HomeMy WebLinkAbout2002-07-02 PZC MINUTES• CITY OF ENGLEWOOD PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
•
•
July 2, 2002
I. CALL TO ORDER
The regular meeting of the City Planning and Zoning Commission was called to order in the
City Council Chambers of Englewood Civic Center at 7:00 p.m., Chairman Waggoner pre-
siding.
Members present: Roth, Schum , Welker, Willis, Mueller, Waggoner
Members absent: Krieger (with previous notice ); Lathram , Parks (no previous notice)
Staff present: Senior Planner Langon
Senior Planner Graham
Assistant Ci ty A ttorne y Re i d
II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
June 18, 200 2
Cha i rman Waggoner stated that the Minutes of June 18, 2002 were to be considered for
approval.
Welker moved:
Schum seconded : The Minutes of June 18, 200 2 be approved as written.
AYES:
N A YS:
ABSTAI N :
ABSENT:
Roth , Schum , Welker, Waggoner
none
Willis, Mueller
Krieger, Lathram , Parks
The motion carried.
Ill. SAFEWAY PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT
3575 South Logan Street
CASE #PUD 2001-02
Chairman Waggoner stated that the Public Hearing on the Safeway Planned Unit Devel-
opment had been continued on June 18 to this evening. He asked if staff had additional
information.
Tricia Langon, Senior Planner, was sworn in. Ms . Langon noted that this issue has been be-
fore the Commission on May 7, June 4, June 18, and this evening. Ms . Langon noted re -
ceipt of a letter from Mr. Perry 0. Becky, Managing Member of Bonbeck HL LLC, owners
of The Shops at Hampden and Logan (the north perimeter shops ). In his letter, Mr. Becky
H:IGRO UPI BOARDS\PLAN CO MMI Minutes\M inUICS ~002\PC\1 07~2~2.doc
•
•
•
states support for the requested fueling station. Ms. Langon asked that this letter be made
part of the record of this Hearing.
Ms. Langon testified that revised plans were submitted on June 21; a formal review of the
plans by the Development Review Team was not possible because of time constraints.
However, representatives of Public Works, Utilities, Fire Division, and Community Devel-
opment did view the amended plans. Changes noted on the revised plans include:
1. The fueling facility has been reduced from 8 islands (16 pumps) to 6 islands (12 pumps).
2. The area of the fueling facility canopy has been reduced from 5,940 square feet to
4,770 square feet.
3. The length of the canopy has been reduced from 132 feet to 106 feet.
4. The parking area directly north of the fueling facility has been redesigned from 1 7 to 20
parking spaces.
5. The overall total of proposed parking spaces has increased from 23 7 to 240 parking
spaces.
6. The width of the southern-most drive aisle has been widened from 22 .59 feet to 24.59
feet.
7. The length of the parking stalls in the southern-most row of parking has been reduced
from 18 feet to 16 feet.
8. The pedestrian crosswalk at the South Grant Street access has been re-aligned per Pub-
lic Works Department comments.
9. Shrubbery has been added beneath trees in the parking lot islands west of the fueling
facility .
Chairman Waggoner asked about parking spaces to serve the north perimeter shops. Ms.
Langon stated that 54 spaces are still available; however, configuration of the committed
spaces has changed.
Chairman Waggoner asked if there were additional questions of staff. None were asked.
Chairman Waggoner then asked the applicant to address the Commission.
John Beauparlant was sworn in, and thanked the Commission for continuing the Public
Hearing to this evening. He testified that issues were raised on June 4th that Safeway
needed to respond to, and he wants the Commission to have all information available be-
fore them when a decision is made. Mr. Beauparlant stated that Mr. Dan Clayton is pre-
sent, and will address marketing issues. Mr. Beauparlant noted the three main items of con-
cern discussed on June 4 were:
1. The size of the proposed fueling station -perceived as too large.
2. The canopy over the fueling station obstructed view of the north perimeter shops.
3. On-site parking would be inadequate after construction of the fueling station and
allowance of the garden center for part of the year.
