Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2000-03-07 PZC MINUTES• • • CITY OF ENGLEWOOD PLANNING AND ZONING COM1\11SSION March 7, 2000 CALL TO ORDER The regular meeting of the City Planning and Zoning Commission was called to order at 7:00 p .m. by Chairman Carl Welker. Present: Absent: Also present: Rininger, Sauter, Stockwell, Weber, Willis, Douglas, Welker Lathram Tricia Langon, Planner Mark Graham, Senior Planner Nancy Reid, Assistant City Attorney Art Scibelli, Business Development Coordinator APPROVAL OF MINUTES February 8, 2000 Chairman Welker stated that the Minutes of February 8, 2000 were to be considered for ap- proval . Douglas moved: Rininger seconded: The Minutes of February 8, 2000 be approved as written. Mr. Sauter referenced Page 5, and the prioritization of the Metro Vision principles. He ques- tioned that the prioritized list represented a "consensus" of the Commission. Mr. Stockwell agreed with Mr . Sauter that the list is not a "consensus" of the Commission, and that the original order of the list presented by Mr. Graham would not be changed. Discussion ensued . Mr. Graham stated, in response to an inquiry from the Commission, that the prioritized list was sent to the Denver Regional Council of Governments (DRCOG), with a letter indicating the prioritized list was the consensus of the Commission. Municipalities were requested to submit this list to determine support for provisions in House Bill 1123, which is the land use Bill to be heard in committee on March gm. Brief discussion ensued . Mr. Welker suggested that this discussion be noted in the Minutes of this meeting. Further discussion ensued . Stockwell moved: Welker seconded : The Minutes of February 8, 2000 be amended on Page 5, eliminating reference to "consensus" of the Commiss ion. AYES : NAYS: Rininger, Sauter, Stockwell , Weber, Willis, Douglas, Welker None H:\GROUP\BOARDS\PLANCOMM\Minuies\Minuies 2000\PCM 03-2000A .doc ABSTAIN : ABSENT: None Lathram The motion carried. PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT Hawthorn Suites Ltd. Hotel South Pennsylvania Street/U.S. 285 CASE PUD-98-03 Mr. Welker stated that the issue before the Commission is a proposed Planned Unit Develop- ment at South Pennsylvania Street and U.S. 285. He asked for a motion to open the Public Hearing. Douglas moved: Rininger seconded : The Public Hearing on Case #PUD-98-03 be opened. AYES : NAYS : ABSTAIN : ABSENT: Sauter, Stockwell, Weber , Willis, Douglas, Rininger, Welker None None Lathram The motion carried. Mr. Welker set forth the parameters for conduct of the Hearing. All persons testifying before the Commission will be sworn, give name and address, and speak from the podium. All com- ments will be directed to the Commission. Staff will make the initial presentation , then appli- cants and proponents will address the Commission , followed by opponents. The Commission may recall anyone for additional testimony . Mr. Welker asked for the staff presentation. Tricia Langon was sworn in. Ms. Langon stated that the Certification of Posting and Proof of Publication have been submitted to the Chair. Hawthorn Suites Hotel is proposed at the northwest/northeast comers of U .S . 285 and South Pennsylvania Street, one block to the south of Swedish Medical Center (SMC), and one of four potential hotel sites identified in a hotel marketing study done in 1997. The request is to rezone this site from R-3, High Density Resi- dence , to PUD, Planned Unit Development. The proposal is to construct a three story, 52- room extended stay hotel on the northeast parcel of property, with part of the required parking to be developed on the northwest parcel of land . The total acreage of the site is .81 acres; the east parcel presently has two single-family residential structures and is .58 acres in size; the west parcel is developed with one residential structure and garage , and is .23 acres in size. The area to the north, east, and south of the site is zoned R-3, and is developed with a mix of single-family, two-family , and multi-family uses, there is also professional office use in this area . To the west of the subject site, the zoning is B-1, Business and is developed for com- mercial and office usage. Ms. Langon suggested there are two issues which are yet to be resolved . H:IG ROUP\BOARDSI PLANCOMMI Minu1es \Minutes 2000\PCM 03-2000A.doc: • • • • • • 1) 2) All fencing must comply with the sight-distance triangle requirements; Submission of a detailed parking demand analysis to support the proposed parking plan. Ms. Langon indicated that the applicant can address both of these issues during the course of their presentation. If the Commission determines that the applicant