petition who live in this partic-
ular area. It seems a little bit unfair that you bring
petitions down here without checking to see if they are
really residents of Englewood, but I leave this for the
City Council. I am sure their legal department can
check that out.
Number two •••
Was that a question, Mr. Maples?
Yes, it was a question.
Have I answered your question?
No. Do you want to answer it?
Yes, I would like to elaborate if I may. If you will
notice in the last sentence of the petition it states
that we recognize the implications of this rezoning
case and its possible effect on future zoning decisions
in other parts of the City and we object most strongly.
You will find that there are other people within the
City of Englewood other than those that are living in
the immediate area that are vitally interested in what
April 5, 1976
Page 23
Bashor:
Maples:
Bashor:
Maples:
Bashor:
Maples:
Bashor:
Maples:
Bashor:
Maples:
(cont.) happens in these zoning decisions as to what
happens to their own property when they buy a resi-
dential piece of property and they want to know if
they can depend on that zoning to protect them in a
single-family situation or even in an apartment
dwelling.
Mr. Bashor, you are very persuasive. The last time
we had a public hearing you talked about the recent
economic conditions. Do you know how long it has
been since there has been a building permit asked
for of the City of Englewood in that particular area
that you are talking about and where you live?
I haven't checked all of the permits, but I will tell
you this that Mr. Donald Rork and Associates had a
multi-family development just south of the subject
property and it has been withdrawn because of economic
reasons. I tried to reach Mr. Rork today to urge him
to come to the Council meeting to express his views
either negative or affirmative.
Do you have any information at all as to how long it
has been since you on the property you own or control
have asked for a permit to build a building that would
be built under the zoning that you now have in that
area?
Is that pertinent, Mr. Maples?
Yes, it is.
On what basis?
Well on this basis. You talk about the economic con-
ditions. We had pretty good economic conditions eight
and ten and twelve and fourteen years ago. And it
would seem to me that you are hiding behind the so
called economy. I think it is important, City Council-
men, that we find out whether that property down there
can be developed under the present or the past zoning
as it was and if people really want to build things
down there under that zoning. I think that is perti-
nent.
Only to this extent. We chose not to build anything
down there, Mr. Maples.
I respect your right to do that, sir.
Mayor Taylor: Councilman Mann?
Mann: I want to see if I can throw a little cold water on
this.
April 5, 1976
Page 24
Bashor:
Mann:
Maples:
Mann:
Maples:
Mann:
Maples:
Mann:
Maples:
Mann:
Maples:
Oh, it is perfectly alright.
Do you consider it to be down zoning to zone that
R-1-A and build single family residences rather than
a B-2?
Do I consider what?
It to be a down zoning •••
Yes.
From a B-2 to an R-1-A single family residence that
probably could be sold and building permits could be
issued for single family residences.
Yes. This is an opinion.
You asked a question though. You asked a question of
the Council, if I understood you correctly, that the
building was down in that area because of the zoning.
I believe that you are only talking about R-3, R-4,
B-2 business use, and no one seems to be tuned into
the R-1-A philosophy.
Mr. Mann, I didn't bring that subject up. The only
question I heard raised was that building wasn't being
done because of economic conditions.
I misunderstood you.
I don t know if this is the time, but I was asked a
question by Mr. Smith a little while ago and I .would
like to answer that when the appropriate time comes.
Mayor Taylor: Alright.
Bashor: Are there any more questions of me?
Mayor Taylor: I think Councilman Clayton has a question.
Clayton: Mr. Bashor, your present use of this land, if I
interpret the map correct~y, would probably be
R-1-A. Your present use of your property.
Bashor: I do not know the fine points of R-1-A over •••
Clayton: Ms. Romans, would the correct definition of the present
use of .that property be R-1-A?
Romans: I believe it would be. It would be 9,000 square feet
and I believe the lots are that size. And I think the
homes have at least 1,100 square feet.
Ap ri l 5 , 1976
Page 25
Clayton: Alright, now this is the adjacent property to the
property in question. Is it your plan that this is
to be your permanent use of that property?
Bashor: No, sir.
Clayton: What do you plan to do with that property since the
property next to the property in question, I would
think, would affect the other. What is your plans
for future use?
Bashor: For many years we have visualized that as a multi-
family, medium density, under the R-3-B which was
most recently changed to R-3 high density. That
has been my prospects.
Clayton: You do desire, then, in the future to change this
use to a heavy density?
Bashor: Yes.
Mayor Taylor: Are there any other questions from Council?
Smith:
Thank you Mr. Bashor. Councilman Smith?
I would like to ask Mr. Maples if we could review
the petitions up here if he is through with them.
I would be glad to return them to him.
Mayor Taylor: Also, Mr. Maples, you said you had an answer
for Mr. Smith.
Maples: The answer is over thirty conunercial, business, and
professional establishments that I counted.
Mayor Taylor: Alright, is there anyone else in the audience
that would like to speak against this rezoning pro-
posal? Since this is a quasi-judicial public hearing
we are to take as much time as necessary, but I
implore on you to come to the point or we could be
here all night. In lieu of redundancy, if we would
present our case.
Can g illa: Before I am sworn in, I would like to know the reason
why the swearing in. Because I have been to many
public hearings here before and have never had to be
sworn in before.
Mayor Taylor: Because it is part of our charter.
Cangilla: Why haven't we been sworn in in the past at these
public hearings?
April 5, 1976
Page 26
City Attorney Berardini: Mayor, as I explained to Council when
we changed the procedure not only at the Council level
but at the Planning and Zoning Commission level, the
Snider case which was decided last fall in September -
James:
Snider vs. Lakewood -required a quasi-judicial hearing. I
The counsel representing those opposing this petition
I think is aware of that case, and it calls for a
quasi-judicial hearing or fact finding and conclusions
on the part of Council. That is why the process is now
to swear the witnesses and allow cross examination in
this type of hearing.
Do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and
nothing but the truth so help you God in this matter
now before the City Council?
Cangilla: I do.
James: State your name and address please.
Cangilla: My name is Louis T. Cangilla and I live at 5000 South
Delaware, Englewood, Colorado. Mr. Mayor and members
of the Council, so far in this hearing it has been
about the people to the south of Belleview. There has
not been much mention of the people to the north of
Belleview in the R-1-A zone district. A lot of things
I had to say up here have been said by Mr. Bashor, but
I would like to make one point. Mr. Maples just gave
Mr. Smith or told Mr. Smith that there are thirty
businesses between Broadway and Santa Fe. I would
like to ask Ms. Romans what is the western boundary
on Belleview for the City of Englewood?
Romans: On the south side of Belleview, Mr. Cangilla, the
western boundary would be at approximately an extension
of South Fox Street. On the north side of Belleview
the western boundary is approximately South Windermere
Street. The boundary is very irregular.
Cangilla: So everything west of South Fox is not in the City of
Englewood.
Romans: On the south side of Belleview.
Cangilla: On the south side of Belleview. Ok. I would like to
give my travelogue of the south side of Belleview coming
up from Fox. I believe, and correct me if I am wrong,
that everything from South Fox on the south side of
Broadway to the R-3 zone district is all R-1-A.
Romans: On the south side of Belleview both sides of •••
Cangilla: I am just talking about the .south side.
April 5, 1976
Page 27
Romans: On both sides of South Elati Drive, which runs with
the center line of Fox and Elati to the north of
Belleview is zoned R-1-A.
Cangilla: So proceeding up Belleview to Broadway we have R-3
to the buffer zone. Beyond the buffer zone is a B-2
zone. Like Mr. Bashor said, the uses that Mr. Maples
mentioned, Scottie's and so on, were a part of a B-2
zone. The north side of Broadway coming up from
Windermere, I believe, on the west, if my memory
serves me correctly, there is the movie place, the
equipment, the lumber yard, city park, and then we
have what I think is Inca Street and east to the
R-2 zone at what would be Cherokee extended is all
R-1-A. I can't for the life of me get thirty businesses
between Broadway and the City limits west of Broadway.
Next point. Being a father, a parent, I hear so often
how our schools are lacking in the number of children
attending them. Englewood's enrollment, the highschool
is down immensely. How do you propose that we, the
family, exist in the City of Englewood without proper
zoning and the protection of the City Council of the
City of Englewood in our existing zoning? On the
particular street that I live on there are many, many
children. And Delaware is an access street from
Belleview clear down to Kenyon, maybe one street beyond,
to Miller Field. I would like to submit to this Council
that with additional business on Belleview at this
particular point, the increase of the traffic which
Mr. Maples has said jumped from 12,000 to 20,000, this
business usage would again create more traffic. So
where do we stop? Do we zone down the south side of
Belleview and get commercial clear down? What is to
keep us from getting commercial on the north side of
Belleview? What is to keep my neighbor to the south
of me on Belleview and Delaware from coming before the
Planning and Zoning Commission and then before the
City Council and asking for a zone change on this
corner here? I live here. This he sells commercially
if we get a commercial zone, and this goes commercial,
and this goes commercial for a parking lot, and then we
have a McDonald's hamburger stand. I am sitting down
at the corner. I can't sell my property. I am at the
far end of the block but I have to put up with that.
