Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2000-05-16 PZC MINUTES• • • CITY OF ENGLEWOOD PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION May 16, 2000 I. CALL TO ORDER The regular meeting of the City Planning and Zoning Commission was called to order at 7 p.m. in the Englewood City Council Chambers, Chairman Welker presiding. Present: Absent: Note: Staff present: Weber, Lathram, Rininger, Sauter, Stockwell, Welker Willis (entered the meeting late) Two vacancies Senior Planner Graham Senior Planner Stitt Planning Analyst Dannerniller Assistant City Attorney Reid Chairman Welker declared a quorum present. II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES May 2, 2000 Chairman Welker stated that the Minutes of May 2, 2000 were to be considered for approval. Weber moved: Rininger seconded: The Minutes of May 2, 2000 be approved . Mr. Welker asked if there were additions or corrections. Mr. Stockwell asked that Page 10 be corrected; rather than stating that "Mr. Stockwell advo- cated ... " he asked that the wording be changed to "Mr. Stockwell suggested ... " Mr. Weber and Mr. Rininger accepted the amendment. The vote on approval of the Minutes, as amended, was called: Mr. Willis entered the meeting during the call of the vote; the amendment to the Minutes was reviewed for Mr. Willis. AYES: NAYS: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: Sauter, Stockwell, Weber, Willis, Rininger, Welker None Lath ram None The motion carried . H:IGROUPIBOARDSIPLANCOMM\"1inu1es\Minu1es 2000\PCM OS-20006.iloc III. FINDINGS OF FACT CASE #ORD-2000-02 Tattoo and Body Piercing Establishments Chairman Welker stated that the Findings of Fact for Case #ORD-2000-02 are to be considered for approval. Stockwell moved: Sauter seconded: The Findings of Fact for Case #ORD-2000-02, Tattoo and Body Piercing Establishments, be approved as written. AYES: NAYS: Stockwell, Weber, Willis, Rininger, Sauter, Welker None ABSTAIN: Lathram ABSENT: None The motion carried. IV. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT Regional Plan Component CASE #CP-2000-01 Mr. Welker stated that the issue before the Commission is a proposed amendment to the Com- prehensive Plan. He asked for a motion to open the Hearing. Rininger moved: Lathram seconded: The Public Hearing on Case #CP-2000-01 be opened. AYES: NAYS: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: Weber, Willis, Lathram, Rininger, Sauter, Stockwell, Welker None None None The motion carried. Mr. Welker stated that he does have in-hand a copy of the Notice of Public Hearing, which was published in the Englewood Herald on May 5 , 2000. Mark Graham, Senior Planner, was sworn in. Mr. Graham testified that the Englewood Compre- hensive Plan was adopted in 1979 . There have been five amendments to that Plan: in 1981, the Downtown Development Plan; in 1986, the Master Street Plan; the South Broadway Action Plan in 1997; and in 1999, the Santa Fe Conidor Resolution, and Urban Growth Boundary. Mr. Gra- ham stated that the last two amendments, approved in 1999, were part of the Denver Regional Council of Governments (DRCOG) Metro Vision 2020 Regional Plan. Mr. Graham stated that the Urban Growth Boundary element does impact the City of Englewood because of the densifi- cation of the metro area. The Regional Plan, if adopted as an amendment, will appear in the same segment of the Englewood Comprehensive Plan as the Urban Growth Boundary element. Mr. Graham stated that staff is proposing that only the Concepts and Objectives of the DRCOG H:IGRO UPIBOARDSIPLANCOMM\Minutcs\M ioutes 2000\PC~ 05-20008.<.loc • • • • • • Regional Plan be adopted.and incorporated as part of the Englewood Comprehensive Plan; a separate plan to implement the concepts and objectives will be written by Community Develop- ment staff. Mr. Graham reviewed study session discussions on the Metro Vision 2020 Plan over the last sev- eral months, and noted that the Commission has determined that at least one element of the Plan is not applicable to the City of Englewood -that being the "stand-alone" municipality. Other elements of the Regional Plan have been considered in depth, and other elements will be before the Commission in the future when those topics are addressed in more detail. For instance, the Open Space issue is scheduled on the June 27 1 h agenda for the Planning Commission. Mr. Graham then cited and discussed the concepts and objectives for the various elements of the Regional Plan: OPEN SPACE Concept: A regional open space s ystem that shapes the region 's form , protects environmental resources and provides recreational opportunities will be planned. Objectives: • De velop a regional open space s ystem as a ke y part of the regional plan. • Conserve and protect important natural resources, including environmentally sensitive lands , wetlands and wildlife habitat • Use environmental features, constraints , and impacts to guide development into areas that minimize environmental degradation and avoid natural and man-made hazards; • Provide for the physical and aesthetic enjoyment of the out-of-doors ; • Shape the region 's pattern of growth and development by buffering and defining commu- nities ; • Protect prominent visual features such as the Rocky Mountain Front Range . Mr. Graham commented that an open space "buffer" between Englewood and Denver, or be- tween Englewood