has addressed these two issues to their satisfaction , the application for PUD approval should be forwarded to C ity Council with a favorable recommendation. If, however, the applicant does not address the two issues to the satisfaction of the Commission, the Hearing should be continued to a date certain, and require that the parking analysis be submitted to staff two weeks prior to the date certain. Ms. Langon stated that the PUD is a rezoning process, which established zoning and criteria for specific site development. The PUD requires submission of a District Plan, and of a Site Plan; consideration of these plans may be done concurrently, which is the case on this request. Ms. Langon stated that the preliminary application was submitted to staff in May , 1998 ; a neighborhood meeting was held , and which time parking for the hotel was an issue of primary concern to surrounding residents. The formal application was presented to staff in September, 1998 . There have been several reviews and revisions of the plan , and the fin al proposal for the PUD was submitted to staff in January , 2000 . The R-3 , High Density Residence District , does not cite hotels as a permitted principal use . The proposed PUD will add a hotel as a permitted principal use , and eliminate single and two- family residential development as a permitted use . Nonconforming use status will be granted to the single and two-family uses that are on the site , and will remain until construction begins for the hotel. The proposed PUD/hotel development is consistent with the intent of the Comprehensive Plan. Ms. Langon reviewed the requirements of the District Plan and Site Plan , as follows : PUD District Plan 1. The PUD District Plan is, or is not, in conformance with the District Plan requirements and the Comprehensi ve Plan ; and The proposed Hawthorn Suites Ltd . Hotel PUD is in conformance with the applicable requirements set forth in Section 16-4-15 E, 3 e . PUD District Plan. 2 . All required documents, drawings, referrals , recommendations , and approvals have been recei ved; and All appropriate documents concerning the proposed Hawthorn Suites Ltd. Hotel PUD have been received and referrals to outside agencies have been made and approved with the exception of an adequate parking analysis. 3 . The PUD District Plan is consistent with adopted and generally accepted standards of de- velopment in the City of Englewood; and H:IGROUPIBOARDSI PLANCOMM\Minu 1es \Minu1es 2000\PCM 03-2000A .doc The proposed PUD District Plan modifies the existing R3 District regulations by: 1. Adding hotel as a permitted use. 2. Removing single-family and duplex as permitted uses. 3. Granting existing single residential dwellings and accessory uses legal non- conforming use status until the hotel facility is built. 4. The PUD District Plan is substantially consistent with the goals, objectives, design guide- lines, policies and any other ordinance, law or requirement of the City; and The proposed Hawthorn Suites Ltd. Hotel PUD District Plan is in conformance with all other ordinances, laws and requirements of the City. 5. When the PUD District Plan is within the Englewood Downtown Development Authority (EDDA) area, the Plan is consistent with the EDDA approved designs, policies and plans . Not applicable. PUD Site Plan Hawthorn Suites Ltd. Hotel PUD Site Plan sets forth the site planning and design parameters within which the proposed development will occur. 1. The PUD Site Plan is, or is not, in conformance with the District Plan requirements; and The proposed Hawthorn Suites Ltd. Hotel PUD Site Plan is in conformance with the Hawthorn Suites Ltd. Hotel PUD District Plan. The PUD Site Plan establishes the size, orientation, location, and building elevations that illustrate the design of the pro- posed structure as well as materials to be used. The PUD Site Plan also includes a signage plan, and a landscape plan that provides details as to location of landscape areas and the plant species to be used. 2. All required documents, drawings, referrals, recommendations, and approvals have been received; and All required site plan materials have been received and approved except for fence sight distance requirements. 