So you tell me where it is going to stop. I have been
here not quite as long as Mr. Summers, but I have been
here for going on the seventeenth year. I picked that
piece of property at 5000 South Delaware because I '
liked the location. When I moved there there were not
too many houses. There were maybe a half a dozen or
so. I could have had property towards Belleview but
April 5, 1976
Page 28
Cangilla: (cont.) I chose the other end because I thought it
would be a little more quiet down there. The noise
that Belleview has from traffic. So I assumed that
the area was going to stay pretty stationary. But
I have been down here so many times with this Council
that I am getting sick of it, really. Down here every I
couple three years for a zone change of some sort. If
it isn't the piece of ground to the east of me it is
the piece of ground across the street on Belleview.
When are we entitled to some peace and quiet? We have
a nice neighborhood, R-1-A the finest zone in the City
of Englewood. I would like to see you gentlemen
preserve this zone. I think the people in that
neighborhood are entitled to that. Thank you very
much.
Mayor Taylor: Would you stand by for questions from Council.
Clayton: Mr. Cangilla, I think many of your statements are
very accurate.
Cangilla: Say that again sir, I didn't hear you.
Clayton: I think many of your statements were very accurate.
Cangilla: Oh, thank you.
Clayton: You drew one conclusion, however, in which I think
the facts go strongly the other way. From the
information that I have, R-3 zoning does not bring
in pupils into the school system. Now, I am not
arguing with you about R-3 zoning. That is not the
question. But I think that inference ought to be
corrected in the record.
Cangilla: May I answer that, Mr. Clayton?
Clayton: Yes.
Cangilla: That was not my inference, Mr. Clayton. My inference
was that if you on the Council so desire to change
this to B-2 that doesn't bring kids into the neighbor-
hood either. But I will tell you what it does do, it
is going to chase these R-l's out of there; and that
is what I had in reference to. My inference was to
that, not the R-3.
Clayton: Ok, I thought I detected the inference that the R-3
was bringing it in; and I just wanted the record to
be straight on that, that R-3 does not generally bring
in school children.
Cangilla: That was not my inference.
April 5, 1976
Page 29
Mayor Taylor: Councilman Sovern?
Sovern: I won't make this an inference, I'll make it a state-
ment. One of the reasons we changed the zoning require-
ments in both the R-2 and R-3 districts for larger units
was to promote family housing and multi-families. And
I think that, if in fact we ever do get additional R-3
and R-2 housing in the City of Englewood, you will see
more families in those units so we could get some more
school children out of it.
Mayor Taylor: Any one else have a question of this gentleman?
Mr. Maples, do you have questions?
Maples: Yes, I would like to rebut what Mr. Cangilla said.
Cangilla: It is Cangilla, sir, there is no •••
Maples: Mr. Cangilla, I apologize sir. Shakespeare said a
rose by another name would still smell as sweet. And
Mr. Cangilla by Congillo would still be as sweet.
Gentlemen, I would like to call your attention to the
fact that Mr. Cangilla seems to become quite ill because
I am down here two or three times a year. How do you
pronounce it, I would like to be correct.
Cangilla: Cangilla.
Maples: Cangilla? Thank you. Mr. Cangilla, I was here June 20,
1972; and if my calculations are correct that is almost
four years ago. And I don't think I have disturbed your
peace and tranquility as often as you have suggested by
insinuation. I would also like to call your attention
to the fact that Mr. Smith asked me approximately how
many businesses did I count between South Santa Fe and
South Broadway, if I remember the question correctly.
I merely answered that question. And thank you for
telling me how to pronounce your name, sir.
Cangilla: I never pronounced yours wrong, Mr. Maples.
Maples: Well, thank you.
Cangilla: I would like to answer Mr. Maples. The reason I
brought that up, Grady, was the fact that I couldn't
see where the amount of commercial business between
Broadway and Santa Fe had anything to do with this
hearing. We have no control over what Littleton does.
The other inference was that I was quite ill because
you have brought me down here many times. If I made
that inference I didn't mean it. I said I have been
down here many times because of the many zone change
that try to be occurred in the City of Englewood by
April 5, 1976
Page 30
Cangilla: (cont.) the property to the east of me and the property
to the · south of me. Not particularly on your property.·
Mayor Taylor: This would be a question of Mr. Cangilla?
Maples: Yes, this is a question. Mr. Cangilla, are you aware
of the fact that there is no legal requirement as to
how long I wait to bring this zoning application to
the City of Englewood?
Cangilla: I am not aware of it, the time element. All I am aware
of, Mr. Maples, is the fact that I have to keep corning
back to this Council every time my situation is in
jeopardy up there. And you would do the same thing,
Mr. Maples, living on Viking Drive if somebody tried
to do the same to you.
Maples: I would just respect your right to do it as often as
you want to.
Cangilla: And I respect your right sir.
Maples: I think Mr. Cangilla is a charming man, but I want to
call your attention to the fact that I have not violated
any law; and according to my legal advice there is no
amount of time that I have to wait to bring an applica-
tion for rezoning before the City Council. And before
the law is changed I can come twenty-four hours after
I am turned down or accepted. And I would like to
call your attention to that fact.
Cangilla: Thank you Mr. Maples, and you are entitled to that;
and I am entitled to say I am sick and tired of coming
down here all the time.
Mayor Taylor: Are there any other questions from Council to
Mr. Cangilla? Thank you, sir.
James: Do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and
nothing but the truth so help you God in this matter
before the City Council?
Keanmaster: I do.
James: State your name and address please.
Keanmaster: My name is Mr. Roy Keanmaster and I live at 673 West
Belleview. This is a home residence there. And if .I
may say, Mr. Grady as he mentioned there for wanting to
rezone this property to a B-2, he doesn't designate
definitely what he might want to do with that property.
But he wants to make it a business. And then in turn,
in some sort of words, he says that he isn!t saying to
any residents what they should do with their property.
April 5 , 19 76
Page 31
Keanrnaster: (cont.) Well I am here to speak for my rights as
well as he is. I have a property down there that I
bought many years ago and I am trying to protect it.
And he acts like I am nobody down there, and I feel
as though that should be an apology.
Maples: If I would have said that, I would apologize to you.
Keanmaster: Well, you did. Because as a resident I have just
as much right as any one individual in the district.
And I am speaking in the interest of my home and the
residents around that neighborhood, which we all try
to protect. And if it is rezoned it is going to change
the whole thing. And he hasn't ever stated exactly
what he would do with that district, and that would
make it into a business type business which we are
opposing to. That is all I have to say. I am speak-
ing for my interests.
Mayor Tay lor: Ok. Are there any questions of this gentleman?
Williams: Could you show us on the map, sir, where you reside?
Keanmaster: I don't understand this, but I am in this R-3 zone.
I'm at 673 West Belleview between Fox and Galapago.
Romans: He is R-1-A.
Williams: Are you on the north side or the south side •••
Keanmaster: I am on the side that he is talking about.
Romans: That is R-1-A.
Williams: R-1-A, that can't be, that is on the north side.
Keanma ster: It is on that side, the north side, 673 if you are
familiar with the run of the addresses.
Romans: On the Englewood side.
Keanmaster: On the Englewood side, between Fox and Galapago.
Williams: Thank you.
Keanmaster: And I think it is fair that I talk for my rights
when it is put to us that way.
Mayor Taylor: Any other questions from this gentleman?
Keanmaster: I didn't get my apology, either.
Mayor Taylor: Yes, sir, you may step forward.
April 5, 1976
Page 32
James:
Hankle:
James:
Hankle:
Romans:
Hankle:
Do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and
nothing but the truth, so help you God in this matter
before the City Council?
I do.
State your name and address please.
My name is Roy Hankle and I live at 5050 South Delaware.
Gentlemen, I came prepared with a big speech but I am
going to pass it up and ask a few questions. One, I
would like to ask Ms. Romans to clear up the ambulance.
First, I better make my intentions clear. I am speaking
against this rezoning. Ms. Romans, if the ambulance
service should cease to exist, what could then happen
to that property?
If the ambulance service ceased to exist it would have
to revert back to a use permitted in the R-3 zone
district.
Thank you. The other thing, I think these two pieces
of property are only the top of the iceburg. Because
once we open up this district, such as immediately
across the street from it is an R-2 district with
two very substandard dwellings, and I mean substandard.
I am sure you have seen the two that I am talking about
which are directly behind the residences on South
Delaware. I think that would open up that property
very quickly to zoning. That would be about 75 feet
which would not permit very adequate business, so
they would go down and try at least two. What does
that do to my neighbor on the corner. He is then
surrounded, and he has nothing to do but move out
or sell out the best he can. Again, what it does is
leave open not one but two lots, and suddenly I was
living in the middle of the block and now I am almost
right behind a couple businesses. I think it could
travel right down Belleview all the way on both sides
down to the park. I think this would change some of
the planning things that are happening in Littleton.
I think it would change their minds about what they
are doing. Gentlemen, I thank you for listening to
me and your kind indulgence.
Mayor Taylor: Mr. Maples, do you have any questions?
Maples: No.
Mayor Taylor: Does Council have any questions?
James: Do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth and
nothing but the truth so help you God in this matter
before the City Council?
April 5, 1976
Page 33
Unrein:
James:
Unrein:
Yes.
State your name and address.