Mr. Beauparlant stated that the fueling station has been downsized from 16 pumps to 12
pumps. Downsizing the fueling station and canopy area has "opened up" the area and
now provides space for 20 parking stalls between this area and the entrance/exit points
H:IGROUPIBOARDSIPLANCOMM\Minutes\Minutes 2002\PCM 07 --02--02 .doc
•
•
from South Logan Street. This is an increase of three parking spaces. Mr. Beauparlant dis-
cussed downsizing of the canopy, height of the canopy, and referenced photographs of a
Safeway fueling development in Longmont that were included in the packet. He pointed
out that the Longmont fueling station does not inhibit visibility of surrounding shops, and
stated that the Englewood development will follow the Longmont concept.
Mr. Beauparlant also displayed a "photo simulation" of the subject site ; he advised that this
photo simulation indicates visibility of the north perimeter shops will not be impacted for
either west-bound or east-bound U.S. 285 traffic.
Mr. Beauparlant addressed the parking issue. He indicated display boards on which were
depicted configuration of the existing parking and access easement for the north perimeter
shops , and the proposed configuration of parking and access easement for the shops. Mr.
Beauparlant cited parking stall distance factors from a reference point, the reference point
being the Englewood Liquor Store/Subway Shop site . Existing average distance from park-
ing space to the reference point is 95.6 '; the proposed average distance from parking space
to the reference point is 104.0'. Mr. Beauparlant stated that the original easement/access
agreement for parking with the north perimeter shops was entered into in 1986; this pro-
vided a total of 54 spaces for those shops. This overall figure of 54 spaces will remain; only
the configuration has been modified. Mr. Beauparlant also noted that existing parking stalls
are wider than required by the City; b y narrowing the parking stalls to comply with the City
minimum regulations 23 spaces will be provided along the front of the north perimeter
shops rather than the existing 21 spaces.
Mr. Beauparlant stated that a copy of a parking audit of the Safeway parking lot conducted
in March, 2001, was included in the packet. This audit indicated that on the days indicated
(Thursday, Friday, and Saturday ), there was ample parking available .
Mr. Beauparlant discussed modifications that are proposed to increase safety features for
pedestrians and the physically disabled.
Mr. Beauparlant then addressed landscaping issues , noting redesign of the landscaping
along South Logan Street. The sidewalk has been widened to accommodate pedestrian
and wheel-chair-bound individuals, and landscaping will be placed between the sidewalk
and South Logan Street curbing. Trees and shrubbery on the west side of the sidewalk will
be moved further up the slope to alleviate the "tunnel" concept cited by Mr. Willis in a pre-
vious meeting.
Mr. Beauparlant stated that Safeway does agree to the time constraints of April through July
for operation of the garden center, and further agrees to restricted access for refueling tank-
ers from South Sherman Street.
Mr. Beauparlant stated that the fueling station will provide an additional level of conven-
• ience for Safeway and north perimeter shop customers.
H:IGROUP\BOARDS\PLANCOMM\Minutcs\Minutcs 2002\PCM 07·02.02.doc
• Mr. Beauparlant then addressed criteria for approval of PUD District Plans and PUD Site
Plans. He also addressed rezoning criteria cited in § 16-3-6 of the Englewood Municipal
Code, noting ways the proposed PUD will promote the health, safety or welfare of inhabi-
tants of the City; noting that the Safeway property is not included in any of eight identified
sub-areas of the Comprehensive Plan and is an "orphan" insofar as development strategies
and dictates of the Comprehensive Plan are concerned. Mr. Beauparlant stated that the
neighborhood has changed in the nearly 20 years since the Safeway development was
done; grocery retailing has also changed -a wider selection of services is available to the
shopper now, including pharmacies, ATM machines, etc. Providing on-site fueling stations
is just one more customer service being provided by grocer retailers. Mr. Beauparlant
stated that the PUD rezoning is requested to allow the fueling station ; the existing B-1 zone
district does not allow fueling stations.
•
•
Mr . Beauparlant asked that Mr . Clayton now address the Commission .
Dan Clayton was sworn in and testified that he is real estate manager for Safeway. He
stated that the Safeway fuel program is 1.5 years old, and they have had positive results in
areas where the fueling stations have been installed. Mr. Cla yton stated that other large
grocery outlets -King Soopers, Albertsons, Costco, and WalMart, all provide outlets with
fueling stations , and Safeway wants to remain competitive in the grocery market. He stated
that the "loyalty factor " is also a consideration -the fueling stations mean repeat business
for the grocery outlet, and drives grocery sales . Mr . Cla yton stated that the fueling station
will help this particular Safeway store remain competitive, and the y may remodel the store
within the next couple of years .