3. The PUD Site Plan is consistent with adopted and generally accepted standards of devel- opment of the City of Englewood; and The proposed PUD Site Plan is consistent with the development standards set forth in the PUD District Plan. H:I GROUPIBOARDSIPLANCOMM\MinutCl\Minu<cs 2000\PCM 03-2000A .doc • • • • • 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 proposed PUD Site Plan is in conformance with all other ordinances, laws and re- quirements of the City. Staff is of the opinion that the proposal is compatible with the mixed-use intent cited in the Plan, and fills a need for the community . Ms . Langon further addressed the two unresolved issues, that being fencing and the parking study. Ms. Langon stated that fencing placement in relation to the sight-distance triangle is a traffic safety issue. Parking was, reiterated Ms. Langon, a primary issue during the neighbor- hood meeting in 1998. The proposed parking for the 52-room hotel is one space per hotel room -a total of 52 spaces . This does not take into account needed spaces for hotel employ- ees . Staff is asking that the parking demand analysis contain information regarding the number of employees; the number of employees per shift; where a hotel van will be parked ; projected occupancy rate; an estimate of time before that rate occurs; when is peak occupancy -week- ends , holidays, etc.; who will use the hotel; driving patterns, and any agreements between the area hospitals and the hotel regarding referrals. Ms. Langon reiterated that staff recommenda- tion of approval is dependent upon the applicant addressing these two issues. Mr. Douglas asked the minimum size of a parcel to be considered under the PUD; he recalled that it was one acre minimum size. Ms. Langon stated that minimum size is one-half acre. Mike Plante was sworn in. Mr . Plante offered testimony on the proposed hotel development, stating that he is of the opinion there is a strong need for a hotel in Englewood. Mr. Plante testified that he is experienced in hotel development , and traced the development of the Haw- thorn Suites chain to the family who developed the Hyatt Hotel chain. Mr. Plante stated that he and his partner, Dr. Paul Zwiebel, have purchased the franchise for this hotel in Engle- wood. Mr. Plante stated that travelers who want to stay at a hotel in close proximity to either Swedish Medical Center or Craig Hospital must stay at either the Comfort Inn at U.S. 285 and Wadsworth, or at the Marriott at U.S. 285 and I-25 . Mr. Plante stated that SMC is a Class I trauma center for the four-state region, and that Craig Hospital specializes in treatment of spi- nal injuries. Both of the medical facilities may serve out-of-town or out-of-state patients; these patients have families who need and want to be close to the hospital, and there is no accommo- dation for these family members. Mr. Plante stated that he had discussed the hotel need for the City with the City's Business Development Office, and that several sites were viewed but were not satisfactory . The subject site is within walking distance of both SMC and Craig hospitals, and the hotel will offer "suites" of one or two bedroom, with small cooking area, eating area, and living area. The hotel will arrange with Safeway Stores to stock the suites with groceries for the clients who may wish to prepare their own meals. There are also some local restau- rants within walking distance for those who wish to eat out. The hotel will not provide rental vehicle service, but do plan to have a van to pick up guests from the airport. H:\GROUP\BOARDSIPLANCOMM \MinulCll Minutc> 2000\PCM 03-2000A.doc Mr. Plante discussed other establishments which could generate hotel guests, and noted that the redevelopment of the mall site is a good example of visitors, such as consultants or prospective • tenant representatives, not having a place to stay in Englewood. Mr. Plante addressed the design of the hotel, and noted that at least four designs have been considered and discarded or revised. This is a "tight site", and the overall development has been scaled down to try to make it work on this site. One of the initial thoughts was to vacate a portion of South Pennsylvania and develop underground parking. This would be very expen- sive, and the proposal is now to construct the three-story, 52-unit hotel with at-grade parking. The structure will be of conventional materials. Mr. Plante stated that this will be a uniquely developed hotel, designed to accommodate a spe- cific type of clientele. A large portion of the clientele may be from out-of-town or out-of-state, and will not have a car. Mr. Plante noted the concern of staff regarding provision of off-street parking, and in his opinion the 52 parking spaces will be sufficient for both the guests and the employees. Mr. Plante stated that employees will not all be present at the same time, and sug- gested that from 7:30 p.m. to 5:30 a.m., there will probably be two staff on-duty; between 5:30 a.m. to 8 a.m. there would be an additional two staff members who will be working in the kitchen (the hotel will serve breakfast); between the hours of 8 a.m. and 3 p.m., the house- keeping staff will be