My name is Tony Unrein and I am a resident of Englewood
at 4995 South Grant. My partner, Mr. John J. Rotz of
Lakewood, and myself are the owners of the property
inunediately to the west being referred to as a non-
conforming ambulance service. I would once again
like to go into the history of the ambulance service
and how it acquired this property. This property was
acquired by my partner and myself in 1963 contingent
on the fact that the ambulance service could operate
from that location. At the time, this property was
in the County of Arapahoe. This was taken up to the
Conunissioners and the officials of the county, and at
that time there was no specific zoning for an ambulance
service. The county did allow the ambulance service to
be stationed there, and consequently the property was
purchased. We then were approached for annexation to
Englewood, and on the grandfather clause we were allowed
as non-conforming with the annexation.
Also within the purchase of this property, the ambulance
service company did promise to mute its operation. And
I believe in the fifteen years that it has been in
operation there it has been on more or less a muted
basis. It is an ambulance station, and a business is
not fully conducted from this point. It is a garaging
of vehicles, of wheelchair cars and ambulances. The
drivers of the ambulance on duty are at the residence
inmediately to the north of the garage.
The last time I appeared before one of these hearings,
which was in January, it was misinterpreted when I more
or less stated that if this property in question by Mr.
Maples was allowed change that there was no reason to
see the ambulance service company be happy with the
situation as it stands today. The ambulance service
has no desire to try to form this into a B-2 operation.
It is content to provide to the City of Englewood, and
to the City of Littleton, and to the outlying Arapahoe
County service from this station. But I have heard,
a couple gentlemen before me did state, and I will go
along with them that the possibility of changing this
zoning here of Mr. Maples could possibly happen as far
as we are concerned. That is all I have to say.
Mayor Taylor: Thank you. Mr. Maples do you have questions?
Jame s :
Council? Thank you sir.
Do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and
nothing but the truth so help you God in this matter
before the City Council?
April 5, 1976
Page 34
Sweeten: I do.
James: State your name and address please.
Sweeten: My name is Patricia Sweeten and I live at 5155 South
Elati Drive. Three years ago when my husband and I I
bought a house at 5155 South Elati Drive we were
informed that the area to the East of us had just
been rezoned R-3 and that the area immediately to
the west of K-Mart was a buffer zone between commercial
and residential areas, and that commercial could not
be extended beyond that area. So we went ahead and
bought our house. Now we are fighting something that
we were told would be an absolute impossibility. Mr.
Maples stated that there are six-wheel vehicles in
the buffer zone. My husband and I go for walks just
about every night and we walk in that area and in a
lot of the areas in Englewood, and I have never seen
a six-wheel truck in that area. In fact, that area
is empty just about all the time. I have never seen
one there.
We as residents in the area are really very proud of
our homes, and these are the sentiments that I got
from 88 people that I got to sign the petitions.
And they were very opposed to this rezoning. We
cannot logically see how you can allow commercial
to come any further west on Belleview when the
traffic conditions are already unbearable. K-Mart
has already created a bottleneck, and with any more
commercial we think the whole area will be a total
disaster.
We can't understand why Englewood doesn't stick to
the areas that are already zoned commercial. The
ones that are on Broadway that haven't been utilized
and the ones in the other areas of Englewood.
In the past few months our property taxes have been
increased. Our water and sewer charges have been
increased by 30%. Yet we feel the quality of our
life is declining.
Mr. Maples stated that many changes have been made in I
the area. The only changes that my husband and I can
see that have happened are that they have let the two
houses on the property in question completely deterio-
rate. And I have heard from people who have lived in
the area that these two houses were beautiful homes at
one time. So their only object in letting them deterio-
rate is to let them be rezoned because they have become
an eyesore to the area.
Apri l 5 , 19 76
Page 35
Sweeten: (cont.) It looks to us, the people in that area, that
this zoning change would benefit only a few people; and
that the benefits derived from this zoning change would
not begin to equal the devaluation in our property that
it would bring to all of the many loyal tax paying
citizens in the City of Englewood. That is all I have
to say.
Mayor Taylor: Just a moment please. Councilman Smith?
Smith : I would like to clear up a couple things. I know your
property taxes went up but that was not because of
Englewood but it was a county tax that caused that
increase. I would also like you to realize that your
property taxes went down depending on how long you
have been a property owner here. But the other thing
is that Englewood is not the one making the decision
to use or not use existing commercial property. This
is an individual's right to buy or use or attempt to
use property where ever he may. We might not allow
it, but we may allow it depending on the plan. But
it is not the City of Englewood that is doing that.
I just wanted to clear that up in case anybody thinks
we are raising taxes in the City of Englewood. We do
have the lowest water rates, by the way, in the tri-
county area.
Sweeten: I just have one question, also. Like Mr. Maples said,
that within twenty-four hours he can come back and do
this again. Shouldn't there be some law to change this?
Because I know people have spent a lot of time and money
on this. We are all middle class citizens and we can't
keep spending all our salaries on fighting zoning changes.
Mayor Taylor: I'm sorry, I can't answer that.
have any questions?
Mr. Maples do you
Maples: I would like to ask a question. What did you mean by
spending all your salaries fighting zoning? Who do
you pay?
Sweeten: Well, we own some rental property on Sherman and we
have had to pay an attorney to get proper zoning in
that area. And I know that the people in our area
fought this zoning four years ago and all of them
helped pay for the attorney. And now we have employeed
an attorney again this time.
Maples: I heard Mr. Loser say he was representing Mr. and Mrs.
Bashor. Is he representing you?
Sweeten: Well, no. He is representing our interests. He is
representing Mr. Bashor but it is our interests also.
April 5, 1976
Page 36
Maples: Are you helping to pay his salary?
Sweeten: No, not this time; but in the past. We are not
paying him this time, no; but we did help in the
past.
Mayor T aylor: Any questions from Council?
Clayton: Just to clear this up, Mr. Loser would you tell us
who is paying your fee and who you represent.
Loser: Yes, Councilman Clayton, I have been retained by the
Bashor's only.
Clayton: Only?
Loser: Only. I think the reference is made in the case of
1972. I was representing a group at that time, and
I believe the group basically composed the R-1-A
area and also the Bashor's at that time. But this
time it has only been Mr. and Mrs. Bashor that I do
represent.
James: Do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and
nothing but the truth so help you God in this matter
before the City Council?
Clark: I do.
James: State your name and address.
Clark: My name is Mrs. John Clark and I live at 400 West
Belleview Avenue. I am sure that I don't have very
much more that you haven't heard already on this
subject. Although Mr. Maples did amuse me with
his point that because things were getting bad
already this Council ought to let them get worse
for all of us. I don't think there is any question
that commercial zoning has a deteriorating quality
on the residences that surround them. Now the only
thing unique that I have to say is that I live next
door to the ambulance service. I live there with
my husband and our five children. We live in a
beautiful area of trees and grass and fields. The
ambulance service is just about the best neighbor
I have ever had. I hardly know they are there.
From the front it appears to be a small green house.
I am not even aware of the ambulances leaving or
arriving, so the zoning commercial is a little mis-
leading in this instance. And I just know that
Englewood has plenty of commercial locations. I
submit that we have very few desirable residential
April 5 , 19 76
Pa ge 3 7
Clark: (cont.) locations. And if a gentleman wants to go
into business, it appears to me that the logical step
would be to buy in a commercial location.
Mayor Taylor: I think Mr. Maples may have a question.
Maples:
Clark:
Mrs. Clark, I would like to ask you to repeat verbatum
the statement you made relative to being worse and
getting worse.
Yes, you pointed out that one of the ways that things
were changing was that traffic had increased in what
proportion, one quarter or one third. I submit that
more and more traffic is not desirable and that if
you turn this location into a commercial entity it
can only increase the flow of traffic. I paraphrased
you. I hope that is permissable.
Mayor Taylor: Do you have any further questions?
Maples: No.
Mayor Taylor: Does Council have any questions? Is there any
one else in the audience that would like to be heard?
Loser: Mr. Mayor, if I may, I would like to •••
Mayor Taylor: I think we have another witness.
Loser:
Finn:
James:
Finn:
Maples:
Finn:
I'm sorry.
My name is Jerri Finn and I live at 5166 South Elati
Drive. Oh, I have to swear? I swear to tell the truth
and nothing but the truth.
I still have to swear you in. Do you swear to tell the
truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth so
help you God in this matter before the City Council?
I do. I just wanted to say that we have a lot of
children in our block, and Mr. Maples states he knows
the traffic or how many cars pass each day. I want
to ask you, do you know how many accidents happen on
this street?
I think that would be on record.
Our children are not able to cross the street. It is
not fit for man or animal to cross Belleview. We have
to lock up our dogs. My neighbor was hit in the back
by a car, and today his child was hit by a car and he
is lucky to be alive. His bicycle is a total wreck.
April 5, 1976
Page 38
Finn: (cont.) And I come from the old country, as you can
tell, thinking that this is the land of the free and
we built a home coming from dirty Chicago to beautiful
Colorado and we were surrounded like in a country club
with fields and horses. All of a sudden all these
buildings, and we too are just middle class citizens.
Don't we have any rights? Is it only the rights of
wealthy people like Mr. Maples? I'm sorry, I don't
mean to hurt your feelings or anything, but I think
I have a right to say this be'cause after all this is
America and I am free, white, and twenty-one.
