HomeMy WebLinkAbout2007-08-07 PZC MINUTES•
•
•
CITY OF EN GLEWOOD PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
August 7, 200 7
I. CALL TO ORDER
The regular meeting of the City Planning and Zoning Commission was called to order at 7:03
p.m. in the City Council Chambers of the Englewood Civic Center, Chair Roth presiding.
Pr esent:
Absent:
Staff:
Diekmeier, Brick, Welker, Krieger, Knoth, Roth , Calonder
Fish (Excused ), Bleile (Excused ), M y ers , Alternate (Excused )
Tricia Langon , Senior Pl anner
Brook Bell, Planner
D an Brotzman, City Attorne y
11 . APPROVAL OF TELEPHONE POLL
June 26, 2007 for Minutes of June 19, 2007
Ms. Krieger moved:
Mr. Knoth seconded : TO APPROVE THE JUNE 26, 2007 TELEPHONE POLL
AYES :
NAYS:
Brick, Knoth , Roth , Welke r, Diekmeier, Krieger, Calonder
None
ABSTAIN : None
ABSENT: Bleile, Fish
Motion carried .
Ill . PUBLIC HEARING
Case #ZON2007-003
Chair Roth stated the issue before the Commission is Case #ZON200 7-003 , Base Rezoning
Request: 3520, 3530, 3546 and 3556 South Clarkson Street. C hair Roth asked for a motion to
open the publ ic hearing.
Ms . Krieger moved:
Mr. Brick seconded: THE PUBLIC HEARING ON CASE #Z ON200 7-003 BE OPENED .
AYES :
NAYS:
Brick, Knoth , Roth , Calonder, Welker, Diekmeier, Krieger
None
ABSTAIN: None
ABSENT: Fish, Bleile
Motion carried .
Chair Roth asked staff to present the case .
1
•
•
•
Senior Planner Langon was sworn in. She stated the case before the Commission tonight is Case
#ZON2007-003 , a request by Craig Hospital to rezone property identified as Lots 5 -16, Block
4, Higgins South Broadway Heights Subdivision. The request is to rezone from MU-R-3-B : Mixed-
Use Residentia l/Limited Office-Retail District to MU-B-2 : General Arterial Business Zone District.
For tonight's discussion the MU-B-2 zone district will be known as B-2 and the MU-R-3-B zone
district will be known as R-3-B. Already presented for the record is the Staff Report, proof of
publication that the Public Hearing was noticed in the Englewood Herald on July 20, 200 7 and
Certificate of Posting signed by the applicant that the property was posted properly for the
required 15 da y s. Community Development recommends approval of this rezoning request. The
rezoning procedure requires that all rezonings in the City are subject to regulations found in 16-
2-7: Official Zo ning Map Am endments (Rez onings) of the Englewood Municipal Code. There are
tw o types of rezonings. The first is a Planned Unit Development (PUD), the second is what y ou
are hearing tonight, a Base Zone Rezoning. A Base Rezoning simply reassigns the parcel 's zoning
identification or classification from one zone district to another, but only those zone districts that
are already identified in Table 16-3-1.1 : Base Zoning Districts. This is not a PUD or a negotiated
rezoning as seen in the past under PUD's. If this rezoning is approved the result is that the
property would be zoned B-2 and subject to all B-2 regulations.
The property is owned b y Craig Hospital. It is on the east side of the 3500 block of South
Clarkson Street and is approximately .93 acres. It is composed of four vacant adjoining properties
known as 3520, 3530, 3546 and 3556 South Clarkson Street. They are adjacent to a Craig
Hospital owned property to the north that is currently zoned B-2 and fronts on the East
Hampden corridor. Surrounding the subject property to the south is a vacant R-3-B property, to
the east across the alley are R-3-B properties that are a mix of single and two unit residential uses ,
commercial and vacant property . Property across Clarkson Street to the west is also zoned R-3-B
and is a mix of commercial and multi-unit residential and office use .