and Littleton , won 't be probable because of existing development ; however, open space buffers along "outer-ring" suburbs would be possible -such as between Littleton and Castle Pines. Mr. Graham al so stated that the South Platte River runs through se veral jurisdic- tions -improvements to acquire and/or protect open space along the river are important, and could in some instances be linked to a local park system. Mr. Graham also stated that City Council is supportive of the Arapahoe County Open Space proposal , and want to have an Engle- wood representative on the Arapahoe County board that considers the open space projects. Mr. · Graham discussed the expans ion of the Centennial Park area ; the expansion is a cited goal of the 1979 Englewood Comprehensive Plan. In conjunction with the expansion of the Park, Mr. Gra- ham stated he understood that some wetland areas would be rehabilitated. Development of hik- ing and biking paths , as well as development of ball fields , soccer fields -all contribute to aes- thetics and enjoyment of the out-of-doors. Mr. Graham briefly addressed the growth patterns and land use issues to guide growth. Protection of visual features was addressed . Mr. Graham stated that Englewood does not have any provisions in the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance to protect "visual" amenities such as the Rocky Mountains. It is possible to write such guidelines into the Zoning Ordinance. Height limitations -particularly in the industrial districts -are cur- H:IGR OUP\B OARD S\PLANCOMM\M in utc s\M inutc s ZOOO\PCM 05-20008 .Joc rently governed by the maximum of building square footage, which is related to the amount of required off-street parking . BALANCED, MUL TIMODAL TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM Concept: The transportation system will include rapid transit, a regional bus network, regional beltways, bike and pedestrian facilities and improvements to the existing roadway system. Objectives: • Restore and maintain the designed transportation function of existing and future transpor- tation facilities; • Provide high-capital transportation facilities where development actions support the effi- cient use of those facilities; • Implement rapid transit to reduce the need for traditional roadway capacity and reconfig- ure the bus network to serve the rapid transit system; • Implement high service frequency on principal bus Gorridors and alternative bus services for suburb-to-suburb travel and other markets not well served by the rapid transit system; • Enhance the attractiveness and convenience of non-motorized modes in serving non- recreational travel; • Improve the connection of passenger and commercial transportation systems within modes, between modes , and between the metropolitan area and other areas of the state; and, • Demonstrate the need for increased revenues to close the gap between needed facilities and the region's ability to pay for them. • Mr. Graham stated that the Santa Fe improvements, including removal of several of the at-grade • crossings for rail and motorist users, have restored the "function" of South Santa Fe Drive. Mr. Graham discussed the transit-oriented development on the CityCenter Englewood site; this com- plies with the second objective cited above. The light rail line that will open on July l41h ad- dresses the third objective cited. The RTD bus routing and shuttle service that the City is work- ing to develop address objectives three and four. Mr. Graham suggested the need to work with adjoining cities to further improve bus routing and shuttle service . Mr. Graham noted the need for improved pedestrian crossing for busy thoroughfares such as Santa Fe Drive, U.S. 285, South Broadway, and Dartmouth Avenue. Travel modes were addressed; Mr. Graham stated that "travel modes" encompasses all forms of travel: rail, air, motorized vehicles, bicycles , etc. Mr. Graham discussed the need for the citizenry to be supportive of bond proposals that may be needed to generate funds to finance transportation improvements. URBAN CENTERS Concept: A range of urban centers will serve as transit origins and destinations that support retail, em- ployment and housing, and contain higher densities than average that encourage pedestrian- oriented travel. Objectives: • Focus a major portion of future growth into urban centers to reduce land consumption and the loss of open space while increasing transit ridership ; H:IGROUP\BOAR.OSIPLANCOMM\."iinut<s\Minutes 1000\PCM 05·20008.Joc • • • • Create compact, mixed-use centers thereby making transit, bicycle, carpooling and walk- ing more feasible alternatives to single-occupant auto travel; • Locate employment, services, housing and other development in close proximity so that walking between activities is easier and multipurpose trips are encouraged, thereby re- ducing auto travel and auto emissions; • Develop a network of urban centers so that jobs, entertainment, public spaces and retail services are in closer proximity to a greater number of residents; • Create urban centers designed for pedestrians to achieve a sense of place and community identity; and, • Promote a network of connected streets and sidewalks, with buildings oriented toward sidewalks rather than parking lots, to create more usable public spaces and amenities. Mr. Graham stated that urban centers are "origin/destination" areas, much as CityCenter Engle- wood is planned to be at build-out. There will be mixed uses of residential, retail, governmental facilities , as well as cultural attractions such as the Museum of Outdoor Arts and the David Tay- lor Dance Theater. The Civic Center will serve as the "hub " of the transit stop. Englewood is also serving as a "model" for urban centers in the Denver metro area -as the first "transit- oriented" urban center development. ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY Concepts: Metro Vision acknowledges that the location, type of growth and land development have signifi- cant effects on the region 's air and water quality. The integration of air, transportation, devel- opment patterns , and water resources is crucial in protecting environmental quality in the region . Restore and maintain the chemical and physical integrity in order to assure a balanced ecological community in waters associated with the region. Water Qualitv Objectives: • Achieve a locally defined, balanced, ecological community through implementation of water quality protection and appropriate water resource management initiatives, provided that a balance will be maintained between the natural environment and those designated uses of the resource ; • Restore and maintain the chemical and physical integrity of the region 's aquatic envi- ronments through a coordinated watershed management process; • Identify effecti ve wastewater treatment through a regional process, with local implemen- tation of wastewater management strategies; • Achieve effective and balanced storm water and no point source management through local implementation processes; and • Develop integrated resource management programs to provide effective and cost-efficient water quality management and water supply. Air Quality Objectives: • Protect human health and environmental quality into the future by achieving and main- taining national ambient air quality standards; • Reduce growth in mobile source air pollution emissions by changing key features of the pattern of urban development to reduce the dependence on auto travel; • Modify local comprehensive plans and zoning ordinances to provide greater community • accessibility and pedestrian , bicycle and transit tra vel opportunity; and H:IGR OU PIBOARDSIPLANCO MMl.'vfiJ1ut<sl.'vf i1 1u«s ~000\PC M 05-2 0008.Joc • Provide pedestrian and transit transportation facilities as needed adjuncts to automobile travel in the future. Mr. Graham noted that the cities of Englewood and Littleton have jointly developed, financed, • and maintain the wastewater treatment plant. Mr. Graham discussed the way storm water drain- age contributes to water pollution; in Englewood, the storm water system is administered through the Utility Department. Mr. Graham suggested the Commission might want to schedule a meet- ing with the Water and Sewer Board to get up-to-date on water and sewer improvements that have recently been completed, and those that are proposed. Mr. Graham then addressed the air quality objectives. He stated that new air quality standards will be in effect in the near future, and that Englewood may be affected by those standards. Re- duction of mobile-source air pollution is addressed by the opening of the light rail line in July, 2000. Mr. Graham stated that the Commission and City Council do have the authority to make modifications to the comprehensive plan and zoning ordinance to provide greater pedestrian, bi- cycle , and transit travel opportunities . Mr. Graham stated that the concepts and objectives cited might be difficult to achieve by a single entity , but by working in concert with other jurisdictions it can be accomplished. Mr. Graham stated that staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend to City Council approval of the proposed amendment to the Comprehensive Plan , by incorporating the aforecited concepts and objectives contained in the Metro Vision 2020 Regional Plan. Mr. Sauter asked if the wording as set forth in the Staff Report the wording that DRCOG wants • used. He stated that he felt some of the "bullet points" were quite vague. Mr. Graham stated that this wording is as contained in the Regional Plan from DRCOG. The Englewood City Attor- ney 's Office didn 't want to adopt the Regional Plan by reference , but to adopt only the concepts and objectives with Englewood staff responsible for writing an "implementation" plan as a sepa- rate document , which would be more "specific " to Englewood. Mr. Graham stated that Com- mission members may modify , add to or delete if they so choose . Mr. Welker agreed that some of the points were v ague . He noted that the Commission needs to keep in mind that we are talking about a "regional plan"; the Commission can move on with these "bullet points" as a connection with the regional plan , and develop specificity in the im- plementation plan Mr. Graham has spoken to. Mr .. Sauter stated that he has no problem if the cited wording is the "general language", with specificity set forth in the implementation plan. Mr. Graham reiterated that if the concepts and objectives are acceptable to the Commission, the staff can move on to draft the implementation plan . Mr. Weber asked if the Implementation Plan will become part of the Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Graham asked Mr. Stitt to