Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1962-12-06 PZC MINUTESI I I C. Arapahoe County 5014 South Grove Page 685 Mrs. Romans reported that it has come to her attention that there is an illegal use existing at 5014 South Grove. A Chiropractors offices have been moved to that location from 5005 South Federal and it has been reported as a Home Occupation. Inasmuch as neither of the Drs. Ohlson live at 5014 South Grove, it is not a Home Occupation. She informed the Commission a letter had been sent to Arapahoe County officials asking that their Zoning Resolution be enforced until such time as the annexation of this area to the City of Englewood is finalized. D. Upcoming Business Commission members were reminded of the discussion meeting with Auto Wrecking Yard managers on December 6th, and of two rezoning cases to be heard on December 13th. Love moved: Kreiling seconded: The meeting be adjourned. The motion carried unanimously, and the meeting was adjourned at 11:30 P.M. Respectfully submitted, Gertrude G. Welty Recording Secretary MEMORANDUM TO THE ENGLEWOOD CITY COUNCIL REGARDING ACTION OR RECOMMENDATION OF TIIE CITY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION . DATE: November 29, 1962 SUBJECT: Street Designation RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Commission recommend to City Council that the 20 foot ease- ment extending west from South Ogden in the 3000 block be designated as East Dartmouth Place. Respectfully submitted, By Order of the City Planning and Zoning Commission. Gertrude G. Welty Recording Secretary ** * * * * * * * * * * * *-* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ·* I. -CALL TO ORDER. CITY OF ENGLEWOOD PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION Minutes of December 6, 1962 The regular meeting of the Englewood Planning and Zoning Commission was called to order by Chairman Rice at 8:00 P.M. Members present: Hill; Kreiling; Love; Miles; Pershing; Rice Romans, Ex-officio Members absent: None Also present: City Attorney Esch II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Hill moved: Miles seconded:· The minutes of November 29, 1962 be approved as presented. The motion carried unanimously. Mr. Kreiling stated he felt there were a · few statements released by the Englewood Herald which needed clarification. The news data release reported that Mr. Kreiling would abstain from voting on any future discussions concerning the KLZ zoning, should it again be brought before the Commission. Mr. Kreiling stated that if the Commission felt it would be better that he not vote, he would abstain; otherwise, he would vote as usual. Mr. Hill stated he felt all news releases should be cleared by the Commission before publication. Page 686 III. AUTO WRECKING ORDINANCE CASE #28-62A Chairman Rice welcomed the owners and operators of the auto wrecking yards in the City. Mr. Rice stated this mee ·ti)lg was specifically for discussion of the proposed Auto Wrecking Ordinance with the operators and owners in order to gain their feelings on this Ordinance. He emphasized that this was ".not a Public Hearing. Mrs. Romans gave a resume of the Auto Wrecking Yard-Junk Yard Ordinance. All Department Heads that are directly conderned with the operation of auto wrecking or junk yards have contributed to ~the compilation of this Ordinance. Their suggestions have been incorporated into the Ordinance, and the administration feels that the Ordinance has merit. Mr. Banta, Attorney for the operators, pointed out that there are approximately 3000 cars per month that are junked. Of this amount, 500 per month come from the southern portion of the Metropolitan Area, including Englewood. Mr. Banta stated there were none of the Auto Wrecking operators in business at the present time who could possibly live with the Ordinance and not be in violation in some way. He further pointed out that it would be a great financial responsibility to meet all the requirements as set forth. Mr. Banta felt Auto Wrecking Yard owners would, in effect, pay twice for the same reason if a license fee is required as well as a B & 0 license. Mr. Banta further objected to the $5.00 per month inspection fee required in addition to the fees above mentioned. Mr. Banta stated he did not believe any Bonding Company would write a bond for an Auto Wrecking Yard. Mr. Banta felt the City was well protected, and did not feel the Bond would accomplish anything. Mr. Banta said he saw no reason for the inclusion of Section 4, as this is set forth in the Building Code. Mr. Rice replied that it was included only for clarification. Mr. Banta felt that Section 7 was putting a minimum lot size stipulation on the Yards with- out specifically setting it forth. He did not feel this could be done. It was pointed out that the access roads, or fire lanes, were a requirement of the Fire Department. Mr. Banta asked if it were necessary to require the access roads within the site to be surfaced when roads in the entire area are not surfaced. It was reiterated that the roads, or fire lanes, are a matter of safety, and should be passable at all times. Mr. Banta stated that there would be considerable difficulty involved in attempting to meet the requirements of Section 9. City Attorney esch replied that a great many of the Auto Wrecking Yard owners were opposing the formation of a Sewer District in the Scenic View area. Mr. Banta voiced an objection to the fencing requirements of the Ordinance. He cited the M-3 Ordinance height specifications as only 6 feet compared to a minimum height of 8 feet as set forth in thEOrdinance. Mr. Banta felt this solid fencing would be unwise, as fires could not be seen should they start; nor could looting be detected. Discussion followed. The Commission felt an opaque fencing, minimum height 8 feet, should be required whenever an Auto Wrecking Yard adjoins, abuts, or is adjacent to a residential use. It was also felt that fencing should be required on all street frontage. Mr. Banta felt Section 10 (d) could be construed as "governing the operation of the business." He asked why the fence height restrictions, if stacking were not permitted. Also it was pointed out that the City would be restricting business, in that the small Auto Wrecking Yards particularly, could not expand if stacking were prohibited. The Wrecking Yard operators were asked how "stacking" was generally done and how many auto bodies could be safely stacked. Mr. Axelson replied stacking was done both horizontal and vertical. He also stated that in his opinion two cars stacked horizontally would be safe. Mr. Banta cited Section 10 (f), and pointed out that the Mills will not buy the cars unless they are burned. He asked if burning could be permitted one or two days a month. Mr. Rice asked what the Wrecking Yards in Denver did. The Operators stated that the cars were burned in Denver; it was not known if it was permitted, but it was done. The Director stated it is necessary to have controls over such phases of operation as burning, in order to control the problem of atmospheric contamination. Mr. Banta felt the Welding Safety Regulations needed to be defined, and questioned the necessity of Section 12 (c), particularly the restriction of not being able to sell anything until it had been in possession 72 hours. Mr. Pershing suggested the restriction be changed to the requirement of a "clear title" before sales were permitted. Section 13 was discussed. No definite time limit was set forth in the Ordinance; Mr. Banta felt every requirementshould be listed and the time to comply with each be given. This Section was discussed by the Commission. Mr. Banta felt this particular section needed to be discussed more thoroughly with the Wrecking Yard owners. The Commission requested the Planning Director and City Attorney to meet with Mr. Banta to discuss further the points brought out in the meeting. The Director was asked to make a report to the Commission at a later meeting. IV. OLD BUSINESS The Director reminded the Commission members of the luncheon meeting Monday, December 10. The revised Zoning Ordinance work program will be discussed at that time. The meeting adjourned at 10:20 P.M. Respectfully submitted, Gertrude G. Welty Recording Secretary * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * I I