As required by the zoning regulations a neighborhood meeting was held on May 9, 200 7. The
application was submitted to the City and re v iewed by the Development Review Team. The
Development Review Team identified no issues with the rezoning request.
The criteria under which a rezoning request is judged are:
1. There is a minimum district size of at least 3 7,500 square feet and that the property
be contiguous to a compatible zone district.
The area of the subject property is 40,500 square feet. The request is to
rezone the property to B-2. The subject property is adjacent to a B-2 zone district; therefore
the zone districts are compatible.
2. The request be consistent with Roadmap Englewood: 2003 Comprehensive Plan .
The Comprehensive Plan recognizes that health care in Englewood is an
anchor to the City's economy. It recognizes that the area around Craig Hospital presents
opportunities to the City and also identifies the area as having a "high development
potential" .
2
•
•
•
3. The proposed rezoning meets one of the following criteria:
a .
b.
c.
Th at the property was previously rezoned in error,
That the property cannot be developed under its existing zoning, or
That there has been a material change in the neighborhood .
This Craig Hospital request for rezoning is based on the latter criterion of
a material change in the neighborhood.
The subject property has seen progressive changes in zoning and in the neighborhood from
single unit from when it was first zoned and annexed into the City approximately 60 years ago to
residential multi-unit to the current mixed use designation. There have been changes in the
neighborhood fabric. This change in zoning would promote the current changes or mix of uses in
the area.
The Medical Small Area Plan discussions that the Planning Commission has had and the
neighborhood meetings have all identified objectives of working in the area to enhance the
neighborhoods and has a goal to "encourage medical facility expansion to include commercial
space intended to serve the needs of the medical community, hospital visitors and neighborhood
residents". This goal could not be achieved without commercial zoning designation.
4. That the general public health , safety and welfare of the community be protected.
The subject parcel and the surrounding properties have been identified in
both the Comprehensive Plan and in the Medical Small Area Plan as areas of change. Any
redevelopment of this property would have to meet all City regulations and applicable Code
requirements. The City's development process is designed to protect public health, safety and
welfare. Therefore, the Department feels that there would be no significant negative impacts
anticipated with the rezoning of the site.
In conclusion, the request meets the Base Zoning requirements and therefore Community
Development recommends that the Planning and Zoning Commission make Findings of Fact
based on the rezoning criteria identified in the Staff Report and forward to City Council
recommendation to approve the Base Zoning request for the property from MU-R-3-B to MU-B-2.
Ms. Lan gon offered to answer any questions the Commission might have. There were none.
Chair Roth thanked Ms. Langon for her testimony.
Dennis O'Malley, President of Craig Hospital, was sworn in . Mr. O'Malley stated when the
subject property was acquired several years ago it was with the future in mind. They do not know
at this time how the property will be used specifically. Thoughts include parking, a building
housing a research facility, or some type of ancillary support building. Nothing has been
absolutely determined at this point. They are interested in the rezoning to give the hospital the
flexibility as they look to future planning. To do so , would best be served by having all the parcels
zoned the same. Also, there has been a significant change to the character of the area since the
original zoning was granted many years ago influenced significantly by the growth of the medical
campus of Swedish and Craig. He offered to answer any questions the Commission might ha ve.
3
Mr. Brick asked if they had any consideration to selling the property. Mr. O'Malley said no, they
have no interest in selling the property.
• Chair Roth asked if there were any other questions for Mr. O'Malley. There were none .
•
•
Chair Roth asked if there was anyone else present who would like to address the Commission.
There was no one.
Ms. Krieger moved :
Mr. Knoth seconded: THE PUBLIC HEARING ON CASE #ZON2007-003 BE CLOSED .
AYES:
NAYS:
Brick, Knoth, Roth , Welker, Diekmeier, Krieger, Calonder
None
ABSTAIN: None
ABSENT: Bleile, Fish
Motion carried.