Mr . Clayton discussed the Longmont Safewa y store, noting that six pumps were installed at
this site . Sales had declined over the last five or six years, but since installation of the
pumps sales have increased for the Safeway store, and for adjoining small businesses.
Mr . Clayton stated that Safeway is very concerned about parking, and the proposed fueling
station does not eliminate required parking. The fueling station is basically "see-through "
and visibility is not inhibited. Mr. Clayton referenced an independent market study that
Safeway had done; Safeway wants to make a proactive statement to the community, and is
willing to invest $1.5 to $2 million for the fueling station and improvements.
Mr. Welker asked about cart corrals -will the area used for this purpose diminish available
parking spaces. Mr. Beauparlant stated they will not.
Mr. Willis recalled discussion regarding installation of shrubbery in the islands , and noted
that one island still appears to have no shrubbery. He also discussed landscaping along the
sidewalk; he emphasized the need for a wider sod area on the west side of the sidewalk,
and that shrubs planted along the sidewalk should not be a type that would spread over the
walk and inhibit passage of pedestrians and wheelchairs. Mr . Willis stated that the shrub-
bery proposed for the west side of the sidewalk is an asset to the overall landscaping pro-
posal ; however, it needs to be moved further up the slope to the west. Mr . Willis ques-
H:IGRO UPI BOARDSIP LANCOMM\M inutcs\M inutcs 1002\PCM 07-02-02.doc
• tioned the use of "cobble rock" as a mulch . Mr. Beauparlant stated that cobble rock will be
used as ground cover.
•
•
Chairman Waggoner asked what will be sold from the kiosk. Mr. Clayton stated that auto-
motive supplies -oil, antifreeze, etc., plus assorted snacks. There will be provision for walk-
in payment for gas from the pumps. The kiosk will be 400 square feet.
Mr. Willis asked about the hours of operation. Mr. Clayton stated the kiosk will be staffed
from 6 a.m. to 10 p.m. Mr. Schum asked if an attendant would be on-site when fuel is
downloaded from the tankers. Mr. Clayton stated an attendant would be on-site unless
tankers download after-hours.
Chairman Waggoner asked if it is correct that Safeway expects 3 7% of the traffic to be cus-
tomers of Safeway. Mr. Beauparlant stated they anticipate this percentage will visit the fuel-
ing station and the store. Chairman Waggoner stated that if 3 7% of the traffic is visiting the
store and the station, then the remaining 63% of station customers will be "new traffic".
Mr. Beauparlant suggested that it will not be "new traffic", but customers may stop to buy
gas on their way to work or home from work. Chairman Waggoner stated that traffic will
be generated at the intersection and the ingress /egress point.
Ms. Mueller commented that a fueling station is not an approved use in the B-1 Business
District, and the PUD has been requested to provide the property owner the means to de-
velop a fueling station on the site. Ms. Mueller pointed out that there are 10 service sta-
tions within a one mile radius of this site. Ms. Mueller further pointed out that this intersec-
tion has been identified as one of the worst, not only in the Englewood Transportation
study, but also by the State. This is an issue that the Commission needs to consider in mak-
ing a decision regarding the PUD. She asked if there is anything the applicant can offer to
address these concerns.
Mr. Beauparlant stated that development of an additional fueling station is a marketing de-
cision; Safeway feels they need the fueling station to provide service to their customers and
to remain competitive. Mr. Beauparlant questioned that a marketing study can be the basis
to determine whether an additional fueling station is needed. He pointed out that this is a
commercially zoned area. So far as traffic is concerned, there will be some new traffic gen-
erated, but it will not be as much as people think. He pointed out that people now have to
go somewhere else to fill their vehicle, and it may cut down on extra trips -a trip to the
grocery, and another trip to a filling station at another location. He stated that "hypermart
stores" can reduce the number of traffic trips. Mr. Beauparlant also pointed out the im-
proved ingress/egress point on South Logan Street.
Mr. Willis asked about the hours for tanker downloading. He did not see that this has been
addressed in the new submittal. Mr. Beauparlant acknowledged that this was discussed,
but pointed out that "no real motion was made to incorporate delivery hours" in revised
plans. Mr. Beauparlant stated that Safeway is receptive to delivery restrictions. Mr. Willis
stated he recalled that it was a very strong discussion regarding hours of fuel delivery, and
this is an issue that had been determined.
