HomeMy WebLinkAbout1959-07-23 PZC MINUTESPage 402
*This item is felt particularly necessary to increase service to Englewood citizens by pro-
viding adequate administrative facilities. It is felt that the City Manager's current study
of the feasibility of moving certain administrative departments sHould be considered as a
guide toward making practical use of this school building for City purposes as soon as it
is vacated. The library should not be moved into temporary housing because of the expense
involved and the imminence of a modern library building within the next few years.
FOR THE PLANNING COMMISSION
JOE M. LACY
Planning Director
JML /ij
Att.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
CITY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
JULY 23, 1959
The meeting was called to order by Chairman Jones at 7:30 P. M.
Members Present: Braun, Hill, Jones, Romans, Schmitt, Lacy, Ex-officio
Members Absent: Kelley
City Council
City
Amendment to Zoning Ordinance
for Building Height
Hearing No. 43-58A
December 18, 1958
The Planning Director presented a communication from the City Council requesting a change
in zoning provisions to allow construction of an eight-story building. He read the
amendment passed on January 19, 1959, amending the ~oning ordinance .as follows:
Section 1. Subsection 3 of Section 9 of Article IV of Ordinance
No. 45, Series of 1955, as amended, of the ordinances of the City
of Englewood,. Colorado, is hereby amended to read as follows:
"3. Maximum Height of Buildings:
(1) 5 stories but not greater than 60 feet;
provided.that one additional story to a
total not greater than 75 feet may be
permitted by directive of the City Council,
if. recommended by the City Planning and
Zoning Commission, and all normal safety
requirements are satisfied."
Section 2. Subcesection 2 of Section 10 of Article IV of Ordinance
No. 45, Series of 1955, as amended, of the ordinances of the City
of Englewood, Colorado, is rereby amended to read as follows:
"2. Maximum Height of Buildings:
(1) 4 stories but not greater than 50 feet;
provided that one additional story to a
total not greater than 65 feet may be
permitted by directive of the City Council,
if.recommended py the City , planning and
Zoning Commission, and all normal safety
requirements are satisfied."
The Planning Director suggested that another amendment allowing more than five stori e s under
proper design for safety and fire . protection might be in order to give the Planning Commission,
Building Inspector, and the Fire Department a specific mandate to approve any such proposed
b uilding.
Mr. Jones stated that he felt some snrt of economic feasibility study should be undertaken
before authorization to build such a large building was granted. He felt that the effect
on the abutting property certainly should be considered and that so manytechnical aspects
were involved that probably an independent research firm should be contacted to make such a
survey.
Mr. Braun stated that . there . is a definite movement in Council to see that applicants for
changes in City legislation pay the full cost of such chaq;es.
The Planning Director qµoted from an Aurora ordinance setting forth the criteria for con-
sidering buildings of additional height. The Aurora ordinance calls for a public hearing
to be held after the property on which a tall building is to be erected is posted with the
decision to be based on five criteria:
(1) The effect of the increased height on adjacent property including
the effect on light, air and ventilation;
(2) Availability and suitability of off-street parking;
(3) Location of tha structure with reference to fire, health and
safety factors;
(4) Opinion of propert~ owners within a 600 foot radius of the
property line of the proposed structure;
(5) Other factors pertinent in the loca~ion of such structure.
I
I
I
I
I
I
Page 403
After further discussion it was agreed that these five points plus the provision requiring
the applicant to pay for all studies and legal costs and specific requirements of approval
from public safety authorities should be d rawn.
Braun moved:
Schmitt seconded: That the Planning Director should prepare a tentative amendment to
the zoning ordinance setting forth provisions and procedures for
allowing tall buildings to be constructed in the City.
Ayes: Braun, Hill, Jones, Romans, Schmitt
Nays: None
Absent: Kelley
Mrs. Dorothy Romans
Englewood School Board
School Sidewalks
The Planning Director reported on contacts concerning specifications and reasons therefor on
sidewalks around school property. He stated he had contacted the following agencies and
gathered the information indicated:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Metropolitan Safety Council .... Jim Keller of the Safety Council has provided
various publications the most meaningful of which is "Building Traffic Safety
Into Residential Developments." This publication suggests sep arate sidewalks
in all residential areas with the specification that sidewalks would be located
next to the curb if the curb is a vertical one.
City of Aurora .... Mr. Bill Dobratz of the city engineer's of fice stated that
Aurora specifically requires a five-foot sidewalk which is located next to a
vertical curb on all sides of any school.
ICRPC .... Mr. Lee Woolsey reported that Madison, Wisc nsin had a similar problem
to Englewood's in finding it impossible t o maintain a small space between existing
vertical curb and separate sidewalk. They solved the problem by laying pre-cast
concrete blocks one foot square loosely in the areas.
Denver .•.. Mr. Harry Waters of the engineer's office indicated that no specific
requirement exists but that the sidewalk is normally separate from the curb
along heavily travel led hi ghways.
Englewood School Superintendent .... Mr. Bill Bishop stated that the Englewood
School building program is now almost complete and that a c hange in the pro-
visions will do little to affect their building design. He stated that the
present City requirements requiring that the sidewalk around all schools be
located three feet from a vertical curb and the requirement that the street
width be twenty-two feet from the center line around all schools while the other
side of the street is eighteen feet fr om the center line in width also seems
unreasonable to him. His feeling was that traffic and pedestrian safety would
be better served by not widening the residential street and therefore providing
a larger gap between the vertical curb and the separate four-foot sidewalk.
