Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2009-12-10 ACE MINUTES• • I. ~ ALLIANCE FOR COMMERCE IN ENGLEWOOD DE CEM BER 10, 200 9 CALL TO ORDER The regu lar meeting of the Alliance for Commerce in Englewood (ACE) was called to order at 11 :39 a.m. in the City Council Conference Room of the Eng lewood Civic Center, Chair Lonborg presiding. Present: Lonborg, McDermott, Vasilas, Schalk Absent: Espinoza A lso present: Joe Jefferson, City Council Liaison Jim Woodward, Mayor Wes Champion, Anderson Vacuums Staff present: Alan White, Community Development Director Darren Hollingsworth, Economic Deve l opment Coordinator Michael Flaherty, Deputy City Manager APPROVAL OF MINUTES November 5, 2009 Chair Lonborg stated that the Minutes of November 5, 2009 were to be considered for approval. It was determined there was a quorum. Chair Lonborg asked if there were any changes or adjustments to the Minutes. There were none. McDermott moved: Vasilas seconded: THE MINUTES OF NOVEMBER 5, 2009 BE APPROVED AS WRITIEN. The motion carried unanimous ly. 11 . ACE BUSINESS SIGN CODE lllJ Chair Lonborg stated the Board needs to come to some resolution on ACE's recommendations to the Planning and Zoning Commission in respect to banners . She noted the banne r discussion would take place first; sidewalk signs second. BANNERS Ms. McDermott said Chair Lonborg asked a good question at the last meeting regarding what makes a banner a permanent sign . A permanent sign can be made out of banner material, but is a banner intended to be a temporary sign or can it be a permanent sign? • She stated she is not clear about that. 1 • • • Mr. Schalk said if the banner is a part of the sign application and you indicate it is part of your signage then it is part of your permanent signage allowance. A banner can be part of your permanent signage, although it looks temporary. It would count towards your allowable square footage. Director White said there is no requirement that a permanent sign has to be made out of certain materials. It just needs to be permanently affixed to the building. Lonborg moved: Vasilas seconded: TO ALLOW EVERY BUSINESS IN THE CITY OF ENGLEWOOD TO APPLY FOR A PERMIT FOR ONE BANNER, TO ALLOW SAID BANNER TO BE UP AS LONG AS THE APPLICANT WISHES AND THE BANNER CAN BE CHANGED OUT PERIODICALLY WITHOUT THE APPLICANT APPL YING FOR A NEW PERMIT. Mr. Schalk noted there was discussion at the last meeting that would allow businesses with larger frontage to apply for a second banner. Chair Lonborg said she is not saying that those businesses could not have a second banner; her motion is to allow every business to have one banner. ACE can come back and further recommend that businesses with certain footage be allowed to apply for a second banner. She stated she is trying to move forward on the majority of businesses in Englewood. Ms. McDermott said she would interpret that to mean every business could have two permanent signs, one trademark and one banner. Chair Lonborg said the motion is for a banner only; outside of the permanent allowable sign square footage. She stated after the last meeting she drove around Englewood, as many of the other Board members have done, and many businesses already have banners up. Vasilas moved: Schalk seconded: THE BANNER .MUST BE MAINTAINED IN GOOD CONDITION. Lonborg and Vasilas accepted the friendly amendment. The motion carried unanimously. Chair Lonborg asked if there was anyone who would like to discuss a second banner for larger locations. Mr. Schalk said he felt it should be discussed. He said he doesn't believe any businesses are taking advantage of the current moratorium on enforcement of temporary signs . Businesses are responsible and if they feel they need a second banner it should be considered . 2 • Vasilas moved: Lonborg seconded: BUSINESSES WITH FRONTAGE GREATER THAN 50 FEET BE ALLOWED TO APPLY FOR A SECOND BANNER AND BOTH BANNERS MUST BE MAINTAINED IN GOOD CONDITION. Mr. Schalk asked if the second banner would require a separate permit. Chair Lonborg said her recommendation would be to have only one permit because we are trying to facilitate the ease of doing business in Englewood . She asked Director White if that is workable for the City. Director White said his opinion would be no permit should be required for the first banner but do require one for the second banner. He would rather not require a permit for something several thousand businesses can apply for. Mayor Woodward asked Director White if there are size requirements. Director White said there are not. Mr. Vasilas said there has to be size requirements . Ms. McDermott read the current code to all. Direc tor White asked if anyone knew if there is a t yp ical size for banners. Mr. Schalk said 3 x 5 feet is fairly typical. Several felt there are times when a larger banner may be necessary . Chair Lonborg asked if there was any further discussion. There was not. She called for a vote. • The motion carried