Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2015-11-03 PZC MINUTES• • • [?] CITY OF ENGLEWOOD PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS November 3, 2015 I. CALL TO ORDER The regular meeting of the City Planning and Zoning Commission was called to order at 7 :00 p.m . in the City Council Chambers of the Englewood Civic Center , Chair Fish presiding . Present: Brick , Freemire, King, Kinton , Knoth, Fish Absent: Bleile , Madrid , Townley , Pittinos (All Excused) Staff: Mike Flaherty , Deputy City Manager Harold Stitt , Senior Planner Brook Bell , Planner II Audra Kirk , Planner II John Voboril , Planner II , Long Range Planning Dugan Comer , Deputy City Attorney Also Present: Scott Yeates , SW Development Group Chad Holsinger, Shopworks Architecture Bob Wilson , Shopworks Architecture [?] II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES • October 20, 2015 Minutes Knoth moved: Freemire seconded: TO APPROVE THE OCTOBER 20 , 2015 MINUTES Chair Fish asked if there were any modifications or corrections . There were none. AYES: NAYS: ABSTAIN : ABSENT: Motion carried . [?l) Brick , Freemire , King , Kinton , Knoth , Fish None None Bleile, Madrid , Townley Ill. Public Hearing Case #ZON2015-009 Sand Creek Planned Unit Development Site Plan approval Knoth moved ; King seconded : AYES : NAYS : ABSTAIN: ABSENT: [?l) Staff Testimony To open the public hearing for Case #ZON2015-019 Sand Creek Planned Unit Development Site Plan approval Brick , Freemire , King , Kinton , Knoth , Fish None None Bleile , Madrid Townley Audra Kirk , Planner II , was sworn in . Ms . Kirk reviewed the history of the PUD (Planned Unit Development) located at 601 West Bates Avenue . The PUD Distr ict Plan was approved by the Planning and Zoning • • • Commission in November, 2012 . The applicant has prepared a site plan for approval by the Commission and met all requirements for notification and neighborhood meetings. The Site Plan meets or exceeds all requirements set forth in the PUD . Mr. Brick asked Ms . Kirk if she thinks that the development will have a negative effect on the neighborhood . Ms. Kirk responded that it is her opinion that the development will have a positive impact on the area . ~ Applicant Testimony Mr. Scott Yeates , 1616 171h Street , Suite 362 , Denver , was sworn in. Mr. Yeates thanked the Comm ission for the opportunity to present his proposed project. Mr. Yeates provided a PowerPoint presentation with images of the proposed project including the survey and elevations . The project will consist of 70 apartments , 42 one-bedroom and 28 two bedroom units , on the southeast corner of the property . The rental rates will be income restricted . The project meets many objectives of the Comprehensive Plan the Light Rail Corridor Plan by provid ing a mix of housing to accommodate various life stages , workforce rental units and proximity to public transportation . ~ The parking ratio will be 1.31 parking spaces per unit which exceeds the 1•1 ratio recommended in the Light Rail Corridor Study . Twenty guest parking spaces as well as outdoor and indoor bicycle storage will be provided . The apartments will be in a single three story building . The landscaping will exceed minimum requirements . Mr. Yeates described the tenant amenities that will be provided to residents. ~ The building form will reflect the original General Iron Works site with arch itectural details coordinating with the theme . Materials will include reclaimed masonry , metal panels and steel stair course . The color palette will be primarily neutral and a large mural will be completed on one face of the building with assistance from the Englewood Cultural Arts Commission. ~ The proposed development meets all requirements of the PUD . Groundbreaking is scheduled for April 2016 with occupancy May 2017 . ~ Mr. Brick asked about the purpose of the hearing . Mr. Yeates explained that at the time the PUD was formed , the owners did not have a developer for the property when the District Plan was approved . As part of the two-step PUD approval process , he is presenting the Site Plan for approval by the Commission . Ms . Kirk explained that the District Plan outlines the development requirements . ~ Mr . Kinton asked if the open space requirement includes the parking area. Mr. Yeates responded that it does not include the parking area . ltll Public Testimony No members of the public testified at the hearing . ~ Ms . Kirk clarified that the Commission approved the PUD in November 2013 with final approval by City Council in May 2014 . Brick moved ; Knoth seconded • To close the public hearing for Case #ZON2015-019 Sand Creek Planned Unit Development Site Plan Approval AYES • NAYS• Brick , Freemire , King , Kinton , Knoth , Fish None 2 • • • ABSTAIN : None ABSENT: Bleile , Madrid , Townley Knoth moved ; King seconded: To approve Case #ZON2015-009 Sand Creek Planned Unit Development Site Plan as written and forward to City Council with a favorable recommendation. Mr. Brick -The plans represent conformance with the zoning outlined in the PUD Mr. Freemire -This will be a marked improvement and meets all criteria for the development of the PUD . Mr. King -The project meets all criteria of the PUD and is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Kinton -He initially had concerns when the PUD was originally approved but believes it has turned out extremely well and meets many objective of the Comprehensive Plan . Mr. Knoth -He is glad to see the project moving forward. Chair Fish -He agrees with the previous comments . He is excited to see something happening . ~ AYES: NAYS : ABSTAIN : ABSENT: Brick , Freemire , King , Kinton , Knoth , Madrid , Fish None None Bleile, Madrid, Townley Motion passes 6-0 ~ Ill. STUDY SESSION 2013-03 Comprehensive Plan Update John Voboril , Planner II , distributed the Commissioner's comments to all members present. The comments were condensed to include the most substantive comments . Mr. Freemire had previously requested the Request for Proposal (RFP) that was issued for the Comprehensive Plan update . Mr. Stitt stated that staff would like to have clarification on some of the comments . Mr. Freemire objected to the fact that the comments were edited and asked what