Chair Roth said he believes this rezone is in the spirit of what the Commission has been looking
at for that area.
Ms. Krieger stated she agreed with Chair Roth in that the rezone is a positive move. It is what the
Commission has identified in both the Comprehensive Plan and the Small Area Plan. As identified
in the Small Area Plan there has definitely been a material change in the character of that
neighborhood. The Commission definitely would like the medical center to expand to the south
and not to the north, and this is encouraging that. It definitely meets the criteria, 1) it meets the
minimum district size, 2 ) is contiguous to a B-2 zone, and 3 ) the area has been identified as an
area of change .
Mr. Welker offered that it is also a part of the connection to Hampden along Clarkson Street.
Mr. Welker moved:
Mr. Knoth seconded: CASE #ZO N2 00 7-003 , BASE REZONING REQUEST : 352 0, 3530, 3546
ANO 3556 SOUTH CLARKSON, BE RECOMMENDED FOR
APPRO VAL TO C/7Y COUNCIL WITH A FA VORABLE
RECOMMENOA TION FOR ADOPTION.
AYES:
NAYS :
Brick, Knoth, Roth , Welker, Diekmeier, Calonder, Krieger
None
ABSTAIN: None
ABSENT : Bleile, Fish
Motion carried .
4
•
•
•
PUBLIC HEARING
Case #ZON2007-002
Chair Roth stated the issue before the Commission is Case #ZON2007-002 , Englewood Estates
Planned Unit Development Amendment No. 1. Chair Roth asked for a motion to open the public
hearing.
Mr. Brick moved:
Ms. Krieger seconded: THE PUBLIC HEARING ON CASE #ZON2007-002 BE OPENED.
AYES:
NAYS:
Brick, Knoth, Roth, Calonder, Welker, Diekmeier, Krieger
None
ABSTAIN: None
ABSENT: Bleile, Fish
Motion carried.
Chair Roth asked staff to present the case.
Mr. Brook Bell, Planner for the City of Englewood, was sworn in. He stated the case before the
Commission tonight is Case #ZON2007-002, a request for Amendment No. 1 to the Englewood
Estates Planned Unit Development rezoning that was approved as Ordinance No. 47, Series
2004. The applicant is WSM Properties, LLC and the property owner is Distinctive Builders, LLC.
The property address is 1210, 1230, 1250, 1255, 1270, 1275 and 1290 West Quincy Circle .
Already presented for the record is the Staff Report and associated exhibits, proof of publication
that the Public Hearing was noticed in the Englewood Herald on July 20, 2007 and Certificate of
Posting signed by the applicant that the property was posted properly for the required 1 5 days.
The Community Development Department recommends the Planning Commission review the
application for Amendment No. 1 to the Englewood Estates Planned Unit Development and
forward the case to City Council with a recommendation for approval. The purpose of the Public
Hearing tonight is: 1) to consider the PUD modifications proposed in Amendment No. 1, 2) to
take public testimony, 3) to make Findings of Fact based on established criteria and 4) to make a
recommendation to City Council .
The original PUD rezoned the site to permit the proposed development and remains in effect
unless it is modified by Amendment No. 1. Tonight's request is to amend specific aspects of the
original PUD; it is not a rezoning of the entire PUD .
In terms of the PUD amendment process, major modifications to an existing PUD District Plan or
Site Plan amendments can only be made through the same procedures as when the original
plans were approved. Therefore, a neighborhood meeting is required, City review, and public
hearings before the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council are required . If the PUD
Amendment is approved the property will also have to be replatted to accommodate the site
plan modifications .