in -this will be a total of three (one for each floor). Mr. Plante stated that the most employees on site at any one time might be seven. Guests will be departing the hotel in the morning about the time the housekeeping staff arrives; therefore, Mr . Plante sug- gested, a parking space can serve both a guest and an employee. Mr. Plante also suggested that some of the employees could be hired from the immediate neighborhood and be within walking distance; another possibility would be to engage employees of SMC or Craig who work split shifts and the hotel will still be within walking distance. Mr. Plante estimated a shortage of two parking spaces for the development. He stated that he did not know where two additional parking spaces could be accommodated -there is no space on the subject site. Mr. Plante discussed occupancy rates, citing an occupancy progression from 75 % to a possible high of 82 % in four to five years. Mr. Plante urged the Commission to not continue the Hearing on the proposed PUD, but to make a decision at this time. He stated that the goal is to break ground in June, and to have the hotel open for business sometime in the first quarter of 2001. Mr. Weber asked what the average rate will be. Mr. Plante stated that this has yet to be de- termined. He did note that he recently stayed at a Hawthorn Suites hotel in Atlanta, which is also in close proximity to a medical campus; this hotel averaged 77 % occupancy, and the rate was $89 per night. Mr. Plante stated that there will be three suites on the first floor that will comply with ADA requirements . Other suites can be retrofitted if there is demand for handicapped accessible rooms. H:\GROUP\BOARDSI PLANCOMM\Minutcsl Minutcs 2000\PCM 03·2000A.doc • • • • Mr. Willis asked if he understood correctly that the hotel will serve primarily SMC, but that anyone could stay there. Mr. Plante stated that SMC is the major generator in the immediate area. Mr. Welker asked for a breakdown on the room sizes. Mr. Plante stated that the first floor will accommodate 10 one-bedroom suites, one large one-bedroom suite, and one two-bedroom suite. The second and third floors will have 17 one-bedroom suites; two large one-bedroom suites, and one two-bedroom suite. Mr. Plante stated that the hotel will have an elevator, so units on the second and third floors may also be retrofitted to ADA requirements. The hotel will also have the "roll-in" showers for handicapped guests. Mr. Welker asked if they anticipate clientele from Craig Hospital. Mr. Plante stated that Craig has some units for their patients where they learn independent living, and that a majority of family members for those patients are also housed by Craig. There may be some guests of Hawthorn Suites affiliated with Craig Hospital in some way . Mr. Plante suggested that many of the guests of Hawthorn Suites will be "follow-up patients" -those who may have to return for follow-up appointments with the physicians who cared for them at SMC or at Craig. There is a strong market for this type of client. Mr. Plante stated that his partner in this proposed development, Dr. Paul Zwiebel, is a plastic surgeon who practices at SMC, and was an ER doctor at SMC for some time . Mr. Weber asked what problems, if any, were anticipated by having the required parking across the street. Mr. Plante stated that he anticipates this will be a pretty quiet intersection, left-turning movements are restricted at the intersection, and he doesn't anticipate problems with required parking provided across the street. He noted that SMC has a lot of "over-flow parking" in the neighborhood . Mr. Sauter asked what impact this development can be expected to have on adjacent proper- ties. Mr. Plante pointed out residential uses which he and Dr. Zwiebel currently own, one of which is a nice duplex he wants to talk to the Englewood Housing Authority about relocating. The other two, once the tenants have been relocated, the Fire Department can use for practice burns. Mr. Stockwell asked how the property is being acquired -is the City condemning the property and turning it to the applicants? Mr. Plante stated that he and Dr. Zwiebel have owned this property for a number of years. Mr. Stockwell noted that the hotel is being designed for "extended stay" -will there be weekly or monthly rates, and marketing to the private sector. Mr. Plante stated that there have been some inquiries on this possibility, and cited a medical accounting service in the immediate area which has audito r s come in for several week stays. This hotel could provide a place for those auditors to stay . H:IGROUPIBOARDS IPLANCOMM\Minu1es\Minu1CS 2000\PCM 03-2000A.doc Mr. Stockwell asked if state and