Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1961-03-09 PZC MINUTESPage 542 Rice said the building has been used for conditional uses b~th by the School and the City and he didn't see how the Board of Adjustment could legally allow a non-conforming use or relieve the situation. There was discussion and reference to the ordinance on non-conforming uses and conditional uses and on the powers of the Board of Adjustment. Miles said he did not feel we should recommend to the Board of Adjustment something that could not be done. Hill asked if the Commission had noticed that the Denver Board of Adjustment has taken a firm stand on many occasions and seems to have quite a bit of power. He was wondering if the Englewood Board of Adjustment is using the full extent of their powers. Hill moved: Romans seconded: That, in view o f the fact that the building has been used for other than residence purposes for over thirty-five years and the use contemplated is compatible with the new school administration building, the Board o f Adjustment be urged to consider professional office use as a permitted use providing the purchaser not be allowed to expand the present lot coverage. AYES: NAYS: Kelley, Romans, Hill, Miles Martin, Rice IV. Planning Department Minor Development along City Ditch The Planning Director showed a plat o f the minor subdivision and explained the action taken to afford good lot design , ingress and egress. V. The Planning Director showed an architectural drawing by Reece Braun , depicting an en- largement of the present City Hall. According to Braun , it could be built in stages. Romans moved: Hill seconded: That the Planning Commission send Councilman Braun a letter complimenting him o n his very attractive and imaginative plans for the expansion of the City Hall. The motion carried unanimously. VI. DEDA Case No. 5-61 The Planning Director showed an overlay indicating the first stage development of the downtown plan. 1. City Park Drive is to be paved this summer without further action by DEDA. 2. Part of Cher okee Street is in a paving district and should be continued to Floyd by DEDA. 3. The State Highway Department has been asked to construct a ramp from Rt. #70 into Broadway across Commerce Park. 4. DEDA should construct an exit of f Rt. #7 0 onto Sherman Street and repave t o Hampden. With the exception of the State Highway o ff-ram p and the Paving Districts, DEDA expects to pay the costs of the proposed changes. The Planning Director said they are going to have to move slowly to see what effect each change is going to have on the traffic pattern. There being no further business to come before the Commission , the meeting adjourned at 11:10 P. M. Approved: David F. Munns Respectfully submitted, Howard Nies Recording Secretary * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * CITY OF ENGLEWOOD PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION Minutes of March 9, 1961 Chairman Kelley called the meeting to order at 8 :20 P. M. Members Present: Romans, Martin, Miles, Rice, Kelley Munns, Ex-officio Members Absent: Hill I. Minutes o f the last meeting were approved as corrected. Paragraph 3, Item 2, Page 1, was changed to read: Mr. Rice pointed out that the owner of a non-conformi n g use cannot expand the land area o f the prop erty except to provide open off-street parking or loading space and can improve his property only if it is damaged up t o , but not more than, 50 % of the replacement cost. Mr. Rice feels thatif the Planning Commission "opens the door," everyone will have a problem to be solved. t I I I I I Page 543 II. Dr. Robert Byall 3630 So. Sherman ·Rezoning 3630 So. Sherman Hearing No. 3 8 -60D September 8, 1960 September 22, 1960 October 6, 1960 January 5, 1961 The Planning Director outlined the subject area on the map. It is now R-2-B and Dr. Byall requests that it be rezoned to C-1. The Planning Director gave a brief outline of the past history of this case. When Dr. Byall bought the property for his professional office use, it was zoned properly; however, when the 1955 Zoning Ordinance became effective, the use be- came non-conforming. In July of 1959, Dr. Byall requested the City to rezone the site from R-2-B to C-1. The Planning Commission recommended to Council that the request be granted. The request was denied by the City Council on August 3, 1959 because it would create spot zoning and was an abrupt change of use. The Chairman asked if the request for rezoning had been properly published and the area posted. The Planning Director replied in the affirmative. Miles moved: Rice seconded: That the hearing be opened. The motion carried unanimously. Dr. Byall told of his efforts in the past to rezone the site in order that he might expand the area of his building. He wants to increase the floor area by adding one or two stories over the present structure. There would be provision for off-street parking spaces for ap- proximately 22 cars. Dr. Byall stated that he felt there would be no traffic problem be- cause of the easy accessibility of Highway #70 and South Sherman Street. The Planning Director showed