H:IGROUPIBOARDSIPLANCOMM\Minutcs\M in utcs :OO~IPCM 07..02..02.doc
• Mr. Clayton discussed the hours of operation of the Safeway store, commenting that he did
not think the Englewood store is a 24-hour store. Mr. Welker asked why Safeway would
want the fueling station open if the store itself isn't open.
•
•
The pricing of fuel through the Safeway fueling station was discussed. Mr. Clayton stated
that prices will be competitive with common street prices, but there will be a discount for
customers that have a Safeway Club card.
Dave Lawrence was sworn in. Mr. Lawrence is owner of the Subway Shop in the north pe-
rimeter shops. Mr. Lawrence reported that he has seen the new plans, and has spoken to
Mr. Beauparlant. He reported that Mr. Beauparlant said to him that "Safeway wouldn't let
anyone dictate hours for delivery" for the tankers. Mr. Lawrence termed the parking lot
audit submitted by Safeway "very questionable". Mr. Lawrence stated that his store has
been in this location for 12 years. He addressed visibility, traffic flow, and restricted deliv-
ery hours. Mr. Lawrence stated that he is "suspicious of people who bend the truth to get
their way". He stated that existing parking spaces are 10 feet in width -not 9'2". He
asked that he be shown pictures of "cars for sale" parked in the Safeway lot. He related
that he once drove his personal vehicle, with a for sale sign in the window, to his business,
and the "cops were on [him] in seconds "; -cars being offered for sale in the parking lot just
doesn't happen.
Afton Lawrence was sworn in. She testified to the parking shortage, noting that when they
need to unload produce for use in the Subway shop , she has to wave off cars wanting to
park in front of the store so that her father can park there while unloading.
Chairman Waggoner asked if anyone else wanted to speak. No one else indicated a desire
to speak.
Schum moved:
Welker seconded: The Public Hearing on Case #PUD 2001-02 be closed.
AYES:
NAYS:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
Schum , Welker, Willis, Mueller, Roth, Waggoner
None
None
Krieger, Lathram, Parks
The motion carried.
Chairman Waggoner asked the pleasure of the Commission.
Welker moved:
Mueller seconded: Case #PUD 2001-02, the Safeway PUD, be recommended to City
Council for approval.
Discussion on the motion ensued. Mr. Schum stated that something needs to be done to
improve the southeast corner of the Safeway site. Safeway is trying to stimulate business
H:IGROUPIBOARDSIPLANCOMM\Minutes\Minutes 2002\PCM 07-02-02.doc
• and improve the area. With the smaller fueling station, they will be competitive with other
service stations in the area, and that most of the business Safeway will bring in will come
from U.S. 285. He stated the City is gaining quite a bit by improvement of the parking lot.
•
•
Ms. Mueller stated that she didn't know of any other Safeway stores in the Denver metro
area that have developed fueling stations with their stores. She stated that the Longmont
site has a larger parking lot, and a different traffic pattern.
Mr. Welker stated that he has seen the hypermart concept in other metro areas.
Mr. Willis stated that many times there are a lot of vacant parking spaces in this lot.
Mr . Welker stated he would rather see the fueling station than the two large dumpsters that
are frequently placed in this corner. He noted that a lot of the patrons of the fueling station
will be west-bound on U.S. 285; he noted there is a four-mile strip that does not have a ser-
vice station accessible. He stated that he no longer thinks the development will be the
"monstrosity" that was first contemplated. He acknowledged that there may still be prob-
lems, but the proposal is very improved over what was seen in May. He stated that, in his
opinion, the City has gotten most of what was asked for except for delivery time con-
straints .
Ms. Mueller stated that the City is gaining some safety for pedestrians and handicapped pa-
trons, but did not see a great monetary gain to the City.
Mr. Schum stated that the more that can be done to keep Safeway a thriving business will
benefit the City and adjoining businesses.
Mr. Willis discussed his concerns regarding landscaping. He noted the species indicated on
the plans will spread and impede pedestrian and wheelchair traffic along the sidewalk. In
addition, the species that have been proposed are inconsistent in height and width at ma-
turity. He urged a species be chosen that will be consistent in height and width, and will
not grow to impede the sidewalk. Discussion ensued. Mr. Willis suggested a species of
Burning Bush would be attractive along the sidewalk, will not overgrow the sidewalk, and
would be consistent in mature height and width.