Mayor Taylor: Do you have some questions of this lady?
Maples:
Finn:
I don't have a question particularly, but I would
like to set the record straight that I, Grady
Franklin Maples, and I want to thank you for knowing
if I am rich or poor, but I have never yet run over
any child out there and I hope to God I don't. And
number two, I do not plan to put horses on that lot,
so you don't have any fear there.
Oh, no, I like the horses.
Mayor Taylor: Does Council have any questions? Alright, thank
you. Is there anyone else that would like to speak
at this time?
James:
Bashor:
James:
Bashor:
Do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and
nothing but the truth so help you God in this matter
now before the City Council?
I do.
State your name and address.
My name is Cybill P. Bashor and I reside at 5250
Miramonte Road, Englewood. I think I have to begin
with an apology to Reverend Nightfield because I can't
keep my emotions out of this, and he definitely requested
in his prayers this evening that we do. Gentlemen,
financial gain has never been the criteria for rezoning
property. This is the only motive that we have been
able to find for this rezoning request.
Mr. Maples sights the traffic count as his reason for
believing there has been a change in our area. I used
to be a good deal sharper on this than I am, in 1972
when we fought this the last time. I didn't think we
would go into it again because it was very thoroughly
rebutted at that time. There are loads of areas in the
City of Englewood that have had a larger percentage of
increase in traffic than Belleview has. I think Downing
Apr il 5 , 19 76
Page 39
Bashor: (cont.) was one of them. I believe Clarkson was
one of them. We are not talking about numbers now.
We are talking about percentages of increase. So
I think this was truly a quote out of context.
It is difficult for all of us who have been harassed
twice in the last three years to understand how a man
who openly prides himself on his service to the
community and his heartfelt concern for its good,
how he could disregard the obvious good and the
expressed wishes of an entire neighborhood, the
Planning Department, the Zoning Commission, and a
former City Council in the interest of his own pocket.
If this change is granted, there are at least 200 of
us who are bound to be hurt because Mr. Maples made
a bad business judgement several years ago. Englewood
does not need more business or traffic or ugliness on
Belleview, and Mr. Maples knows it. We can't stand
the pressure of any more B-2 or B-1 zoning on our
already busy Belleview, and you know it. We as
people emotionally and financially can't stand to
have to fight this issue every three and one half
years. Under the law, a common criminal is given
more consideration than has been given our neighbor-
hood in this affair. A criminal, after all, cannot
be placed in jeopardy twice. But it seems that we
must go through this trial and fight for our lives
as a residential neighborhood every time Mr. Maples
wants to fight again.
I think sometimes that a quote or two from prominent
persons in a decision-making capacity is worth infinitely
more than anything I myself might say. So I have gathered
a few words that seem to be pertinent to our proceedings
this evening, and I quote: "I am for programs that
inject vigor into residential areas and rejuvenate
neighborhoods"; another quote: "If I am retained on
the Council, I shall stress cooperation with the Planning
and Zoning Commission"; and another quote: "I strongly
favor a strong single-family housing base for Englewood";
and finally: "I think the people believe in what we have
been saying. The community really does want one family
housing and progress in a reasonable manner, and I think
they intend to hold us responsible. There is nothing
wrong with that. That is the way it ought to be." That
is the end of my quotes. It isn't necessary for me to
identify which of these statements are attributable to
which of you Councilmen. Each of you have said much the
same thing on many occasions.
Believe me, all of us here and all of us on these
petitions are listening to you tonight. We beg you
April 5, 1976
Page 40
Bashor: (cont.) to remember your commitments. A decision for
this rezoning will mark the beginning of another resi-
dential neighborhood, will mark the beginning of the
end of another residential neighborhood in Englewood.
We don't have many more to lose. Please think care-
fully. And Mr. Maples, my last remark is for you; and
it is very direct and very personal and very heartfelt.
If you lose here this evening, for God's sakes once and
for all stop asking Englewood and our neighborhood to
pull your financial chestnuts out of the coals.
Mayor Taylor: Mr. Maples, do you have some questions?
Maples:
Bashor:
Maples:
Bashor:
Loser:
Bashor:
Maples:
Yes, since she has used the word specifically, I would
like her to give a definition of the word 'harassed',
so we will know what she is talking about.
We have been bothered. Our sense of contentment has·
been upset. We spent six months the last time and
our entire neighborhood contributed more money than
they could afford to purchase an attorney to support
us. We are doing it alone ourselves this time. That
is a bit of harassment. I am not Webster, but I think
you get the feel.
Next question, if you are going to quote things up
here I think you should identify the persons you are
quoting and tell us what the quote is.
Ron? Must I?
You don't have to, no.
I would be very pleased to. "I am for programs that
inject vigor into residential areas and rejuvenate
neighborhoods"-that is Mayor Taylor. "If I am retained
on the Council, I shall stress cooperation with the
Planning and Zoning Cormnission"-that also is Mayor
Taylor. I spent the afternoon at the Englewood
Sentinel. "I strongly favor a strong single-family
housing base for Englewood"-that is Mr. Clayton.
"I think the people believe in what we have been
saying. The cormnunity really does want one family
housing and progress in a reasonable manner, and I
think they intend to hold us responsible. There is
nothing wrong with that. That is the way it ought to
be"-that also is Mr. Clayton. These are quotes from
the Englewood Herald.
No further questions.
Mayor Taylor: Any questions from Council? Thank you Mrs. Bashor.
Any one else in the audience that would like to speak?
April 5, 1976
Page 41
Loser: Mayor and gentlemen of Council, I'm Ronald Loser again.
I would like to present a copy of a letter to the
Council for their study in reference to the ambulance
service company. It is relevant in how that company
was established in Arapahoe County. It is a letter
dated June 11, 1963 from Dr. Richard Simon to James H.
Norton, the Building Inspector of Arapahoe County in
1963. I think it indicates the type of business, if
you can call it a business, that we are dealing with on
the west side of the subject property. The letter reads:
"Ambulance Service Company, whose main office is at
2045 Downing Street, Denver, Colorado, has recently
taken over the Public Service formerly provided by
Bullock Ambulance Service. Ambulance Service Company
is negotiating for the purchase of the vacant property
at 358 West Belleview (Arapahoe County) and otherwise
described as West 75' of Plot 6, Inter Urban Addition
which is 75' on West Belleview and 370' deep.
An examination of the Arapahoe County Zoning Resolution
adopted August 7, 1961 discloses there is no specific
classification for "Ambulance Service".
The improvements on the premises now consist of a seven
room house and single garage. Ambulance Service Company
intends to purchase the property as a place for two to
six single men, ages 21 to 40, to live while on duty and
provide a garage to accommodate three automobiles. There
will be some re-decorating of the house and the request
for a building permit to enlarge the garage.
The service performed is in the "nature of public service"
since calls are received at all hours of the day and
night to render ambulance service to the public. Police
regulations require each call received to be reported to
the Arapahoe County Sheriff's office and the Colorado
State Patrol. The ambulance vehicle cannot use the
"siren" on the vehicle for emergency purposes until the
vehicle receives clearance from the Sheriff's office
after the vehicle has travelled approximately six blocks
from its station.
The property at 358 West Belleview is now situated in
an R-5 district. Your attention is directed to West
Belleview and South Fox Street where the Englewood
Fire Department maintains a Fire House to receive calls
and dispatch fire engines. This location is also situ-
ated in a residential district in Englewood (R-1-B).
In my opinion the use proposed by Ambulance Service
Company conforms to the Regulations provided for in
the Arapahoe County Zoning Resolution, Page 8, Chapter II,
District Regulations, Applications .of Regulations:
April 5, 1976
Page 42
Loser: (cont.) 2. The following uses are permitted in all
districts: a. Public and quasi-public buildings
and/or uses of administrative, educational, religious,
cultural, or public service nature.
I submitted this matter to your office and it is my
understanding you referred the matter to Richard
Dittemore, County Attorney. I have talked with Mr.
Dittemore and he suggested I submit the matter by
letter to you. He informed me that he is in agree-
ment with the above interpretation of the regulation
and use.
In order that I may advise Ambulance Service Company
that they may use the property as above described,
and when the property is purchased they may obtain a
building permit to enlarge the garage, subject t9 the
County Building Code, it will be appreciated if you
will indicate your approval on the enclosed copy of
this letter and return it to me in the self addressed
and stamped envelope."
And this letter was approved by the Building Inspector.
As indicated by that letter, there is a Fire Station
that is now existing in an R-1-A district. There was
then in 1963 and there is now. There is also a Red
Cross building located approximately here, which is
also in the R-1-A district. Again, this is a public
service nature. The Red Cross, I don't know how the
Ci ty of En g lewood handled that particular project. I
believe I was Chairman of the Red Cross when we pur-
chased that and there was no problem as far as the
zoning is concerned. But I think when we are talking
about ambulance service and fire stations and Red
Cross, I think we have certain types of uses that are
hardly called commercial or business in nature even
though they certainly aren't residential in nature.
But they do fit within the residential area. I think
it is not a proper objective to indicate that that
particular location boxes the subject property in
between cormnercial uses.