criteria was used to audit the comments . Chair Fish requested a full copy of all comments be sent to the Commissioners. li] Mr. Freemire asked if the goals of the RFP were met and requested an analysis to be presented at the November 17 1h meeting. Chair Fish requested a document that would outline any changes in the draft plan that are made based on feedback from the Commission and the public . Mr. Brick added that the Commissioners can comment at the City Council public hearing . Mr. Stitt reiterated that comments will be taken up to the time of the City Council public hearing as well. [?] Mr. Brick asked about establishing a work program based on the Comprehensive Plan . Mr. Stitt responded that the final Comprehensive Plan will be available approximately a month after it is approved by City Council and a work plan will be established in December of 2016 . Mr. Flaherty suggested that the Commission take testimony at the public hearing and based on that testimony and the other comments received , the Commission make their official recommendations to City Council as a body . lt] Mr. Flaherty explained that the Commission does not have to approve the draft Comprehensive Plan at the public hearing but can defer the vote for approval to a later date . Mr. Freemire asked about the goals of the project; Mr. Voboril explained that the City Council expressed a desire to see a plan with actionable items. Mr. Voboril explained that staff asked the consultants to perform a cursory review of the existing plan goals and objectives , make minor updated and edit , and carry these goals and objectives forward in the updated plan . Mr. Knoth asked how many items from the previous plan were used in developing the plan , Mr. Voboril responded that the majority of items from the previous plan were incorporated . ~ Mr. Voboril reviewed the comments that were submitted by the Commissioners . Mr. Kinton commented that the intersection of Belleview and Broadway is problematic in that it is not pedestrian friendly nor is it 3 • • • easy to navigate by car. An alternative route may be something to consider. Mr. Kinton also commented on the light industrial area near Baker Park . Consideration could be given to changing the zoning in the neighborhood area . Mr. Stitt responded that he did not hear those concerns at the neighborhood meeting but they desired investment by the City . fll1 Mr . Knoth commented on the statistics in the report and expressed that he would like to see more comparisons to Englewood 's peer cities . Mr. Fish added that he feels that the statistics regarding population were incorrect; Mr . Voboril agreed and after additional research found some of the numbers were not accurate. Mr. Fish noted that the statistics are stated throughout the document. Mr . Knoth cited a lack of large goals and felt that the recommendations were mostly small steps . Mr. Knoth commented on the lack of objectives for education while one of the goals is to attract employers who will require an educated work force. Mr. Voboril is aware of the lack of information about education . fll1 Mr. Freemire commented on the lack of information regarding city services including administration . He also expressed concern about the plan 's assertion that it could be a twenty-year plan and in his ex perience a ten year plan is more common . It is his opinion that in order to differentiate the City from other cities with the same goals , an actionable plan needs to be in place to reach that goal. l?lJ Discussion ensued regarding the processing and integration of comments into the plan . Mr . Flaherty advised the Commission that the Parks and Recreation Department is developing a master plan that will become an addendum to the Comprehensive Plan . [?] Mr . Fish suggested that there are areas of the Plan that are in conflict that need to be exam ined . He encouraged staff to place the important items in the front of the document. Mr. Voboril asked Mr. Fish about his comments regarding the catalytic areas ; Mr . Fish responded that it is the market that will drive improvement in these areas , not the City . The City can facilitate action and remove barriers to improvement. For strategy 2.1 and 2.2 , Mr. Voboril asked for clarification on his comment regard ing establishing neighborhood character. Mr. Fish stated that he would like to have that strategy eliminated . Mr. Flaherty informed the Commission that the consultants heard the comments from a neighborhood meeting and r§rted accordingly . Mr. Brick thanked Mr. Flaherty for his comments regarding internal city services and ex pressed that he agrees that it is important for the Comprehensive Plan to be in alignment with the goals of City administration and staff. [?] IV. PUBLIC FORUM No members of the public were present at the meeting . l?l1 V. ATTORNEY'S CHOICE D~ty City Attorney Comer did not have any comments for the Commission , VI. STAFF'S CHOICE Mr . Flaherty stated that the Commission will have materials coming to them soon regarding the sign code regulations . He outlined the history and timeline of the development of the new Comprehensive Plan . He asked the Commission to consider how much additional time they want to have for consideration of the Comprehensive Plan in light of their regular workload. He reminded the Commissioners that they wil l have a public hearing on November 17 1h and that there will be additional comments received on the plan after the hearing . 4 • • • Mr. Bell informed the Commission that the decision on case 2015-003 4635 South Pearl Street Urban Lot Development is being appealed to City Council on November 16 , 2015 . The letters received from the three appellants will be forwarded to the Commissioners . ~ VII. COMMISSIONER'S CHOICE Mr. Brick expressed that he has appreciation for the work that has gone into the Comprehens ive Plan and is willing to continue working with staff. Mr. Fish asked when the new City Council will be sworn in ; Mr. Flaherty informed the Commission that they will be sworn in at the regular meeting November 16 1h . Mr. Kinton agreed with previous comments that the Commission has not spent enough time examining the Comprehensive Plan . The meeting adj 7 urned at 8:50 p.m . tf ~ , Recording Secretary 5