The existing Englewood Estates PUD is a 1.2 acre site that is vacant. In 2004 it was rezoned from
R-1-C to PU D by Distinctive Builders, LLC. The original PU D included seven single-unit detached
dwellings and a one-way private drive. No development has occurred on the property to date. In
5
•
•
•
the fall of 2006 WSM Properties showed an interest in purchasing the property from Distinctive
Builders contingent upon amending the existing PUD . In February 2007 a neighborhood meeting
was conducted and an application was filed on April 9, 2007 for Amendment No. 1. It was
reviewed by Staff and revised accordingly.
The applicant is proposing several PUD District Plan and Site Plan Amendments to address issues
related to housing market conditions and infrastructure costs associated with the original PUD
design. Generally, Amendment No. 1 proposes the following changes:
1. a change in the type of residential use from single-unit detached dwellings to
single-unit attached dwellings,
2. the number of units is being increased from seven units to eleven units,
3. a reduction in the minimum lot size and an increase in the percentage of lot
coverage,
4.
5.
building set-backs and building envelopes have been modified slightly, and
a reduction in the percentage of required landscaping.
Accessory structures are now limited only to children's play structures. No storage sheds will be
allowed . The location of permitted fencing has been modified slightly. The roadway width has
been increased for fire access and to simplify the roadway edge. The District Plan Amendment
now requires that all proposed units be fire sprinkled. Amendment No.1 proposed no change to
the use of the site, parking required on a per unit basis , building height, or infrastructure
requirements.
Although Amendment No. 1 does propose an increase in the number of units on the vacant
property the proposal is consistent with the following Comprehensive Plan goals : 1 ) promoting a
balanced mix of housing opportunities, 2 ) improving the quality of the City 's housing stock and
3 ) encouraging higher density development in proximity to transit routes.
Mr. Bell offered to answer any questions the Commission might have. There were none. Mr. Bell
introduced Mr. Rick Foerster, architect for WSM Properties.
Mr. Foerster said in 2004 the property was rezoned to create seven lots for redevelopment. That
redevelopment did not occur. WSM Properties stated market conditions have changed and the
culture of the neighborhood has changed with the introduction of light rail. WSM Properties has
developed several other properties in the City of Englewood. He offered to answer any questions
the Commission might have.
Mr. Brick asked what the rear set backs would be and if animals would be allowed. Mr. Foerster
said some setbacks would be 10 feet and yes, animals would be allowed. Mr. Brick asked how
the "No Parking" will be enforced since the drive is a private road . Mr. Foerster said the curb will
be painted and there will not be much of an opportunity to park on the street without blocking
someone 's driveway. Mr. Brick expressed concerns regarding snow removal including if the snow
was above four to six inches where would the residents pile the snow from their driveway and
walkway, where would residents park their cars while removing snow from their drive especially
coming home in the afternoon since there is no parking on the street and snow will be piled in
the additional spaces , and if traffic moves counterclockwise where would snow from the street in
front of units 1 and 2 be placed. Mr. Foerster said it is his understanding the Association will be
using a private contractor for snow removal.
6
•
Mr. Welker had a question regarding the massing of the buildings. Mr. Foerster said there is a
defined building envelope, whether it is utilized to its fullest extent, may or may not happen. The
intent is to give the units visual interest with undulating doors, garages and different color
schemes. Mr. Welker expressed concern with the visual impact on the neighborhood with the
larger buildings compared to the single unit dwellings. Mr. Foerster presented a drawing of the
original layout of the property and the proposed new layout for the Commission's review.
Discussion ensued regarding the massing of the proposed development.
Mr. Calonder asked Mr. Foerster if he knew why the land was not developed in 2004. He stated
he did not.
Testimony was taken from :
Mr. David Miller was sworn in . He stated he has been in residence in the area for six years. He
stated he feels the project does not fit in with the area . He also expressed a concern the project
will infringe on the privacy of the neighbors .
Nancy Baker was sworn in . She stated the reason the property was not developed in 2004 was
due to family issues of the developer. She said she is not thrilled to have townhomes on the
property, but is also not thrilled with having eight foot tall weeds in the field. She would prefer
single family properties, but understands the price the Seller is asking for the lot prohibits single
family homes from being built.