I do have a statement on behalf of Mr. and Mrs. Bashor
that I would like to present to the Council. I think I
I have sufficient copies. I am not going to read the
statement. It does go into what we consider to be a
legal analysis of this situation. Basically it gets
into the requirements of the zoning ordinance as to
what is necessary in order to change a zoning resolu-
tion. Obviously, your Comprehensive Plan is the key
to any zoning decision. The Comprehensive Plan has
not been changed as far as its intent not to allow
commercial uses to extend further west on Belleview.
Certainly that should be a change of philosophy if
this zoning application should receive any merit.
April 5 , 1 97 6
Page 43
Loser: (cont.) Secondly, and I think important are the rules
and regulations that were adopted by the Planning and
Zoning Conunission, which states six objectives that I
recite in this particular memorandum as to when a zoning
should be grant e d. We argue that none of those particu-
lar changes have been shown by Mr. Maples in his appli-
cation tonight. And, therefore, it would be in our
opinion not possible for the Council to arrive at a
proper finding of fact based on evidence presented to
you to indicate that a zone change should be granted.
I think, and I'll summarize in my presentation by
reflecting back on what was said by Planning staff in
reference to the B-2 and B-1 zoning categories, that
it is not necessary and it certainly hasn't been
presented tonight, once the B-2 is granted there are
a number of uses that will be allowed for that property.
You are not, and I don't think you probably have the
legal authority to say we would grant that if a cer-
tain business enterprise would go in or say that if
it was landscaped and so on. It probably could be more
appealing if that were the case, but as I read your
ordinance it is not the case. The ordinance does get
into what uses are allowed in the B-1, and as I read
the ordinance B-2 allows everything that B-1 allows.
There are some pages, 67 through 70, that list 107
types of uses that could go into the B-1 category and
therefore could also go into the B-2 category. You
have theatres, tobacco stores, liquor stores, jewelry
stores, just everything under the sun that could go
in ••. boat stores, bowling alleys, barber shops, bicycle
stores, assembly halls or auditoriums, auto sales or
repair. In the B-2, as I stated, it allows anything
allowed in the B-1 and also allows an auction house,
drive-in type eating or drinking establishment, drive-
in type restaurant, feed and seed store, garages for
commercial and public utility vehicles, gasoline and
oil service stations, mortuaries, hospitals and con-
valescent homes, motels, motor courts, auto courts,
outdoor commercial advertising devices, terminals for
public transit vehicles, trailor sales lots, used car
lots. Again, I think to visualize any of those uses
in this area is certainly going to be a change of
condition that would probably justify conunercial going
through the, certainly if not the northern part of
Belleview, certainly the southern part of Belleview.
I think that is a serious consideration for the Council
tonight. I just don't see that the facts are before
Council as presented by Mr. Maples other than he needs
to sell the property. That is not a condition, I feel,
that is warranted for a rezoning against the Comprehen-
sive Plan and against the requirements as set forth in
April 5, 1976
Page 44
Loser: (cont.) the Planning and Zoning rules and your own
ordinance. I thank you very much for your attention
and the way you have handled this hearing.
Mayor Taylor: Thank you, sir. Mr. Maples?
Maples: Gentlemen, Mr. Loser has said, quote: "The Master
Plan is the key to any zoning change", end quote.
I submit to you that the Master Plan is not the law.
The Master Plan is not final. The Master Plan is not
inflexible. And I challenge Mr. Loser to deny that.
I would like to call your attention again to R-4
definition. This district is residential-professional
district. This district is designed to achieve
stability of land use and land value through mini-
mizing the adverse effects of adjoining incompatible
uses. To these ends, development is limited to a
medium high concentration and permitted uses are
typically single-family and two-family dwellings.
I ask you, gentlemen of the Council, is it conceivable
that that R-4 could be used for what this has said?
Various institutions, certain professional uses com-
patible with the district. This should be applied
only in sufficient size to properly perform the above
objective. This is normally construed to mean at
least one half block in depth and one full block in
length. I submit to you that the R-4 has been a
mistake from the beginning. And I don't care what
it is called, if you will go observe for yourself
it is not used for that; and there are trucks that
come up there and unload, and that is what K-Mart is
using it for and I might submit that is what it should
be used for. Therefore, this should not have ever
been done anyway if you want to go by your own defini-
tion. ·
Now it all boils down to the fact that regardless of
the R-4 there, this is still B-2 usage and it is still
being used as B-2. Therefore, in effect, we are
bounded by a commercial use contiguous to and bounded
by cormnercial on the east side. And even Mr. Bashor
said, quote: "The ambulance is somewhat commercial
use". I want to thank you for agreeing with me tonight. I
That is probably the nearest we have agreed tonight.
Somewhat commercial use ••• it is cormnercial use. Non-
conforming commercial use as it is presently being used.
Therefore we have the specter of this land, the subject
property, being bounded on both sides by commercial
property. And we are an island there. They tell us
we can't go either way commercial.
In this legal paper which Mr. Loser prepared very
capably, he suggested there has been no substantial
Apri l ~' 19 76
Page 45
Maples: (cont.) change in the nature of the area. There has
been substantial change in the nature of the area. We
stand by the reasons, plus the additional reasons given
tonight, for believing we have a right, I know we have
a legal right to, and we have a common sense right to
ask for the rezoning that we are petitioning you for.
And I would like for this question to be raised and
answered by yourselves whether they have been any
cause, questions, or inquiries made of you or of any
City employee relative to this zoning question by
some of the people who are occupying a position
diametrically opposed to mine. And furthermore
other than a quasi legal question asked of me by
Mr. Loser, I ask you as a duly elected official
what is wrong in the democratic process with the
citizens speaking with any elected official about
any matter of interest to that citizen. I would
not deny them the right nor suggest or insinuate
that they shouldn't if they wanted to ask you. I
have heard some of you gentlemen say that you want
to hear from the citizens, and that is all I would
be doing. But I ask you the question, those of you
on the position opposite of mine, have any one of
you made any kind of inquiry. And I want to go on
record to state that I have never specifically asked
the question of any person on this Council -will
you vot e for my position, or will you vote against
my position. And I will not insult your intelligence
or compromise your integrity by expecting you to make
up your mind befor e this hearing. Therefore, I would
like to further emphasize in answer to the question
I was asked by Mr. Loser, that that is the position
I take and I think it is a moral position; and I think
I have a right as a citizen who owns property and who
is a tax payer and who conducts business in the City
of Littleton to ask that question.
There is a man by the name of Patonious who was a
Roman who lived in 66 B.C., I would like to identify
my quotes, he said: "A bit of sound sense, common
sense, is what makes men. The rest is rubbish."
And Lord Chesterfield said, "Common sense is the
best sense I know." And common sense suggests to
me that, in as much as I am bounded on the east and
bounded on the west by commercial entities, it is
not unreasonable to ask you to grant me a commercial
zoning that I have asked for. Thank you.
Mayor Taylor: Ok, I'll entertain a motion to close the public
hearing.
Sovern: So move.
April 5, 1976
Page 46
Williams: Second.
Mayor Taylor: It has been moved and seconded that the public
hearing be closed.
James: Councilman Sovern?
Sovern: Yes.
James: Smith?
Smith: Yes.
James: Mann?
Mann: Yes.
James: Brown?
Brown: Yes.
James: Clayton?
Clayton: Yes.
James: Williams?
Williams: Yes.
James: Mayor Taylor?
Mayor Taylor: Yes.
James: Seven ayes, your honor.
Mayor Taylor: At this time I suggest to Council that we postpone
the findings of fact on this until the next Council meet-
ing so we have time to study the information that has
been given to us tonight. The public hearing is over.
It is up to the Council now to decide which way they
want to go on this vote. But I believe it would be
hasty to vote on it tonight, and at the advice of our
City Attorney I am asking for a motion to postpone this
finding of fact and decision and vote on the ordinance
until the next Council meeting which will be on April
the 19th.
Williams: Mr. Mayor, could we extend that even to the first meet-
ing in May so we could have enough time to go through
all this?
Mayor Taylor: I really, I'll leave that to Council, but my personal
opinion would be that we should not sit on it too long.
April 5, 1976
Page 47
Williams: Alright, I would like to make the motion then that at
the meeting of April 19th that we come back after review-
ing the findings of fact and testimony we heard tonight
to act on this ordinance.
Mayor Taylor: Is there a second to that motion?
Smith: Second.
Mayor Taylor: Now before we vote on the motion I think that we
should instruct our City Manager and our City Attorney
Mann:
to compile the information that we have here so that we
can have a special study session on this so we will have
time to sit down and really digest the information that
we have. This is not an easy decision to make. I don't
know, should we vote on this motion and then vote on the
other? We can just direct them to do that. Any discussion
on the motion?
Yes, your honor. This has been before the City and before
the City's fathers and before previous Council. It has
been to the Planning and Zoning Commission. There was a
public hearing held before the Planning and Zoning
Commission. There was testimony given at th public
hearing. I happened to be there because I am a resident
of this area. I was active in the first when this was
tried to be rezoned in 1972. This has been before the
people and before the Council and before the Planning
and Zoning Commission now for months. These people are
out and I think we should give them a yes or no answer.
I came prepared to vote on this tonight, after sitting
through two hours of public hearing I definitely have
my mind made up. I can't speak for the rest of your,
but I think we do owe the people a little more than
putting them off for another two or three weeks.