The Commission then reviewed criteria for approval of the District Plan and the Site Plan,
which are:
District Plan
1. The PUD District Plan is, or is not, in conformance with the District Plan requirements
and the Comprehensive Plan.
2. All required documents, drawings, referrals, recommendations, and approvals have
been received.
3. The PUD District Plan is consistent with adopted and generally accepted standards of
development in the City of Englewood.
H:IGROUPIBOARDS\PLANCOMM\Minu1cs\Minwcs 2002\PCM 07-02-02 .doc
•
•
•
4. The PUD District Plan is substantially consistent with the goals, objectives, design
guidelines, policies and any other ordinance, law or requirement of the City.
5. When the PUD District Plan is within the Englewood Downtown Development Author-
ity (EDDA) area, the Plan is consistent with the EDDA approved designs, policies and
plans. (Note: This provision is not applicable because the EDDA was disbanded).
PUD Site Plan
7. The PUD Site Plan is, or is not, in conformance with the District Plan requirements.
2. All required documents, drawings, referrals, recommendations, and approvals have
been received.
3. The PUD Site Plan is consistent with adopted and generally accepted standards of de-
velopment of the City of Englewood.
4. The PUD Site Plan is substantially consistent with the goals , objectives and policies
and/or any other ordinance, law or requirement of the City.
The Commission majority opinion is that the Safeway PUD, Case #2001-02 , does meet all
requirements of the District Plan and Site Plan.
Mr . Waggoner noted that staff did make some recommendations that should be included in
the motion to recommend to City Council.
Welker moved:
Schum seconded : The motion to recommend approval be amended by addition of the
following conditions:
1. Refueling Tanker truck access to the site shall be only from the
South Sherman Street access via *U.S. 285, and shall be accomplished
between the hours of 11 p.m. to 6 a.m.
2. The outdoor garden center accessory use shall be limited to
the months of April through July , shall not utilize more than 20 parking
spaces, and the layout shall be consistent with the PUD proposed site
plan.
3. The shrubbery between the sidewalk and South Logan Street
shall be of one species, consistent in height and width at maturity, and
shall not be of a species that will overgrow the sidewalk. A Burning
Bush species is suggested. Further, shrubbery and landscaping pro-
posed on the west side of the sidewalk shall be moved further west up
the slope to provide more grass closer to the sidewalk.
The vote was called:
AYES:
NAYS:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
Willis , Schum , Welker, Waggoner
Mueller, Roth
None
Krieger, Lathram , Parks
H:IGROUP\BOARDS\PLANCOMM\Minutes\M inutes 2002\PCM 07-02.02.doc
• The motion carried.
•
•
*Staff Clarification: The "U.S . 285 " route designation has been inserted in lieu of "East
Hampden Avenue"; the focus of access for tanker trucks has always been from U.S. 285 to
South Sherman Street, thence into the Safeway Parking lot .
Mr. Waggoner asked that the vote on the motion to recommend, as amended, be called .
The motion reads:
Welker moved:
Mueller seconded: Case #PUD 2001-02, the Safeway PUD, be recommended to City
Council for approval, with the following conditions:
1 .
2 .
3 .
Refueling tanker truck access to the site shall be only from the
South Sherman Street access via *U.S. 285, and shall be ac-
complished between the hours of 11 p.m. to 6 a.m.
The outdoor garden center accessory use shall be limited to
the months of April through Jul y, shall not utilize more than 20
parking spaces, and the la yout shall be consistent with the PUD
proposed site plan .
The shrubbery between the sidewalk and South Logan Street
shall be of one species, consistent in height and width at matur-
ity , and shall not be of a species that will overgrow the side-
walk. A Burning Bush species is suggested. Further, shrubbery
and landscaping proposed on the west side of the sidewalk
shall be moved further west up the slope to provide more grass
closer to the sidewalk
AYES:
NAYS:
Welker, Willis , Schum , Waggoner
Mueller, Roth
ABSTAIN: None
ABSENT : Krieger , Lathram , Parks
The motion carried.
*Staff Clarification: The "U.S. 285 " route designation has been inserted in lieu of "East
Hampden Avenue "; the focus of access for tanker trucks has always been from U.S. 285 to
South Sherman Street, thence into the Safeway Parking lot
IV. PUBLIC FORUM
No one addressed the Commission .