unanimously. • Chair Lonborg said we are recommending that permits not be required for the banners . She asked if all members were in agreement with that statement. They were. Lonborg moved : Vasilas seconded: RECOMMEND TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION THAT BUSINESSES NOT BE REQUIRED TO APPLY FOR A PERMIT FOR EITHER THE FIRST OR SECOND BANNER. The motion carried unanimously. SIDEWALK SIGNS Ms. McDermott noted at the last meeting it was discussed the maximum size of a sandwich board sign be 48 inches by 36 inches . She said she feels that is too large. After looking at a comparison chart of what other cities allow, she said it appears to be an acceptable size. Mr. Vasilas said the size must meet all safety requirements of the City and the ADA. Businesses would also have to apply for a permit to display the sandwich board sign . The permit would be good for a one year period . 3 • • • Ms . Mello asked if businesses would be required to carry separate insurance for the sidewalk sign. Mr. Vasilas said he did not believe that would be required, but the City must approve the placement of the sign to determine if there is enough space . Mr. Jefferson asked if the City would require the applicant to show where the sign will be located . Director White said Denver requires that a drawing be submitted to show the exact location . Mr. Vasilas said the BID would require a drawing showing where the sign would be located. Chair Lonborg asked if a permit should be required. Several members said yes. Vasilas moved : Schalk seconded : RECOMMEND TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION THAT THE PROHIBITION AGAINST PORTABLE SIGNS BE REMOVED FROM THE SIGN CODE AND BUSINESSES BE ALLOWED TO APPLY FOR A PERMIT TO PLACE PORTABLE SIGNS IN FRONT OF THEIR BUSINESSES. The motion carried unanimously. Chair Lonborg asked if there are any other issues in the sign code that need to be reconsidered or changed in order to support a business friendl y Englewood . Chair Lonborg asked if that was something ACE needed to discuss this month or it is already a given that the City will not complete the amendments before th e moratorium expires in February. May or Woodward said he felt that is a given. The changes need to go to the Planning and Zoning Commission to resolve and hold a public hearing. The amendments then go to City Council for first reading, a public hearing, a second reading and then a 30 day waiting period before they go into effect. He said he believes the moratorium will have to be extended. Vasilas moved: Lonborg seconded: RECOMMEND TO CITY COUNCIL THAT THE MORATORIUM ON TEMPORARY SIGN CODE ENFORCEMENT BE EXTENDED FOR FOUR MONTHS IF THE AMENDMENTS HAVE NOT BEEN APPROVED BY THE TIME THE CURRENT MORATORIUM EXPIRES. The motion carried unanimously. Chair Lonborg asked if there was an y thing else in the sign code that ACE f e els needs to be addressed . 4 • • • Mr. Schalk asked what the mural situation is. He said only small murals are allowed by the current sign code . He said it needs to be discussed since it has been constitutionally decided that you can put what you like on the side of your building. Is that correct? Mr. Flaherty said no, it was determined that the City Manager cannot say what you can and cannot put on the side of a building. Secretary's Note: Mayor Woodward commented but unable to transcribe due to numerous people speaking at the same time. Mr. Jefferson said the process the City had for approving a mural was shot down. Schalk moved: McDermott seconded: RECOMMEND THE MURAL SIZE CONSTRAINTS BE REMOVED FROM THE SIGN CODE AND A PERMIT BE REQUIRED TO INSTALL A MURAL. Mayor Woodward said this issue is on the Planning and Zoning Commission's agenda . Maybe this is a recommendation to them as they are looking at updating the entire sign code. Chair Lonborg asked if there was any further discussion regarding the motion. Ms. McDermott asked Mr. Schalk why he would like to see the size restriction removed from the Code. Mr. Schalk said there are two businesses that have murals up and it is o.k . He believes murals are a form of art and Englewood calls itself an artistic city. Currently, the sign code is not allowing them. They add value to your city. Mr. Flaherty said you bring up the term art; are you differentiating that from advertising? Mr. Schalk said there are a lot of advertising murals ... it's a tough one. Mr. Flaherty said in some cities, I think Denver is one, they don 't permit advertising murals and the art murals don't go through the sign code process, they go through a permit process through another department. Mayor Woodward said it was when the 2004 Unified Development Code went into effect that murals were cut out. The Liquor Barn mural, in my opinion is probably one of the neatest murals in town . It is an advertising type mural, but it is certainly colorful and noticeable. There is another mural in a residential area that is strictly prohibited, but really adds to that particular corner. Director White said even with the size restriction murals are only allowed along South Broadway. Chair Lonborg asked if the difference between graffiti and a wall mural is the permit. Ms . Mello said maybe Englewood needs to do what Denver does. If it is going to be art it should go through the art committee for approval. 