Williams: I believe that we have not had such a detailed discussion
as we have had tonight. I would like to review what has
been said from both sides. I think we owe that to both
sides, if that meets with your approval.
Mayor Taylor: Further discussion on the motion? Roll call.
James: Councilman Sovern?
Sovern: Yes.
James: Smith?
Smith: Yes.
James: Mann?
Mann: No.
April 5, 1976
Page 48
James: Brown?
Brown: Yes.
James: Clayton?
Clayton: Yes.
James: Williams?
Williams: Yes.
James: Mayor Taylor?
Mayor Taylor: Yes.
James: Six ayes, one nay, your honor.
Mayor Taylor: Motion is carried.
* * * * * *
Mayor Taylor declared a recess at 10:20 p.m. Council
reconvened at 10:35 p.m. Upon a call of the roll, the following
were present:
Council Members Williams, Sovern, Smith, Brown, Mann,
Clayton, and Mayor Taylor.
Absent: None.
The Mayor declared a quorum present.
* * • * * *
"Cormnunications -No Action Recommended" on the agenda
were all accepted:
(a) Minutes of the Planning and Zoning Commission
meeting of March 2, 1976.
(b) Transmittal of the Annual Financial Report for
the year 1975.
(c) Minutes of the Parks and Recreation Commission
meeting of March 11, 1976.
(d) Minutes of the Board of Career Service Commis-
sioners meeting of March 18, 1976.
(e) Memorandum to the City Manager from the Director
of Public Works concerning Annual City Cleanup.
I
April 5, 1976
Page 49
(f) Letter to Mr. Herbert Mosbarger, 2250 West
Wesley Avenue, from Mayor Taylor concerning
reappointment to the Urban Renewal Authority.
(g) Copy of Formal Presentation to Wagon Master of
Bi-Centennial Train Pilgrimage to Pennsylvania.
• • • • • •
Assistant City Manager Nollenberger presented a
recommendation from the Water and Sewer Board concerning the
encroachment agreement for City Ditch in the 3500 block of
South Washington Street. He explained that the Plaza de Medico
development wants to cover over the City Ditch with paved park-
ing. This is the only area in that section of town that City
Ditch is not currently covered over, and they would stand the
total cost plus any construction or reconstruction required and
repairs. Mr. Nollenberger stated that the City would retain
easement for the whole area.
Acting Director of Community Development Romans
stated that there are two houses presently at this location
which will be removed. The development will run between
Clarkson and Washington, with a two-story medical building
being constructed there.
COUNCILMAN MANN MOVED AND COUNCILMAN SOVERN SECONDED
A MOTION TO APPROVE THE ENCROACHMENT AGREEMENT IN CONNECTION
WITH THE PLAZA DE MEDICO DEVELOPMENT ON SOUTH CLARKSON STREET.
Upon a call of the roll, the vote resulted as follows:
Ayes: Council Members Williams, Sovern, Smith, Brown,
Mann, Clayton, Taylor.
Nays: None.
The Mayor declared the motion carried.
• • • • • •
Assistant City Manager Nollenberger presented a
recommendation from the Water and Sewer Board concerning the
renewal of the raw water lease agreement with G.A.S.P. -
Groundwater Appropriators of the South Platte. He stated
that the City has leased water to them over the last three
years of 2000 acre feet, the last year at $5/acre foot. An
agreement has been received from them to lease the 2000 acre
feet at $6/acre foot, plus a check in the amount of $12,000 to
be cashed if the agreement is approved by Council.
COUNCILMAN SOVERN MOVED AND COUNCILMAN MANN SECONDED
A MOTION TO APPROVE THE RENEWAL OF THE RAW WATER LEASE AGREEMENT
WITH G.A.S.P. FOR 2000 ACRE FEET AT $6/ACRE FOOT. Upon a call
of the roll, the vote resulted as follows:
April 5, 1976
Page 50
Ayes: Council Members Williams, Sovern, Smith, Brown,
Mann, Clayton, Taylor.
Nays: None.
The Mayor declared the motion carried.
In response to Councilman Clayton, Mr. Nollenberger
stated that the flat-rate/meter question will be discussed at
the meeting on April 20.
Councilman Smith inquired about the water pressure
and use of booster pumps in the area of Fox and Chenango, as
discussed in Section V. of the minutes of the Water and Sewer
Board meeting of March 16. Councilman Mann stated that the
problem has not been solved and requested that this subject
not be discussed at this time as it is not on the agenda.
* * * • • •
City Manager Mccown presented a memorandum from Tom
Burns, Chairman of the Englewood Housing Authority, regarding
the ownership of the land and the ownership of the building for
the elderly housing project. The Housing Authority feels there
should be some type of formal agreement between them and the
City whereby: (1) the Housing Authority would lease the property
to the City for $1.00 per year throughout the term of the bonded
indebtedness; and (2) after the bonds are repaid and the terms of
the Housing and Urban Development contract are fulfilled, the
City would convey ownership of the building to the Housing
Authority.
City Attorney Berardini requested that this item be
tabled until the next Council meeting to allow him time to
consult with the bond counsel.
COUNCILMAN MANN MOVED AND COUNCILMAN BROWN SECONDED
A MOTION TO TABLE AGENDA ITEM 5b UNTIL THE NEXT CITY COUNCIL
MEETING ON APRIL 19, 1976. Upon a call of the roll, the vote
resulted as follows:
Ayes: Council Members Williams, Sovern, Smith, Brown,
Mann, Clayton, Taylor.
Nays: None.
The Mayor declared the motion carried.
• * * • • •
city Manager Mccown presented a proclamation declaring
June 29 & 30 as Englewood Blood Donor Day with a blood bank set
up between 12:00 noon and 5:45 p.m.
April J t 19 76
Page 51
COUNCILMAN SOVERN MOVED AND COUNCILMAN BROWN SECONDED
A MOTION TO AUTHORIZE THE MAYOR TO SIGN THE PROCLAMATION FOR
CENTENNIAL LIFE UNDERWRITERS ASSOCIATION DECLARING BLOOD DONORS
DAY. Upon a call of the roll, the vote resulted as follows:
Ayes: Council Members Williams, Sovern, Smith, Brown,
Mann, Clayton, Taylor.
Nays: None.
The Mayor declared the motion carried.
I I I I I I
City Manager Mccown requested Council's consideration
of a contribution to the Englewood Centennial-Bicentennial
Foundation to pay for their victory dinner, which will be held
at the Elks Club Lodge on April 30. They are hoping to have
the dinner free for the campaign workers and many of the elderly
people who have contributed to the campaign. The dinner should
cost between $800 and $1,000.
COUNCILMAN BROWN MOVED AND COUNCILMAN WILLIAMS SECONDED
A MOTION TO PROVIDE A MAXIMUM OF $1,000 TO THE ENGLEWOOD CENTENNIAL-
BICENTENNIAL FOUNDATION FOR THEIR VICTORY DINNER.
Councilman Mann stated that he is against this motion
because the City has already and will be contributing much more
towards this project and feels they should come up with their
own money to pay for their celebration.
Upon a call of the roll, the vote resulted as follows:
Ayes: Council Members Williams, Sovern, Smith, Brown,
Clayton, Taylor.
Nays: Council Member Mann.
The Mayor declared the motion carried.
• • • • • •
INTRODUCED AS A BILL BY COUNCILMAN BROWN
BY AUTHORITY
ORDINANCE NO. 16
SERIES OF 1976
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 3, CHAPTER 10, TITLE III, OF THE
1969 ENGLEWOOD MUNICIPAL CODE, AMENDING A PORTION OF THE NATIONAL
ELECTRICAL CODE, 1975 EDITION, RELATING TO THE INSTALLATION OF
LAMPHOLDERS IN WET OR DAMP LOCATIONS.
April 5, 1976
Page 52
COUNCILMAN BROWN MOVED AND COUNCILMAN SOVERN SECONDED
A MOTION TO PASS ORDINANCE NO. 16, SERIES OF 1976, ON FINAL
READING. Upon a call of the roll, the vote resulted as follows:
Ayes: Council Members Williams, Sovern, Smith, Brown,
Mann, Clayton, Taylor.
Nays: None.
The Mayor declared the motion carried.
• • • • • •
RESOLUTION NO. 16, SERIES OF 1976
A RESOLUTION AMENDING SECTION 2 OF RESOLUTION NO. 57, SERIES OF
1975, ENTITLED "WATER SERVICE CHARGES -FIRE PROTECTION SERVICE",
BY ABOLISHING AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER SYSTEM CHARGES.
COUNCILMAN SOVERN MOVED AND COUNCILMAN MANN SECONDED
A MOTION TO PASS RESOLUTION NO. 16, SERIES OF 1976. Upon a call
of the roll, the vote resulted as follows:
Ayes: Council Members Williams, Sovern, Smith, Brown,
Mann, Clayton, Taylor.
Nays: None.
The Mayor declared the motion carried.
• • • • * *
City Attorney Berardini presented a resolution of
intent to create P.O. 23 for improvements in Dartmouth Avenue
from Zuni Street to Huron Street. This special improvement
district is the one funded by the federal government under
aid to urban systems to the extent of 74% of the total cost.
RESOLUTION NO. 17, SERIES OF 1976
A RESOLUTION DECLARING THE INTENT OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF ENGLEWOOD, COLORADO, TO CREATE A SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT
DISTRICT IN THE CITY TO BE DESIGNATED AS PAVING DISTRICT NO.