H:IGROUPIBOAJU>S\PLANCOMM\Minutcs\M inutcs 2002\PCM 07-02-02 .doc
•
•
•
v. DIRECTOR'S CHOICE
Senior Planner Langon stated the Work Program for the Community Development De-
partment has been distributed; she noted that this is informational only, and emphasized it
is only a list of activities staff is currently involved with, and does not reflect the amount of
time each project requires .
A study session of the Commission on the MX-TSA has been scheduled for July 9, 7:00 p.m.
The study session will be on the third floor of the Civic Center, in the City Council Confer-
ence Room.
The next regular meeting of the Commission will be July 16 1h, at which time a request for
Interpretation of the Zoning Ordinance will be considered. This interpretation is to allow
massage therapy as a Home Occupation in all residentia l zone districts except R-1-A.
Two public hearings will be scheduled for August 61h; one will be for a Conditional Use to
allow an amusement establishment in conjunction with a restaurant; the second public
hearing w ill be a Planned Unit Development for a proposed residential de v elopment.
Ms . Langon i ntroduced Mr. Kent Diekmeier, newly appointed alternate member to the
Commission .
VI. ATTORNEY'S CHOICE
Ms. Reid noted inclusion in the packet of a memo from City Attorney Brotzman regarding
review of organizational structure of boards and commissions . She asked that if members
have suggestions to forward them to the Community Development staff, or to herself.
Ms. Reid addressed concerns raised by Mr. Parks at the last meeting regarding Alexan ten-
ant issues . She reported she had spoken to Safety Services Director Olson, and no com-
plaints have been received since completion of the apartments . It appears that problems
alluded to by Mr. Parks are between the landlord and tenants, and the City has no record
to show any problem.
VII. COMMISSIONER'S CHOICE
Mr. Schum asked about the RTD /GIW project. Mr. Graham stated that RTD will introduce
their general contractor to City Council on July 15 th, and construction permits will be pulled
within the next two weeks. Another public meeting is proposed . Mr. Schum asked what
type of notification residents of the neighborhood will receive . Mr. Graham stated that
RTD is handling the notification, and he isn't sure what form it will take.
**********
Ms. Langon excused herself from the meeting.
H:IGRO UP\BOARDS\PLANCOMM\Minutcs\Minutcs 2002\PCM 07-02-02 .doc 10
• A brief recess of the Commission was called. The meeting reconvened, Krieger, Lathram,
and Parks absent.
•
•
VIII. GIW TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS
Mr. Graham introduced Mr. David Woolfall of Carter Burgess, Mr. Tim Leonard of Deepwa-
ter Point Company, and Mr. Bryant Winslow, property owner.
Mr. Graham distributed copies of the Traffic Impact Analysis to members of the Commis-
sion . Mr. Graham also distributed revised copies of the Bates Station Development and De-
sign Standards and Guidelines; he asked that this document be retained for the July gm study
session.
Mr. Graham stated that contracts with Carter Burgess were signed over a year ago, one
contract was for a city-wide Transportation Study, and another contract covered a traffic
analysis study of the General Iron redevelopment site (Fullerton redevelopment); also re-
quested was a study encompassing the Winslow property and the balance of the north
Englewood Industrial Urban Renewal Area. Mr. Graham stated that the Traffic Impact
Analysis report has been presented to the Englewood Urban Renewal Authority. Mr. Gra-
ham also submitted to the Commission members copies of a letter from the Deepwater
Point Company on behalf of the Winslow family regarding the Traffic Impact Analysis. Mr.
Graham stated that staff has not had an opportunity to review the letter. He stated that
staff has not allotted a second meeting to review the Traffic Analysis report, but if additional
time is needed we could possibly "piggy-back" on a zoning study session.
Mr. Woolfall noted that traffic analysis work began in fall of 2001. Traffic counts were ob-
tained to give a base point from which to work. Mr. Woolfall cited "givens" in developing
the analysis . The diagonal roadway from Galapago northward to Elat i/Delaware at ap-
proximately Amherst will be constructed by The Fullerton Company, and will be designed
to carry the majority of traffic generated by the redevelopment out of the neighborhood.
An assumption was made that redevelopment of the Winslow property and the remaining
industrial area will be similar to The Fullerton Company development. Several scenarios
have been considered -one being that this Galapago diagonal street will carry approxi-
mately 6,000 vehicles per day, and another 2,500 vehicles per day may use Yale Avenue to
Broadway. He pointed out there are signalized intersections at Yale and Broadway and at
Bates and Broadway.