slides of the area and the surrounding area. The Chairman asked if there were any persons in the audience who would like to speak either for or agains t the proposed change of zoning. Joseph A. Haugland 3679 South Grant -Stated that he is concerned with the effect this change of zoning will have on the surrounding residential property--whether or not it will depreciate the value of the property and whether or not it will allow commercial zoning to encroach upon the residential area. In addition he was concerned about the additional traff~c that might be created and whether or not sufficient off-street parking would be provided . Dr. Byall said that in addition to spaces around the building, there would be parking along the curb line, and that the change "of zoning would probably n ot change tax assessments as long as the surrounding property remained residential. Charles M. Anderson 3649 South Grant - Mrs. M. A. Cohors 3650 South Grant - Mr. Robert Kirkland stated that he feels this rezoning should be considered in the long- range planning. He questioned whether just this parcel should be con- sidered for rezoning or whether the whole block should be considered at this time. He is in favor of rezoning in this area. stated that there are several new homes in the area and she feels this would depreciate their value. She satated that there are other areas already zoned for office use where there are older homes that could be torn down and t .e land used for an office building such as Dr . Byall wants to build. 3650 South Sherman -stated that he was the builder of several of the new homes in the area. He feelsthat just these lots should not be rezoned; that the request should include a half block north and south and as far east as might be desired. Mr. Miles read the uses permitted in the C-1 zoning district. Mr . Kirkland said he did not want C-1 zoning, he wanted Multi-family and office bu i lding zoning. Ruby McMillan 3640 South Sherman -stated that she is opposed to the rezoning because it is next to her property. Mr. Frank Shepherd 3698 South Sherman -stated that he feels the home owners might be forced to sell and would not get the value out of their property should the request for rezoning be granted. Mrs. Ross 3687 South Grant -stated that she feels the taxpayers have a big investment in the schools in the area and that this rezoning would allow businesses to develop too close to the schools. She also feels the commercial use should not be allowed to develop on the south side of Highway #70. For these reasons she is opposed to the rezoning. The Planning Director read a letter received from Mr. Ross, 3687 South Grant, who was out of town and unable to attend. The letter is as follows: "Gentlemen: I herewith present my arguments against the rezoning of lot 1 -Blk 3 AW Hiner Subdivision. This same property has been up for this before. It being rezoned would be spot zoning which I am sure you can see would deteriorate the neighborhood as the rest of the block is R-2. In view of the plans for the rehabilitation of the main Englewood Business Dis tr ic t, it seems to be better to keep business houses in this district and help build it up as spo t zoning has the tendency to draw from a downtown district. Also the long range plans for t h is block does Page 544 not call for any business but apartments only and it seems inconsistent to make these plans for a bigger and better Englewood just to upset them to please one property owner. This property owner may have another letter from the Chamber of Commerce saying that it is ideal to change the zoning and while some of you probably belong to this organization you ,:1 can still appreciate how it makes me feel to have people that do not live in the block tell how good it is for me to change it. I bought property in this block in 1956 knowing it was R-2----which is what 1 wanted. The idea of spot zoning was shortly after that given up by the Planning and Zoning Board also by the City Council but this is the third time it has reared its head in this particular block and for the protection of all concerned I believe it should be discourated in the en- tire City of Englewood. Yours truly W. C. Ross 3687 South Grant Englewood, Colorado " Mrs. Pilcher 3638 South S h erman -stated that she is in favor of the rezoning. Rice moved: Romans secon ded : That the hearing be closed. The motion carried unanimously. Rice moved: Romans seconded: That the matter be tabled for further study. The motion carried unanimously. III. City Planning Office ~ - --- - Amendment Article V , Ordinance #45 , Series 1955, Non-Conforming Uses. Case No. 6-61 The Commission was given an informational sheet on non-conforming and special uses. Dis- cussion followed and the Commission made these observations: 1. There are many non-conforming uses that have been in use much longer than surrounding uses and should be allowed to remodel or enlarge to fit their needs . Non-conforming uses might be allowed to improve on the basis of a special use permit. 2. In order to receive this special permit the non-conforming use should h ave been established for a certain num b er of years . 