23, ADOPTING DETAILS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE PROPOSED
DISTRICT, AND ORDERING PUBLICATION AND MAILING OF NOTICE OF
HEARING TO THE OWNERS OF THE PROPERTY TO BE ASSESSED FOR
IMPROVEMENTS IN SAID DISTRICT.
COUNCILMAN SOVERN MOVED AND COUNCILMAN SMITH SECONDED
A MOTION TO PASS RESOLUTION NO. 17, SERIES OF 1976. Upon a call
of the roll, the vote resulted as follows:
Ayes: Council Members Williams, Sovern, Smith, Brown,
Mann, Clayton, Taylor.
April 5 , 19 76
Pa ge ~3
Nays: None.
The Mayor declared the motion carried.
• • • • • •
City Attorney Berardini presented the findings of
fact and conclusions regarding the rezoning request by Tina
Warden of R-1-A to R-1-C for 3001 West Bellewood Drive. The
ordinance rezoning this property was passed at the last regular
Council meeting.
COUNCILMAN CLAYTON MOVED AND COUNCILMAN WILLIAMS
SECONDED A MOTION TO APPROVE THE FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLU-
SIONS REGARDING THE REZONING APPLICATION OF TINA WARDEN, 3001
WEST BELLEWOOD DRIVE. Upon a call of the roll, the vote
resulted as follows:
Ayes: Council Members Williams, Brown, Mann,
Clayton, Taylor.
Nays: None.
Abstain: Council Members Sovern, Smith.
The Mayor declared the motion carried.
• • • • • •
RESOLUTION NO. 18, SERIES OF 1976
/
A RESOLUTION ADOPTING FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS IN
CASE NO. 7-76, APPLICATION FOR THE REZONING OF LAND WITHIN
THE CITY OF ENGLEWOOD, COLORADO, FROM R-2-A TWO-FAMILY
RESIDENCE DISTRICT, TO R-2-C MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENCE
DISTRICT.
COUNCILMAN WILLIAMS MOVED AND COUNCILMAN CLAYTON
SECONDED A MOTION TO PASS RESOLUTION NO. 18, SERIES OF 1976.
Upon a call of the roll, the vote resulted as follows:
Ayes: Council Members Williams, Sovern, Smith,
Brown, Mann, Clayton, Taylor.
Nays: None.
The Mayor declared the motion carried.
• • • • • •
City Attorney Berardini presented a report concerning
the law suit filed against the City by Alma L. Reffel, who had
laid claim to part of Raritan Street. He submitted copies of
April 5, 1976
Page 54
the Findings of Fact, Conclusion, Order and Judgment from the
District Court on this case. The case was won by the City in
the trial court.
• • • • • •
City Attorney Berardini stated that he should have a I
report prepared for the next regular Council meeting regarding
towing service for the City.
• • • • • •
City Manager Mccown presented a memorandum to the City
Manager from the Director of Public Works concerning P.D. 22
assessment protests.
Director of Public Works Waggoner outlined the changes
to be made in the assessment roll as follows: page 11 -Edward
and Alice Reffel -$1,154.07; page 12 -Edward L. and Sylvia
Gates -$1,212.86; page 13 -Gerard c. and Ruth Ann Bertsch -
$914.95; page 13 -Roy D. and Elizabeth A. Richards -$941.08;
page 13 -Curtis L. and Lillie Morris -$941.08; page 13 -
Paul c. and Elizabeth Barcelona -$959.99; page 20 -Al J.
Schechter -$19,249.43. He further stated that the following
changes should be made on page 1 of the Bill for an Ordinance:
" ••• the City of Englewood will pay $72,467.59 leaving $425,671.77
to be assessed ••• "
COUNCILMAN SOVERN MOVED AND COUNCILMAN SMITH SECONDED
A MOTION TO ACCEPT THE CHANGES IN THE ASSESSMENTS FOR P.D. 22
IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE LIST PROVIDED BY THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC
WORKS.
COUNCILMAN MANN MOVED AND COUNCILMAN SMITH SECONDED
A MOTION TO AMEND THE ABOVE MOTION TO REDUCE THE ASSESSMENT FOR
GERTRUDE A. BOBBIT FROM $466.37 TO $200.00.
Councilman Mann explained that this is a hardship case
and this would help her to be able to pay it.
Councilman Brown stated that Council is sympathetic in
this case, but that she should be able to pay the full amount
just with her tax rebate money over ten years.
Councilman Clayton stated that he would have liked for
this to have been handled through the rehabilitation loan program
if it could have been. He also stated that Mrs. Bobbit's tax
rebate and the ten year period allowed should help her to be
able to make the full payment.
Upon a call of the roll, the vote on the amendment to
the original motion resulted as follows:
Apr i l 5 , 19 76
Page 55
Ayes: Council Member Mann.
Nays: Council Members Williams, Sovern, Smith, Brown,
Clayton, Taylor.
The Mayor declared the motion defeated.
Upon a call of the roll, the vote on the original
motion resulted as follows:
Ayes: Council Members Williams, Sovern, Smith, Brown,
Mann, Clayton, Taylor.
Nays: None.
The Mayor declared the motion carried.,
Assistant City Manager Nollenberger pointed out that a
correction should be made on page 3, Section 6, of the Bill for
an Ordinance in that $431,698.96 should be changed to $425,671.77.
INTRODUCED AS A BILL BY COUNCILMAN CLAYTON
A BILL
FOR AN ORDINANCE APPROVING THE WHOLE COST OF THE IMPROVEMENTS MADE
IN PAVING DISTRICT NO. 22, IN THE CITY OF ENGLEWOOD, COLORADO;
APPROVING AND CONFIRMING THE APPORTIONMENT OF SAID COST TO EACH
LOT OR TRACT OF LAND IN SAID DISTRICT; ASSESSING A SHARE OF SAID
COST AGAINST EACH LOT OR TRACT OF LAND IN THE DISTRICT; PRE-
SCRIBING THE MANNER FOR THE COLLECTION AND PAYMENT OF SAID
ASSESSMENTS; AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY.
COUNCILMAN CLAYTON MOVED AND COUNCILMAN WILLIAMS SECONDED
A MOTION TO PASS A BILL FOR AN ORDINANCE APPROVING THE WHOLE COST
OF THE IMPROVEMENTS MADE IN PAVING DISTRICT NO. 22, IN THE CITY OF
ENGLEWOOD, COLORADO; APPROVING AND CONFIRMING THE APPORTIONMENT
OF SAID COST TO EACH LOT OR TRACT OF LAND IN SAID DISTRICT;
ASSESSING A SHARE OF SAID COST AGAINST EACH LOT OR TRACT OF LAND
IN THE DISTRICT; PRESCRIBING THE MANNER FOR THE COLLECTION AND
PAYMENT OF SAID ASSESSMENTS; AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY. Upon
a cal l of the roll, the vote resulted as follows:
Ayes: Council Members Williams, Sovern, Smith, Brown,
Mann, Clayton, Taylor.
Nays: None.
The Mayor declared the motion carried.
* * * * * *
April 5, 1976
Page 56
City Manager Mccown presented a memorandum from the
Chief of Police concerning animal shelter operations.
COUNCILMAN SOVERN MOVED AND COUNCILMAN SMITH SECONDED
A MOTION THAT CITY COUNCIL AUTHORIZE THE PARTICIPATION OF
COUNCILMAN SOVERN, BILL JAMES, CHIEF HOLMES, AND ONE CITIZEN
TO BE NAMED BY THE MAYOR ON THE COMMITTEE ON ANIMAL SHELTER
MANAGEMENT WITH LITTLETON, ARAPAHOE COUNTY, AND SHERIDAN.
Upon a call of the roll, the vote resulted as follows:
Ayes: Council Members Williams, Sovern, Smith, Brown,
Mann, Clayton, Taylor.
Nays: None.
The Mayor declared the motion carried.
RESOLUTION NO. 19, SERIES OF 1976
A RESOLUTION AMENDING THE 1976 BUDGET IN THE GENERAL AND REVENUE
SHARING FUNDS.
COUNCILMAN CLAYTON MOVED AND COUNCILMAN BROWN SECONDED
A MOTION TO PASS RESOLUTION NO. 19, SERIES OF 1976. Upon a call
of the roll, the vote resulted as follows:
Ayes: Council Members Williams, Sovern, Smith, Brown,
Mann, Clayton, Taylor.
Nays: None.
The Mayor declared the motion carried.
• • • • * *
City Manager Mccown presented a memorandum from the
Assistant City Manager to the City Manager reference House
Bills 1026, 1058, and 1225. The information was obtained from
the Colorado Municipal League, who are in opposition to all
three bills. House Bill 1026 is reference weed control, House
Bill 1058 is reference homes for the aged, and House Bill 1225
is reference statewide contractors licensing.
COUNCILMAN SMITH MOVED AND COUNCILMAN SOVERN SECONDED
A MOTION TO SEND A LETTER TO EACH INDIVIDUAL COMMITTEE AS WELL
AS A GENERAL LETTER TO THE HOUSE AND SENATE AND A COPY TO THE
COLORADO MUNICIPAL LEAGUE IN SUPPORT OF THE DEFEAT OF ALL THREE
OF THESE BILLS.