5 • • • Ms . McDermott said she feels there should be some type of approval process for a wall mural. The City spends a lot of time regulating just regular signage ... it has to be a certain size, it has to be permitted, it has to be placed appropriately, the materials have to be approved, etc. We are already jumping though a bunch of hoops for signage so why is traditional retail signage that is regulated different than someone who chooses an art form. That is still the bottom line a sign to me. Why aren't they treated the same? Mr. Schalk said he believes it is due to trying to regulate the content. Mr. Jefferson said you have content neutral things such as size restraints and if you are asking a board to approve it you really need to have content neutral approval criteria. The members agreed. Mayor Woodward said he believes the code just states it cannot be advertising. Mr. Jefferson said that starts to be a little gray. He said he always thought the horse mural at the Liquor Barn was just an art piece, but it is the Budweiser horses . He asked if everyone had seen the Headed West mural and if they viewed that as advertising. Mr. Schalk said he believes it is a form of advertising. Mr. Vasilas said because of time issues today he said he doesn 't believe the Board has enough information on murals to make a recommendation. He suggested the Board move on with the other recommendations and discuss murals after receiving more information. Chair Lonborg asked Mr. Schalk if he would like to withdraw his motion or vote on it. Mr. Schalk asked that his motion be tabled in order to study the issue further. Schalk moved: McDermott seconded: TABLE MR. SCHALK'S MOTION REGARDING MURALS IN ORDER TO DISCUSS THE ISSUE FURTHER AFTER OBTAINING MORE INFORMATION. The motion was carried unanimously. MEDICAL MARIJUANA l?Jl Chair Lonborg asked what is happening in the City in regards to medical marijuana. Mr. Jefferson said there is currently a moratorium in place through mid-February, meaning no new medical dispensaries can open in the City. City Council is considering extending the medical marijuana moratorium for another four months in order to further discuss the issue . The licensing structure is already in place. The last remaining piece is determining where the dispensaries can be located. City Council received a recommendation from Staff and Planning and Zoning at the last meeting. It was a lot of information so Council decided to bring it forward at a future study session. One of the recommendations was for establishing distancing requirements. It was noted the State is currently working on regulations. Mr. Jefferson said he would prefer the City to move forward at its own pace and if the State does come forward with something we can make the applicable changes. 6 • Mayor Woodward said he has concerns regarding security. Within the first few weeks of one dispensary opening there was a break-in . fortunately, the police apprehended the individuals inside the building. Since we do not regulate security for other types of businesses we cannot regulate security for medical marijuana stores. Mr. Champion noted that the owner's insurance company may require some type of security. Ms. Lonborg asked if the City requires a business to carry insurance. Mayor Woodward said he did not believe that was the case. Mr. Schalk questioned the fact that that type of business would even be able to obtain insurance. Mr. Vasilas asked if regulations were being considered to allow medical marijuana only in certain areas of the City. Mayor Woodward said Planning and Zoning discussed just that. They also discussed a 2500 foot distancing requirement. Mr. Vasilas stated he visited eight businesses in the 3300 and 3400 blocks of South Broadway and only one person said he felt the use was alright. The other seven businesses said they did not want it next to them. Mayor Woodward said he felt the Planning and Zoning Commission did a good job setting forth the distancing requirements. Mr. Jefferson said he personally felt the 2500 foot distancing requirement from each other along Broadway was too restrictive. • Ms. McDermott said she is concerned about the potential for increased crime since the stores are cash only and they do not have adequate security. How do you protect the majority of the citizens in your neighborhood? • Mr. Jefferson said the safety issue is out there and it's real, but believes there is also a perceived safety issue that goes even further and whether or not there is a real safety issue in some of the areas where dispensaries are located it may detract