Sarah Leatherwood was sworn in. She has concerns about looking at a huge building from her
• back yard. She also has concerns regarding the increase in traffic to the area in regards to safety .
•
George Stampados was sworn in. He stated he has lived in his home for 29 years. His biggest
concern is the building height. He also expressed concern the units will become rental units. As a
buffer it's not bad and it would be nice to have something other than the weed field. He feels the
design does not fit the neighborhood and doesn't come close to what already has been built in
the area.
Mr. Knoth asked if the maximum height restriction changed from the original PUD to
Amendment No. 1. Mr. Bell stated it did not. The PUD approved in 2004 had the same
maximum height as the proposed Amendment No. 1.
Chair Roth asked Mr. Bell what the maximum height was under the original zoning prior to the
PUD . Mr. Bell stated it was 32 feet. Chair Roth said if you take the square footage of the lot and
divide it by 11 units you get 4,700 square feet per unit. He asked if that is close to what it would
be in an R-1-C zone . Mr. Bell said typically in an R-1-C zone the minimum lot size would be 6,000
square feet. A typical 50 ' x 125' lot is 6,250 square feet but there are smaller lots that exist in
Englewood.
Mr. Welker asked what the side setbacks were on the approved PUD . Mr. Bell stated they varied.
On the east side there was a five foot setback on each lot, which would be a 10 foot opening.
Mr. Foerster stated the same was true on every lot.
Mr. Diekmeier asked if all the roof lines were the same. Mr. Foerster stated they vary . He
provided a drawing for all the Commissioner's to view. Mr. Welker asked if the developer would
7
consider lowering the maximum height from 32 feet to 28 feet. Mr. Foerster said yes , they would
consider that.
• Chair Roth asked if anyone else would like to address the Commission.
•
•
Mr. Stampados took the stand again . He expressed concerns regarding snow removal.
Mr. Welker asked if the street was a dedicated City street that the City will maintain or a private
street. Mr. Bell stated it is a private street, but will be a dedicated fire lane, which is what it was in
the original PUD.
Mr. Diekmeier asked if there would be a homeowners association. Mr. Bell stated there would
be .
Ms . Leatherwood asked if storage sheds would be allowed . Mr. Welker stated they would not be
allowed under this proposal. She wanted to know where owners will store their lawnmowers, etc.
Mr. Foerster stated with the homeowners association in place the intent is to keep the upkeep
presentable for each unit. The front yards will be maintained through the association. The back
yards will be maintained by each owner. Several units will have doors from their garages to the
back yard for easy access . On other lots the developer has created an easement for access. It is
intended to not have fences at the onset. As the units are purchased the owners have the
provision to install fence limited to a certain extent. There will still be an easement around the
outside edge to enter the back yard for maintenance. The developer feels eliminating the storage
sheds will maintain a cleaner view .
Chair Roth asked if there were an y further questions. There were none.
Mr. Brick moved :
Ms . Krieger seconded: THE PUBLIC HEARING ON CASE #ZON2007-002 BE CLOSED .
AYES:
NAYS:
Brick, Knoth, Roth , Welker, Calonder, Diekmeier, Krieger
None
ABSTAIN: None
ABSENT: Bleile, Fish
Motion carried .
Ms . Krieger moved;
Mr. Welker seconded CASE #ZON200 7-002, ENGLEWOOD ESTATES PLANNED UNIT
DEVELOPMENT AMENDMENT 1, BE RECOMMENDED FOR
APPROVAL TO CITY COUNCIL WITH A FAVORABLE
RECOMMENDATION FOR ADOPTION WITH A HEIGHT
AMENDMENT DOWN TO 28 FEET MAXIMUM HEIGHT FOR ALL
UNITS.