Present ordinances .••. The Planning Director reported that in checking the present
ordinances (five of them) which set the present specificatiais, he found that the
1951 ordinance for master street plan had been extended by Council resolution to
include all area in the present City limits. The original ordinance was passed
in 1951 and therefore does not include all of the present City area. The most
recent ordinance modifying the ori ginal building provisions allows concrete to
be installed in the gap between the sidewalk and the c urb if such gap is eighteen
inches wide or less. If the gap is wider, the ordinance specifies a gravel or
grass cover which must be maintained by the property owner.
In the discussion which followed, it was felt that traffic conditions on certain residential
streets around schools definitely would not carry major traffic in the future. Gaps between
curb and sidewalks along these streets might well be sealed with something to minimize a
maintenance problem without providing a traffic hazard to the school children.
The Planning Director suggested that inasmuch as a new Master Street Plan should be ready
cJ for Planning Commission and Council consideration by early 1960, any ordinance modification
at this time might be wasted.effort particularly since the public school bui lding program
does not require such modification before 1960. He suggested that if a maintenance problem
is critical, perhaps the present ordinance allowing a gravel or grass cover might be inter-
preted by the Board of Adjustment and Appeals to allow some other material which wouldnot
present a maintenance problem.
Mr. Jones suggested that asphaltic concrete might be an answer since it would provide a
color and texture difference and should be relatively inexpensive. He also . suggested
that if this substance is used that a permanent weed killer should be applied to the ground
before the asphalt is laid.
It was agreed that the Planning Director should contact the school superintendent and report
this consideration so that he would be informed of possible corrective methods available to
the school system prior to possible alteration of the specifications in the new master
street plan.
---- ---- - ---- - --- ---
Dale Rea Property in City Annexation
The Planning Director presented a map and a cover letter dated May 20th fr om Mr. Rea
requesting Planning Commission's consideration of the inclusion of his property which is
desired by the City of Littleton for a sewer plant extension in the City of Englewood.
Councilmen Braun and Hill and Mr. Jones stated that Council has already considered the
matter and agreed to exclude the land from the City's annexation if it is purchased by the
City of Littlet on for sewer plant expansion.
Page 404
City Council
City
Sewer Service in Scenic View Hearing No. 29-59
The Planning Director presented a communication from the City Council requesting Planning
Commission consideration of sewer service into the Scenic View area particularly the Vista
Heights area which is zoned for industry but has substantial residential usage at present.
The Planning Director explained that a tentative street plan and easement layout in cooperation
with the Engineer's Office, the Water Department, the public utility engineers, private
developers concerned, the C & SR. R. (Mr. Watson), and the assistance of ICRPC should be
undertaken in order to give Planning Commission a guide from which to begin consideration of
the layout.
Council also requested the Planning Commission's consideration of the impact of allowing
sewer service for residential use in the area now zoned for heavy industry and any suggested
policy which would be feasible to preclude expansion of residential usage or entrenchment
of such in an area with a heavy industrial potential. It was agreed that the Planning Office
should proceed with a tentative street plan in cooperation with all of the agencies and
individuals concerned and should consider a policy for sewer service considering present
usage and zoning.
Planning Office
City
Subdivision
Area Bounded by the City Ditch
w. Stanford Ave. & W. Stanford Dr.
Hearing No. 28-59
The Planning Director reported that the Planning Office is doing the preliminary design for
resubdivision of the subject area. He stated that although this is not normal procedure,
the variety of interests in the area dictate that some objective organization start the
ball rolling in order to avoid a clash of personal and financial interests of the land owners
involved.
The preliminary design has been completed considering the additional street width needed for
pending paving of Stanford Drive and is now being considered by the land owners involved.
ICRPC MEETINGS
The Planning Director suggested that at least one member of the Planning Commission should
attend the monthly regional planning meetings with the Planning Director. This would give
all concerned a better understanding of the role of regional planning in the City's planning
picture. It was agreed that this would be a good idea and that the Planning Director should
arrange the attendance informally.
Robert L. Gillpatrick
3890 South Galapago
Subdivision
Approximately One-half Block on
West Side of 3900 Block S. Galapago.
Hearing No. 42-58C
(See minutes of
March 19, 1955
March 31, 1955)
December 4, 1958
January 8, 1959
February 5, 1959
Mr. Jones reported that Mr. Gillpatrick had contacted him as to the procedure to allow part
of a building to extend over five feet of a ten-foot easement in the subject subdivision.
The easement in question is for access to an actual sewer line and does not have a sewer
line lead within the easement to be presently covered.
Mr. Jones stated that the power company and the telephone company both have agreed to submit
a letter indicating no objection to the partial covering of the easement.
The Planning Director stated that felt the authority to grant such a variance already resided
in the Board of Adjustment since no sewer line was to be covered. It was agreed that the
Planning Director should confer with the City Attorney on this matter and report to Mr. Jones.
There being no further business to come before the Planning and Zoning Commission, the
meeting adjourned at 9:25 P.M.
APPROVED /s / J. M. Lacy
Jewell M. Banfield
Recording Secretary
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
CITY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
AUGUST 6, 1959
The meeting was called to order by Chairman Jones at 7:30 P. M.
Members Present: Braun, Hill, Jones, Kelley, Schmitt
Members Absent: Romans, Lacy (Ex-officio)
I
I
I