Mr. Woolfall stated that the Galapago/lnca/Dartmouth intersection is an issue of concern.
The Galapago/lnca legs of the intersection are off-set approximately 200 feet. With pro-
jected traffic to be carried by Dartmouth Avenue (15,000 east bound; 20,000 west bound)
this intersection needs to be a four-leg intersection. It is hoped that some traffic may be
deflected to use Yale Avenue, and that Bates Avenue could be used as a bicycle route for
light rail riders .
Mr. Woolfall recalled a public meeting held in April, at which time residents on South Gala-
pago Street were concerned regarding traffic patterns and projected traffic volumes on Ga-
H:\GROUPIBOARDS\PLANCOMM\M inutcs\M inutcs 2002\PCM 07-02-02.doc I I
,. lapago Street. Mr. Schum recalled concerns were also expressed by residents regarding
projected Yale Avenue traffic.
•
•
Mr. Woolfall stated that traffic mitigation issues, such as the sound wall along Floyd Ave-
nue, have been discussed. He stated that street closures have not been considered. Mr.
Woolfall noted that during discussions with the general public regarding the city-wide
transportation plan , people seemed to veer away from the "calming methods" to increased
enforcement.
Mr. Schum asked about extension of Amherst Avenue to tie in with the diagonal street,
rather than dead-ending in a cul-de-sac. Mr. Woolfall stated that this hasn't been brought
up, and pointed out that there is no light at Amherst and Broadway. He stated that Am-
herst can be added to the list to consider.
Mr. Welker stated that the biggest issue is still Dartmouth Avenue, and means to get pedes-
trians across to Bishop Elementary School and Cushing Park. Mr. Woolfall stated that traffic
on Dartmouth Avenue will continue to increase. The Santa Fe Dri v e/Dartmouth Avenue
intersection is at full capacity.
Mr. Willis asked if the impact analysis was to address onl y vehicular traffic, or was it to also
address needs of pedestrians and bicyclists . Mr. Woolfall stated that the primary purpose
was to address vehicular traffic. Mr. Willis stated that pedestrian and bicycle traffic are im-
portant components of a transportation plan also. Mr. Schum pointed out that pedestrian
and bicycle traffic is increasing. Mr. Welker urged the need to make the intersection pe-
destrian and bicy clist friendly. Mr. Willis commented that the need to address pedestrian
and bicyclist issues has been brought up several times , and it is still not being addressed in
any transportation /traffic reports he has seen .
The issue of signal timing was discussed. Mr. Woolfall pointed out that if motorists experi-
ence delays at any particular intersection, they will "bleed off" throughout a neighborhood
to reach another intersection. He noted that if calming blockades are put on Dartmouth,
the traffic will filter throughout the neighborhood.
Ms. Mueller excused herself from the meeting.
Mr. Welker asked about making other neighborhood streets unattractive to through traffic .
He stated that he would like to see ways to deal with issues of pedestrian and bicyclist
treatment, of making major intersections usable by all segments/types of transportation,
and discouraging through traffic on neighborhood streets. Mr. Welker pointed out that
Dartmouth Avenue "divides the City", and we need to develop a means to eliminate this
division . He asked that pedestrian and non-vehicular traffic be included in traffic planning.
Mr. Schum pointed out there will be an increase of traffic in the neighborhood just from
people wanting to ride light rail and catch the transit at the Bates Station.
H:IGRO UPI BOARDS\PLANCOMM\Minutcs\Min utcs 2002\PCM 07-02-02.doc 12
• Mr. Waggoner asked why the Elati/Dartmouth intersection isn't improved inasmuch as it
leads directly to Bishop Elementary School. Mr. Schum stated that people who may live on
Huron or Galapago, for instance, will not walk that far to cross Dartmouth Avenue if they
want to go to Cushing Park.
•
•
Mr. Graham stated it is clear there are pedestrian and bicyclist components the Commis-
sion want addressed in the Traffic Impact Analysis. Mr. Graham stated that the evaluation
of land use decisions by the Commission is very closely tied to what is proposed. Mr. Gra-
ham stated that staff wants Commission members to be comfortable with the process and
help determine appropriate land uses.