investment. Mr. Vasilas said an applicant obtained a license to open a dispensary in the basement of the building across the street from Colonial Bank in September, before the moratorium was put in place. Mr. Champion said he did not know a dispensary was located there so he couldn 't say there has been any negative impact. Chair Lonborg asked the ACE members if they have formal guidance they want to give to City Council. Mr. Champion asked what hours of operation are allowed. Mayor Woodward said it was his understanding the City cannot impose Blue Laws on them. That would have to come down from the State . However, he believes most are working regular business type hours. Ms . Mello asked if dispensaries pay sales tax. Mayor Woodward said yes they do . Mr. Jefferson said he has heard a lot of "not in my backyard " comments. His response to those people is the reality is whether it is in our front yard, back yard or side yard it's going 7 • • • to be in our yard. It's just a matter of where. We have to open up to the idea this 1s accepted policy in the State and that it is going to be in our yard . Mayor Woodward noted within some cities charters it basically says that businesses that are not legal nationally, statewide or citywide cannot locate there. Greenwood Village is an example. Mr. Jefferson said he personally believes that to be unconstitutional and they are open to law suits. Mayor Woodward said that is happening now in Centennial. Mr. Jefferson said we need to come to the conclusion it is accepted policy and we need to find the best way to allow them to do business but minimize the impact on our communities and address some of the major concerns. He said he believes the licensing and zoning structure we have in front of us is going to do. He said he's comfortable with it and not afraid to move forward. Chair Lonborg said she personally believes Mr. Jefferson is very wise. The other members agreed. Instead of trying to prohibit something we'll probably lose at let's get our arms around how to understand it. Her guidance would be to get through the moratorium so we know where the State is coming from and we are not doing things twice and then embrace how we are going to deal with it. Mr. Schalk said we have an image in Englewood and the image is not very friendly to business. We have to be understanding; if it's legal it should be allowed . Personally, he doesn 't believe having a medical marijuana business next to you is going to stop people from coming in to do business. He did note there are some danger issues . Mr. Champion felt the danger issues will probably be resolved. You have problems, the police increase their enforcement and the problems go away. Ms. Mello said she believes the impression is people are expecting all these drug addicts to come into the shop. If people who actually have medical problems are coming in to do business that should be good for other businesses. Mr. Champion said if an owner doesn't have insurance and he gets robbed he'll increase his security. Mayor Woodward said he believes supply and demand will take care of how many shops open and survive. Ill. COMMENTS & EVENTS CHAMBER OF COMMERCE l@l Ms. Mello stated the Chamber holiday party was held earlier this week and there were approximately 125 people in attendance. The Chamber office will be closed between Christmas and New Year 's. The Dining Guide is being finalized and Staff will begin work on the Directory in January. Mr. Jefferson said the holiday party was very nice and congratulated Ms. Mello for her efforts. BID COMMENTS 8 • • • ~ Mr. Vasilas noted the BID held its public hearing last month and it went very well. The next BID meeting will be held next Wednesday, December 16th. The Christmas decorations are up, but crews encountered a problem with power in a section of the City. Some trees will not be lit this year . Hopefully, the problem will be resolved before next holiday season. Mr. Vasilas congratulated Mr. Woodward on his re -election as Mayor. ACE MEMBERS ~ There were no further comments from the ACE members. STAFF COMMENTS Interna tional City Manager's Association -Best Practices ~ Mr. Hollingsworth noted several acknowledgements the City received. ACE helped work on both the new business check list and the economic development strategy . Englewood was the only city to have two recognitions. E~lewood Sites Re-launch ~ The commercial real estate database Englewoodsites.com is being updated and will re-launch i n January. Director White suggested Staff give ACE members a demonstration; it will be placed on the January meeting agenda. The 2010 City calendars are available . Mr. Jefferson noted there are currently 3 vacancies on the ACE Board . He encouraged all members to speak to anyone they felt might be interested in serving on the Board. No further business was brought forth for consideration . The meeting was adjourned at 1 :00 p.m . The next meeting is scheduled for January 14, 2010 . 9