Councilman Smith pointed out that one of the problems
with House Bill 1225 is that it has no provision for performance
bonds for contractors. Councilman Mann stated that the licensing
fees required by each municipality for the contractors is an
unfair handicap.
April 5, 1976
Page 57
Councilman Sovern stated that DRCOG does not support
this particular bill because they feel it is not the right bill
for us.
Upon a call of the roll, the vote resulted as follows:
Ayes: Council Members Sovern, Smith, Brown, Clayton,
Taylor.
Nays: Council Members Williams, Mann.
The Mayor declared the motion carried.
* * * * • *
City Manager Mccown presented a memorandum from the
Director of Utilities to the Assistant City Manager reference
water service for the south drive in area, as well as a recommenda-
tion from the Water and Sewer Board to approve the Windermere
Water Users Association's request for water service. He stated
that the approximate cost to install an 8" line would be $22,000;
the cost to install a 10" line would be approximately $2.00/foot
higher; and the cost to install a 12" line would be approximately
$4.20/foot higher.
Discussion by Council followed regarding the size of
the line, the money involved, and possible future annexation
of this area.
COUNCILMAN SOVERN MOVED AND COUNCILMAN SMITH SECONDED
A MOTION TO APPROVE THE AGREEMENT WITH WINDERMERE WATER USERS
ASSOCIATION FOR WATER SERVICE AS LONG AS A TEN INCH LINE IS USED
AND IF THEY PAY THE COSTS. Upon a call of the roll, the vote
resulted as follows:
Ayes: Council Members Williams, Sovern, Smith, Brown,
Mann, Clayton, Taylor.
Nays: None.
The Mayor declared the motion carried.
* * * • * *
Mayor Taylor declared a recess at 12:05 a.m. Council
reconvened at 12:15 a.m. Upon a call of the roll, the following
were present:
Council Members Williams, Sovern, Smith, Brown, Mann,
Clayton, Taylor.
Absent: None.
The Mayor declared a quorum present.
• • • • • •
April 5, 1976
Page 58
COUNCILMAN SOVERN MOVED AND COUNCILMAN MANN SECONDED
A MOTION TO TABLE THE ENGLEWOOD DAM MAINTENANCE CONTRACT UNTIL
THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING ON MAY 3, 1976, TO ALLOW THE CITY
ATTORNEY AND DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS TO INVESTIGATE LIABILITY
PROBLEMS. Upon a call of the roll, the vote resulted as follows:
Ayes: Council Members Williams, Sovern, Smith, Brown,
Mann, Clayton, Taylor.
Nays: None.
The Mayor declared the motion carried.
• • • • • •
City Manager Mccown presented a memorandum from the
Director of Finance to the City Manager reference the quarterly
occupational tax payments by Mountain Bell proposing that these
payments be made on a monthly basis.
COUNCILMAN MANN MOVED AND COUNCILMAN BROWN SECONDED
A MOTION TO REQUEST THE CITY ATTORNEY TO AMEND SECTION 13-3-3
OF THE ENGLEWOOD MUNICIPAL CODE. Upon a call of the roll, the
vote resulted as follows:
Ayes: Council Members Williams, Sovern, Smith, Brown,
Mann, Clayton, Taylor.
Nays: None.
The Mayor declared the motion carried.
• • • • • •
City Manager Mccown requested Council's consideration
of establishing a date for the Capital Improvement Plan public
hearing. He stated that the purpose of the public hearing would
be to consider the five-year budget and the method of financing
the five-year budget. He also proposed having a pre-budget
public hearing at the same time.
COUNCILMAN SOVERN MOVED AND COUNCILMAN SMITH SECONDED
A MOTION TO HOLD A SPECIAL STUDY SESSION ON JUNE 14 TO STUDY
RECOMMENDATIONS FROM THE TAX COMMITTEE AS WELL AS OTHER ITEMS,
AND TO HOLD A PUBLIC HEARING ON JULY 12 TO STUDY THE CAPITAL
IMPROVEMENT PLAN AND FOR A PRE-BUDGET HEARING. Upon a call of
the roll, the vote resulted as follows:
Ayes: Council Members Williams, Sovern, Smith, Brown,
Mann, Clayton, Taylor.
Nays: None.
April 5, 1976
Page 59
The Mayor declared the motion carried.
• • • • • •
COUNCILMAN SOVERN MOVED AND COUNCILMAN SMITH SECONDED
A MOTION TO FOLLOW THE STANDING POLICIES OF THE CITY CONCERNING
RELOCATION OF BUSINESSES, THAT BEING THAT NO RELOCATION COSTS
BE BORNE BY THE CITY EXCEPT WHERE FEDERAL REQUIREMENTS MANDATE
IT, REGARDING THE SENIOR CITIZENS RECREATION CENTER. Upon a
call of the roll, the vote resulted as follows:
Ayes: Council Members Williams, Sovern, Smith, Brown,
Mann, Clayton, Taylor.
Nays: None.
The Mayor declared the motion carried.
• • • • • •
City Manager Mccown presented agenda item 7i, considera-
tion of Elati Street as a collector from Kenyon to Yale Avenue.
Acting Director of Community Development Romans stated that the
Planning Commission has discussed this and felt that Cherokee
was the only street that could serve as a collector west of
Bannock. Councilman Clayton stated that the City should keep
its promise that an island would be put in Elati Street. Mayor
Taylor requested that this item be placed on a future study
session agenda.
• • • • • •
City Manager Mccown presented a report from the
Assistant City Manager and the Director of Finance to the
Tax Committee concerning the financial status of the City.
He stated that the main thing to be highlighted from this
report is the future revenue and expenditure outlook for the
City.
Councilman Sovern stated that this information will
be public information. He stated that we do have financial
problems but are looking at them in time to do something about
them.
COUNCILMAN SOVERN MOVED AND COUNCILMAN SMITH SECONDED
A MOTION TO SEND THIS INFORMATION TO OUR CONGRESSMEN. Upon a
call of the roll, the vote resulted as follows:
Ayes: Council Members Williams, Sovern, Smith, Brown,
Mann, Clayton, Taylor.
Nays: None.
April 5, 1976
Page 60
The Mayor declared the motion carried.
• • • • • •
City Manager Mccown requested that the dinner session
with the Career Service Board be held on April 26 instead of
April 12. This would be held at 6:30 in the library conference
room. This was approved by Council.
• • • • • •
COUNCILMAN CLAYTON MOVED AND COUNCILMAN SOVERN
SECONDED A MOTION TO DIRECT THE CITY MANAGER TO RECEIVE BIDS
TO RAZE THE OLD POLICE AND FIRE BUILDING LOCATED AT WEST GIRARD
AND SOUTH BANNOCK STREETS AND PRESENT THE BIDS TO CITY COUNCIL
FOR THE SELECTION OF THE LOWEST AND BEST BID, AND THAT SUFFICIENT
FUNDS BE APPROPRIATED IN THE SIXTH QUARTER CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT
BUDGET TO MEET THAT EXPENDITURE; IF POSSIBLE, THIS PRESENTATION
TO BE MADE ON APRIL 19, 1976.
In response to Councilman Mann, Councilman Clayton
explained that it would cost approximately $200,000 to use
that building, it possibly may not fit in the plans for the
Dry Creek Study, it does not meet the space requirements for
the Senior Citizens Recreation Center and that it ·is not logical
to put the necessary expenditures into that building to make
pr0per use of it.
Councilman Mann stated that he knows of four uses
that have been proposed for that building. Councilman Clayton
stated that he feels these proposals are not feasible.
Mayor Taylor stated that Englewood seriously lacks
a hotel and convention center, and there are plans to build a
300 unit hotel with a large convention hall in Englewood. He
further stated that the problem is where to put the hotel and
two possible locations are the old Police/Fire building site
or Cinderella City.
Discussion followed by Council regarding the motion.
Upon a call of the roll, the vote resulted as follows:
Ayes: Council Members Williams, Sovern, Smith, Brown,
Clayton, Taylor.
Nays: Council Member Mann.
The Mayor declared the motion carried.
• • • • • •
April 5, 1976
Page 61
Councilman Smith requested that serious consideration
be given to the dog ordinance and the possible use of off-duty
policemen to get rid of some of the dogs in the City.
COUNCILMAN SMITH MOVED AND COUNCILMAN BROWN SECONDED
A MOTION TO DIRECT THE CITY MANAGER AND THE CHIEF OF POLICE TO
GET TOGETHER AND CONSIDER WAYS TO CONTROL THE DOGS IN THE CITY.
Upon a call of the roll, the vote resulted as follows:
Ayes: Council Members Williams, Sovern, Smith, Brown,
Mann, Clayton, Taylor.
Nays: None.
The Mayor declared the motion carried.
• • • • • •
COUNCILMAN SOVERN MOVED AND COUNCILMAN WILLIAMS
SECONDED A MOTION TO ADJOURN THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING. Upon
a call of the roll, the vote resulted as follows:
Ayes: Council Members Williams, Sovern, Smith, Brown,
Mann, Clayton, Taylor.
Nays: None.
The Mayor declared the motion carried, and the City
Council Meeting was adjourned at 1:05 a.m.
City Clerk P'