Mr. Graham noted that Mr. Leonard and Mr. Winslow are present, and suggested it would
be helpful to get their perspective regarding the Traffic Impact Analysis.
Mr. Leonard stated that he was asked by the Winslow family to look at their property. The
Bates light rail station will be right on the north edge of the Winslow property. The Wins-
low family runs a construction equipment business , and large equipment such as cranes are
kept on the site. The Winslow family wants to be assured that, as changes are made to the
GIW development, they can continue to operate their existing business on their property.
The Winslow family is also desirous of working with the City to determine whether a transit
oriented development can be done on their property. The Winslows want to make sure
the area is neighborhood friendly . Mr. Leonard stated that the family realizes there are
benefits to maintain their property for industrial uses, but there would also be benefits to
redevelop their property to accommodate transited oriented uses . Mr. Leonard acknowl-
edged that realignment of the Galapago/lnca intersection may be beneficial to the GIW
redevelopment, but pointed out that this will an expensive project. Mr. Leonard stated that
the Winslow family wants to retain as much of their ownership as possible -not lose small
segments for right-of-way -in the event they determine to redevelop.
Mr. Schum commented that "you want to maintain a bulk area, but why should the resi-
dents on the west side of South Galapago suffer ". Mr. Schum stated that the proposed
round-about at the intersection would not have impacted the residents; however the angled
roadway does impact one or two of the residents.
Mr. Leonard stated that if a road alignment is to be changed, it should be changed for a
specific reason -something should be gained by the change . What impacts to pedestrians
and motorists are caused by the realignment. Mr. Leonard stated that the Winslow's posi-
tion is: does the roadway need to be changed at all? Mr. Leonard urged that the Commis-
sion look at the "trade-offs " -whenever developments warrant road changes, there must
be a good solution to the changes.
Mr. Schum stated that Galapago Street is not a designated truck route in this area; South
Elati Street is; however, the trucks are using South Galapago -not Elati .
Bryant Winslow addressed the Commission, and stated that his family has been in Engle-
wood "forever". The business has been at this location since the 1940's, and they want to
H:IGROUPIBOARDS\PLANCOMM\Minutcs\M in utcS 2002\PCM 07-02-02.doc 13
•
•
•
be a good neighbor -they want what is right for the City and the neighborhood, and are
excited about the development of a light rail station at Bates Avenue. Mr. Winslow stated
that they have been standing back, evaluating the situation; their greatest concern is
whether there is a need to change the intersection at Dartmouth/Galapago/lnca. Mr. Wins-
low stated that there two points of access to their business -from South Galapago Street,
and from Cornell Avenue. Mr. Winslow stated that the family actually operates two busi-
nesses on their property, each business being accessed at a different point -one from Ga-
lapago, one from Cornell. Mr. Winslow stated that questions have been raised that have
yet to be answered, and they need to protect their businesses -they have a vested interest
in the intersection and how well the Fullerton Company develops the GIW site. He stated
that the Winslow family does not plan on vacating the property, and pointed out that there
is no suitable replacement property in the immediate area. Their crane service is centrally
located in the area.
Chairman Waggoner asked if getting the cranes into or out of the site has ever been a prob-
lem. Mr. Winslow stated that they have not experienced problems getting the equipment
in or out. Chairman Waggoner then asked if there are a lot of pedestrians in the area . Mr.
Winslow stated that they "don't see a ton of pedestrians ", but is sure there are some and
that more will come.
Discussion ensued .
Mr. Willis excused himself from the meeting. Mr. Schum excused himself from the meeting.
Chairman Waggoner stated that he feels that Mr. Leonard and Mr. Winslow are pointing
out the need to "pre-plan " this area. He asked if there is any consideration to develop an
interior roadway in the Winslow property.
Mr. Roth pointed out that when GIW was in operation, a lot of the people employed there
walked to and from work; they lived in the area. Mr. Leonard agreed, and also pointed out
that GIW had three shifts operating the plant.
Mr. Winslow asked the Commission to consider what the realigned intersection does to the
value of individual properties. Further discussion ensued.
Mr. Graham stated that staff and the consultant will work further on the Traffic Impact
Analysis .
The meeting disbanded at 10:05 p .m.
LhzA t d?li-
Gertrude G. Welty, Recording Secraary
H:IGRO UP\BOARDS\PL4.NCOMM\Minutcs\Minutcs 1002\PCM 07-02-02.doc 14