3. Some non-conforming uses such as the neighborhood grocery stores are perhaps necessary. I V . Planning Office City Amendment to Ordinance T Zone -Transitional Zone Case No. 7-61 Mrs . Romans explained the Transitional zone and its purpose. She also explained how it could be used to make incompati b le uses compati b le. There was a general discussion in which the followin g ideas were presented: 1. A Transitional zone could work very nicely along South Broadway where C-2 abuts resi- dential areas . 2. The T-zone structures should conform in architectural design, h eight and lot area coverage to the a djoining one family residential zones. 3. In an industrial area, a good transitional use can be an employees' recreational area. 4. Parking area with the proper screening is often used in T-zoning. 5. The normal zone width would be one-half block. However, in some cases it might be necessary to T-zone larger areas. V. DEDA Case No. 5-61A February 23, 1961 The Planning Director said there had been a meeting of Englewood Unlimited and bond attorney Robert Talmadge. The first stage of the DEDA plan is estimated to cost approximately $109,000. It is anticipated that this money will be raised through a special improvement district. VI. Olds Agency The owner discussed a parking area between Acoma and the back of their place of business. VII. Smith Rest Home This is one of the problems the staff believes should and could be solved with either the T-zone or an amendment of non-conforming uses. VIII. Reeme Rest Home The City Council referred Mrs. Reeme's request for rezoning back to the Planning Commission for further study in relation to the proposed T-zone District. I I I I I IX. Rose Leino Bell Realty Hawthorne School 4100 So. Bannock Page 545 Case No. 3-61A February 23, 1961 Mrs. Romans asked theCommission for their views on this problem in order that the School Board could decide what procedure to follow. She said that the School Board sold the building in good faith and she felt that every effort should be made to cooperate with them in order to get the building on the tax roll; and further more, if the building is left vacant it will quickly depreciate. The Commission discussed the application of both the T-zone and the non-conforming use section of the ordinance as they might apply to the Hawthorne site. Miles said the Council felt the owner of the property, the School Board, should make applica- tion for rezoning. Mrs. Romans said this would create a problem for the School Board which would be placed in the position of having to rezone any school property before they could sell it. Mr. Kelley stated that he did not feel that the owner could be denied the right to make some reasonable use of the building. Mrs. Romans added that the next quarterly hearings for rezonings will be in June, and Mrs. Leino is to become the owner of the property on April 1, 1961; therefore it does not seem practical for the School Board to make application for rezoning. The Commission ended the discussion with the following statement: "It is the intent of the Planning Commission to c ontinue trying to determine a way to extend the use of Hawthorne School as an office building." There being no further business to come before the Commission, the meeting adjourned at 11:30 P. M. David F. Munns Respectfully submitted, Susie M. Schneider Recording Secretary * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * CITY OF ENGLEWOOD PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION Minutes of March 23, 1961 Chairman Kelley called the meeting to order at 8:15 P. M. Members present: Romans, Miles, Rice, Hill, Kelley Munns, Ex-officio Members absent: Martin I. Minutes of March 9th meeting were approved as written. II. Dr. Robert Byall 3630 So. Sherman Rezoning 3630 So. Sherman Hearing No. 38-60E September 8, 1960 September 22, 1960 October 6, 1960 January 5, 1961 (Heariftg) March 9, 1961 After some discussion, it was noted that Dr. Byall can continue to use his property as a non-conforming use, but cannot enlarge the building. Rice moved: Miles seconded: That after due consideration the Byall property zoning request be denied for the following reasons: 1. An application for essentially the same thing has been denied previously and no conditions have been changed. 2. This would constitute "spot zoning" in violation of City Council instructions and Planning Commission policy. 3. The number of the people in opposition was substantial. 4. To re-zone would amount to an infringement of C-1 into residential. The motion carried unanimously. III. M-3 Ordinance and Rezoning. Mr. Bob Anderson, owner of a 40 acre tract of land adjoining the proposed M-3 zone, was present at the meeting. The Planning Director gave a brief history of the M-3 Ordinance and the proposed rezoning. Mr. Anderson said he believed the city would be limiting its tax base by zoning this for auto wrecking yards because the industrial ground next to it would not develop. He felt that many of the junk yards in the proposed M-3 zone were leased and maybe some leases would not be renewed .