federal guidelines were used to determine the number of rooms needed to comply with ADA requirements. Also, will rent-a-car services be provided. • Mr. Plante stated that they did make use of the guidelines to determine the ADA room re- quirement. He reiterated that rent-a-car services will not be provided, but that they will have a van to pick up guests or deliver guests to the airport. Mr. Sauter inquired about the fencing. Mr. Plante indicated on a display board where the fencing will be and the height of that fencing. The fencing will be a combination of brick wall and cedar fencing. There will be no fencing along the alleys. Mr. Willis asked if on-street parking can be counted as part of the required parking. Mr. Plante stated they had asked about assigning the required handicapped parking spaces on-street, but in talking to the Planning staff they were told that this parking could not be counted toward the required parking. He stated that he thought there was merit to providing the handicapped parking right in front of the hotel, but right now, these spaces are open to whoever wants to park there. Mr. Stockwell asked where guests would cross the street -mid-block or at the corner. Ms. Langon stated that the Traffic Division of the Public Works Department has indicated that the only approved crossing point will be at the corner. Again , this is a safety issue. Dennis Carlson was sworn in. Mr. Carlson testified that he is the architect for the proposed hotel. The hotel will be three-story, wood frame construction, with a three foot high veneer of • brick along the base of the building. The brick veneer on the building will match the coloring of the brick used in the brick wall fencing. On the building above the brick veneer the finish will be stucco, and the building will have asphalt shingles. Mr. Carlson indicated locations of fencing on the display board, and noted heights of the fenc- ing in the various locations . Mr. Carlson cited the use of brick walls, cedar fencing, and wrought iron fencing. Mr. Welker noted the maximum height of 3 '6" for a fence in front of a building. Ms. Langon noted that this is correct; however, this is a Planned Unit Development, and variations to specific standards may be approved if the PUD is approved. Mr. Welker urged that the fencing in front of the building line be lowered to no more than 30" for the 20 foot front setback. Also, on the west side of South Pennsylvania he wanted to see heights tran- sitioned from lower fencing at the street to higher fencing past the front setback line. Mr. Carlson stated, in response to a query from the Commission, that 27 standard sized park- ing spaces, 22 compact parking spaces, and three handicapped parking spaces will be provided. Bumper stops will not be provided; there will be curbing along the parking area, and vehicles will overhang the curbing. Mr. Carlson addressed signage for the proposal. Signage on the building will be back-lit. Signs on the brick fencing walls will be up-lit. H:\GROUP\BOARDS\PLANCOMM \Minuies\Minuies 2000\PCM OJ..2000A .doc • • • • Mr. Carlson stated there will be no pool facilities provided at this hotel; they will have a small dining area for those who wish to eat breakfast; an office center with a copy machine and fax machine to accommodate the guests, a small exercise area and office and laundry space for the hotel on the first floor. The building will be sprinklered in accordance with Building Code re- quirements. Mr. Carlson discussed the landscaping which will be provided -21 trees, and an assortment of shrubs and plantings. Mr. Carlson stated that they are in receipt of a letter from the Colorado Department of Transportation regarding the landscaping. Mr. Welker noted that the sewer line the development will tie into is a block away. Mr. Carl- son stated that this is correct; the line in the Pennsylvania/Pearl alley is at capacity, while the line in the Pennsylvania/Logan alley can accommodate the hotel. Mr. Welker noted that 15 foot light poles are noted in the parking lots; what types of globes will be used, and what intensity of lighting. Will the applicant take steps to prevent light pol- lution onto adjoining properties? Mr. Carlson stated that the applicants are exploring various kinds of lighting. Mr. Welker stated it appears the Pennsylvania/Logan alley pan will be replaced and the alley paved; is this required to facilitate use of the alley for ingress and egress purposes. Mr. Carl- son agreed. Ms. Langon stated that the Public Works Department has said that the alley must be paved. Mr. Welker asked if the 15 foot wide alley will accommodate two-way traffic. Ms. Langon responded that Public Works Department had