Mr. Brick stated the PUD is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan, Section 5, in that it
promotes a balanced mix of housing opportunities serving the needs of all current and future
Englewood citizens. It is also in conformance with Goal 4 of the Small Area Plan, to improve
community life through improved neighborhood design and neighborhood identity and civic
8
•
•
•
pride. He said after listening to testimony tonight he is not sure the neighbors feel the same. He
stated he did not feel Section 4.5 of the Comprehensive Plan is met. He said be believes the
public is not here to talk about heights as they have already been formulated, but to talk about
density. He believes 11 units is a lot of people, a lot of houses, a lot of cars and a lot of dogs.
Ms. Krieger stated she was in on the formulation of those goals and what was meant by
traditional design was front porches, etc.
As far as the District Plan 16 .2.7h goes, he had concerns with the safety in terms of the snow
removal. In 16.2.7h3a it says the resulting rezoned property will have a significant negative
impact on those properties surrounding the rezoned area and that the general public heath ,
safety and welfare in the community are protected . He believes the proposed Amendment No. 1
will have a negative impact on the neighborhood.
Mr. Welker is concerned that the building's massing has been changed as well as the density. He
recognizes the need to create an urban environment and densify certain places in Englewood
and it has been accepted by the Planning Commission that places to increase that density is
along or near light rail, along changes from one zone district to another and from industrial 1-1
Districts to R-1 . The Comprehensive Plan discusses this type of activity . He feels a far more urban
housing district could be built than what is proposed; it could be worse . He feels lowering the
building height offers something for the residents who live to the east and have the greatest
impact.
Ms. Krieger said she too is concerned with the massing of the two biggest buildings. She said as a
Commission it is our job to try to balance out individual rights and the good of the community. It
is often very difficult to do so. She stated she does not believe snow removal is going to be an
issue. The owners will be paying for the removal through the homeowners association and would
not allow their street to be blocked by snow.
Mr. Knoth stated he likes the project and it is exactly what the Commission has talked about in
the Small Area Plan meetings .
Mr. Calonder said he feels the project is a positive change for Englewood.
Mr. Diekmeier stated he feels what has been submitted meets most established development
standards in Englewood. This is one of the few first time development projects in Englewood. He
said he is glad to see development happen.
Mr. Welker said he feels this is a step forward and is , with reservations , an acceptable project.
Ms. Krieger stated she feels the developer has improved the design from when it was originally
submitted and believes, other than the density, it's a better fit than before. She also said she lives
in the area where the developer has built other units and feels they are quality, attractive
properties that are good additions to the neighborhood . She also reiterated that when light rail
came through Englewood we committed as a City to take advantage of that and support
increased density .
AYES:
NAYS:
Knoth, Roth , Welker, Diekmeier, Calonder, Krieger
Brick
9
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
None
Bleile, Fish
• Motion carried .
IV. PUBLIC FORUM
There was no one present to address the Commission .
V. DIRECTOR'S CHOICE
Ms. Langon noted that Mr. Alan White, new Community Director, will start work on Monday,
August 13th. There will be a reception on Friday, August 17 th from 2 to 4:30 in the City Council
conference room to welcome him to the City. All Commissioners were invited to attend.
Saturday, August 25 th, is Council's Board , Commission and Authority Appreciation Night get
together at Pirate's Cove starting at 5 :00 . Swimming is from 5 to 6:30. The recognition party will
begin at 6:30. Please provide names of those attending by Friday , August 17th .
The next Planning and Zoning meeting will be on Tuesday, August 21 51
•
VI. STAFF'S CHOICE
Staff had nothing further to report.
• VI. ATTORNEY'S CHOICE
•
Mr. Brotzman stated he had nothing to report.
VII. COMMISSIONER'S CHOICE
Ms. Krieger wanted to express how difficult these types of hearings are. She said she believes
sometimes the Commission can come off as uncaring and just wanting to develop. She finds it
very difficult and does what she feels is right, but it is still wrenching at times.
The meeting adjourned at 9:12 p.m .
10