approved the 15 foot width. Mr. Welker inquired further about signage in the parking lots. Mr. Carlson stated that the lots will be signed for "hotel guests only". Mr. Stockwell stated that this signage cited by Mr. Carlson is contradictory to Mr. Plant's suggestion that the parking lot might open to usage by employees of SMC. Ms. Langon stated that the signage "for hotel guests only" is a require- ment to prevent loss of parking for hotel guests in these designated lots. Arthur Scibelli, Business Development Coordinator, was sworn in. Mr. Scibelli testified that staff has been working with the applicants to find a suitable site for hotel development for the last four and one-half years. Mr. Scibelli stated one of the objectives of the Community De- velopment Department is to _ create a presence near the medical campus to accommodate over- night guests. The residential, commercial, and industrial neighborhoods were all surveyed in an attempt to find a suitable hotel site. Mr. Scibelli expressed his opinion that the hotel devel- opment will lead to additional supportive developments in the area of the medical campus. Mr. Scibelli acknowledged that the site is quite small -only .81 acres in size. He stated that two and one-half years ago, the City financed a $30,000 study on hotel development in the Englewood area, and whether such a project would be economically viable . Mr. Scibelli stressed that the profit margin for such an undertaking is "very slim", and the ownership of the site by the applicants is an important aspect to make the proposal work . Mr. Scibelli empha- sized that this may be the only opportunity Englewood has to get a hotel adjacent to the medi- H:IGROUP\BOARDS\Pl.ANCOMM\Minul<SI MinutcS 2000\PCM 03-2000A.doc 9 cal campus. If the project is approved, this is one more piece of the overall Community De- velopment effort, and is an opportunity that many communities do not have. • Mr. Weber asked that the other sites which were considered be identified. Mr. Scibelli stated that sites along South Broadway were considered, as well as the EHA site at Girard and Sherman where the townhomes were developed. They looked at some apartment houses owned by SMC, and at the former Englewood Garden Center. He stated that the only reason the subject site was taken into consideration is that the site was already owned by Mr. Plante and Dr. Zwiebel. Jim Gerlits, 3579 South Pennsylvania, 'was sworn in. Mr. Gerlits asked how this development will affect his property values -will it appreciate or depreciate the value. Assistant City Attorney Reid stated that this is a question the Planning Commission cannot an- swer. The Commission may take comments that Mr. Gerlits wishes to make or concerns he may express into consideration during their deliberations after the Hearing closure, but they cannot answer this question. Mr. Welker asked if anyone else in the audience wished to address the Commission. He asked if there were further questions from the Commission. Mr. Stockwell asked what process would be followed if there is concern regarding the amount of parking; he noted that there is a very small window for approvability if the applicant is to • meet his goal of breaking ground in June. Does the Commission have the option of requiring information which would change the starting date of the project. Ms. Langon stated that the construction start date is dependent on when approval is granted by City Council. If the Commission has concerns and wants additional information, it is within their prerogative to request that information, and the construction start date will have to be adjusted. Mr. Welker stated that the Commission recommends approval , approval with conditions, or disapproval of the project to City Council. Ms. Langon noted that if the Commission asks for the parking demand analysis, the Findings of Fact will be based on this. Mr. Welker asked for a motion to close the Public Hearing. Rininger moved: Willis seconded: The Public Hearing on Case #PUD-98-03 be closed. AYES : NAYS: ABSTAIN : ABSENT: Stockwell, Weber, Willis, Douglas, Rininger, Sauter, Welker None None tathram H:IGROUP\BOAROSI PLANCOMM\Minuies\Minuies 2000\PCM 03 ·2000A .doc lO • • • • The motion carried . Douglas moved: Rininger seconded : The Planning Commission recommend that City Council approve the ap- plication for Planned Unit Development approval for the Hawthorn Suites Hotel, Case #PUD-98-03, with the following conditions. 1. The applicant shall supply a detailed parking demand analysis; 2. All fences shall comply with sight distance triangle requirements. Mr. Welker asked what Mr. Douglas wants on the parking study. Mr. Douglas stated that he questions the cited occupancy rate for this hotel -he thinks the occupancy rate could be higher and the parking demand greater because of the location and the targeted clientele. Mr. Sauter pointed out that the plan, as presented, is only two parking spaces short of meeting the mini- mum requirement. Mr. Willis pointed out the possibility that some guests will not have vehi- cles . Mr. Douglas acknowledged that this is the allegation of the applicant, but he would like a second opinion on the required parking . Mr. Douglas also pointed out that if a seriously ill or injured patient is in SMC, there many be family members from different locales which could come to town; they may be able to stay together in one suite, but there could be two or three vehicles associated with the guests in that one suite. Mr. Welker agreed with this scenario, but noted the reasonable predictions that the hotel will seldom be 1003 capacity -more likely 75 3 to 85 3 full. There is also the parking lot at Safeway which could be used, as well as the parking garage on South Pearl Street. Mr. Welker stated that he does not want to see the hotel parking spaces made available to SMC employees, or to the general public . These parking spaces must be restricted for use by hotel guests and employees. Discussion ensued . Mr. Weber asked how many spaces the project is short -is it two spaces, five spaces, seven spaces? Mr. Welker stated that assuring ample parking is a big issue in considering approval for any proposal. He stated that he doesn't think the hotel will generate a lot of traffic, but did ac- knowledge that the parking is tight. Mr. Welker also cited the issues of lighting and noise and the impact of those facets on the neighborhood; he stated that he felt the lighting and noise im- pact created by the hotel will be minimal. Mr. Welker stated that in his opinion, the hotel is an appropriate use. Mr. Welker pointed out that the hotel will be providing 50+ parking spaces that are not available in the area now. Mr. Douglas pointed out that the hotel developer may be providing 52 parking spaces, and generating need for 55 spaces. Mr. Stockwell suggested that the hotel development could encourage development of and use of shuttle services. He stated that the applicant did, in his opinion, address the issues of fenc- ing, lighting, and the hotel clientele very well. Mr. Stockwell suggested that the recommenda- H:IGROUP\BOARDS\PLANCOMM\Minutes\Minutcs 2000\PCM 03-2000A .doc 11 tion from the Planning Commission to City Council should include encouragement to relocate the duplex mentioned by Mr. Plante. Mr. Welker noted that moving houses is quite expensive, • and this is an issue for Mr. Plante and his partner to resolve. Mr. Sauter suggested the need to weigh the overall benefit to the neighborhood and to the community as a whole. Further discussion ensued on parking. Mr. Douglas stated that the parking analysis did not have to come before the Planning Commission, but it should be submitted prior to submission of the proposed PUD to City Council for their consideration. The requirement that the parking analysis be submitted prior to consideration of the request by City Council is to be made part of the motion. The vote on the motion, as amended was called: AYES : NAYS: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: Weber, Willis, Douglas, Rininger, Sauter, Stockwell, Welker None None Lathram The motion carried. PUBLIC FORUM No one was present to address the Commission. DIRECTOR'S CHOICE Mr. Graham stated that South Broadway improvements were a topic for the City Council study session on March 6th. The undergrounding project and new lighting in the Cherrelyn District (Tufts to Mansfield) is pretty well completed. The "district banners" are in place, but may be revisited; there is some discussion that these banners are too small to create the desired effect. Eight new properties are participating in the fa9ade improvement program on South Broadway . The City has a "catalyst program", which provides monetary assistance to businesses desiring to improve their appearance -new signage, new fa9ade, new roofing, ironwork fencing, etc. The Broadway widening project begins April 1 in the Downtown District -from U.S. 285 to Floyd or Eastman A venues. This is scheduled to be completed in July, and will be funded by use of federal transportation monies. In addition to widening the street, the City wants to in- clude streetscape elements to enhance this area. Work in the Gateway District on Broadway will begin in July, and continue to October. The City hopes to have the improvements along Broadway completed prior to the national RailVo- H:IGROUP\BOARDSI PLANCOMM\Minutes\Minutes 2000\PCM 03-2000A .doc 12 • • • • • lution conference, scheduled in early October in Denver. Englewood will be a primary par- ticipant in this conference because of the light rail line and the transit-oriented development of the old mall site . The preliminary draft of a market analysis for South Broadway was presented to City Council. A preliminary market analysis for the South Santa Fe corridor will be discussed by the Plan- ning Commission on March 21, and Mr. Graham suggested possibly the South Broadway mar- ket analysis could also be available for that meeting. Mr. Graham stated that staff has been working on an ordinance regulating tattoo and body- piercing establishments; this ordinance will be coming forward for Commission consideration in the near future. Negotiations with the Regional Transportation District (RTD) continue regarding a light rail stop, and the RTD maintenance facility in the General Iron Works (GIW) vicinity . Part of the maintenance facility will be constructed on property in the City of Denver . Fiscal analysis of the GIW area is moving forward; again , the marketing analysis for the Santa Fe corridor will be on the March 21 51 agenda, and Mr. Jesse Silverstein and Ms. Susan Blansett are scheduled to be present. CityCenter Englewood redevelopment is progressing; the underground utility lines are in; the streets are constructed at-grade , but won't be paved until April or May . The bridge at the light rail station from the piazza area should be completed in April or early May. The transit stop at CityCenter is completed, and the stop at Oxford A venue is nearly completed. The obelisk has been constructed. The grand opening of the light rail station is scheduled for July 14; ribbon cutting and various ceremonies are being planned . City Hall offices will move to the new Civic Center building on June gm, 10m , and 11th. Most offices will be "out of business" for a day or two during the packing and move, but the intent is to be open for business on Monday, June 12m . The residential developer at CityCenter is still in negotiations with the City. The goal is to have the negotiations completed, and the agreements before City Council on April Yd, and to close with the developer approximately April 10th. The proposed development is for residential to be constructed over retail. The retail development components will be conveyed to the mas- ter developer, Miller-Weingarten. The proposal at this time is a 24-month build out on a 10 acre parcel for the residential developer , Trammel Crow Residential. WalMart construction has begun, concrete is being poured and a full height wall on the north- west comer of the building was put in place earlier this date . Other tenants under considera- tion for the total site include Ross Dress for Less, Ruby Tuesday , Bennigans , Peaberrys , Old Navy, and Chipotle , Gart's Sporting Goods, Office Depot , and Bally 's . Mr. Graham directed the attention of the Commission to a listing of "tentative" agenda and study session items which is now being printed on the back of the agenda. Mr. Stockwell H:\GROU P\BOARDS IPLANCOMM\Minutcs\Minutcs 2000\PCM 03 -2000A .doc 13 asked if designation of a historic structure or site is a "rezoning". Mr. Graham stated that it is not. Mr. Graham stated that there is a CLE Conference on Real Estate Development in May, of which members of the Commission received notification. This conference will be at the Ad- ams Mark Hotel in Denver. There are funds in the 2000 budget available for Commission members to attend this or other conferences throughout the year. Mr. Graham urged members to consider future attendance at the national American Planning Association conference, the Rocky Mountain Land Use Institute, the Colorado Municipal League, and various ~tate and local conferences. Mr. Willis stated that he had called the Community Development Office to express his interest in attending the Real Estate Development conference in May . Mr. Welker stated he had no problem with members attending if there was budget available to cover their expenses. ATTORNEY'S CHOICE Ms . Reid stated that she had taken the opportunity to discuss Mr. Gerlits' concerns regarding property valuation with him after the closure of the Public Hearing; she advised him that his concerns should be addressed to City Council, but his questions were not something that the Planning Commission could address . She further advised him that he may want to get a de- termination from someone in real estate regarding the property values . Brief discussion ensued. COMMISSIONER'S CHOICE No topic was raised for discussion . The meeting adjourned. H:IGROU PIBOAR DS IPLANCOMM\Minutcs\Min utcs 2000\PCM 03-2000A.doc 14 • • •