address this issue . Harold J . Stitt, Senior Planner, was sworn in. Mr. Stitt stated that Community Development staff is in the process of developing a program to update the Comprehensive Plan. One issue the staff H:IGR OU P\B OARDS IP LANCOMM\."1 in utc s1Minutes 2000\PC M 05·20008 .doc • • • • has debated is how to write the Plan to encompass local and regional elements, and can be im- plemented. One thought has been to focus on "goals". The implementation document, or plan, could be appended to the Comprehensive Plan as an "appendix", or it can be a free-standing Plan. Mr. Stitt noted that the implementation plan can change with every year. Mr. Stitt noted that a Comprehensive Plan with implementation strategies embedded in the Plan is very difficult to work with -Plans need to be kept flexible. This flexibility promotes ease of updating, and if the implementation plan can change every year with budgetary constraints, the Comprehensive Plan becomes much more usable. Mr. Welker stated that he appreciates what Mr. Stitt has presented, but suggested the need to have more definition on some specific topics. Mr. Welker stated that we could incorporate the concepts and objectives from the regional plan but also broaden elements and set definitive stan- dards. Ms. Lathram asked what the timeline is to get the implementation plan written and to the Com- mission. Mr. Graham stated that the goal of staff is to deal with four elements of the Compre- hensive Plan this year: Regional Plan, Open space, Economic Development, and Housing. Other elements of the Plan , such as Transportation , Industrial, and the Commercial areas , would be addressed in 2001. Mr. Graham stated that staff will have to get on this quite soon to meet this timeline. Mr. Graham noted that at a Metro Mayor's Caucus it was decided to draft a "Compact" that would eliminate the need for a referendum on growth control on the Nov ember ballot. One of the things that will be required is a 20-year future-oriented·plan . Englewood is trying to write such a plan. Mr. Graham also noted that DRCOG is now working on a plan for 2025. Mr. Welker commented on the four items cited by Mr. Graham as high priority issues for the Comprehensive Plan; he stated that in his opinion Transportation should also be considered a high priority. He stated that he thinks in planning for Englewood , the most important thing to consider is what happens along the Santa Fe corridor. Mr. Graham stated that rewriting the Transportation element was in this year 's work program for Community Development; however, due to time constraints for staff it has been moved into the 2001 projected work program. Mr. Graham stated that Mr. Stitt will work on the Transportation element, Ms. Dannemiller will work on the Open Space element , Mr. Hollingsworth will work on the Economic Development ele- ment , and he will work on the Housing and Regional Plan elements. Mr. Stitt will oversee the compilation of all the various elements into one document. Ms. Lathram expressed concern regarding prioritization in considering the various Plan ele- ments; she pointed out that Transportation and Open Space are two very important, germane top- ics right now -possibly more important that one or two other topics cited. Mr. Graham stated that the Commission may want to prioritize the elements staff addresses . He reiterated that staff does have a work program that is developed each year for the succeeding year, but some adjust- ments have to be made to allow for unforeseen issues that arise . H:IGROU PIBOARDSIPLANCOMM\M inutes\Minute s 2000\PCM 05 -20008.J oc Mr. Welker urged the addition of the Transportation element to high priority elements of consid- eration . He suggested that if the transportation element is included in high priority consideration, he was comfortable with the regional plan concepts and objectives amendment. Mr. Willis stated that he felt the Urban Centers and Transportation elements were of high prior- ity, and that Urban Centers should be moved to the top of the list. He expressed that these two 'issues go hand-in-hand. Mr. Stockwell suggested that the Open Space Objectives be more inclusive, and suggested add- ing wording to the last objective cited " .. Rocky Mountain Front Range or the South Platte River corridor." Mr. Graham stated that this wording can be added if it is the consensus of the Commission. Mr. Welker noted that the river corridor is very important to Englewood. He stated that the Commis- sion could take each objective and make them more specific to Englewood. He asked if the Commission wanted to address this at this time, or keep the objectives more general. Does the Commission want to eliminate any of the objectives. Mr. Sauter asked whether the City has any stationary sources of air pollution that are of concern. Mr. Graham stated that once the new air quality standards are adopted , there may be an industrial use or two that will not be in compliance . Brief discussion ensued. Mr. Graham advised the Commission to keep in mind that the "regional plan" provides a framework on which to build and add other regional concepts and objectives. Mr. Graham noted that Ft. Collins has specified by-pass routes for transport of hazardous materials. This is an example of what can be accom- plished under a regional plan , and development of specificity for a communit y or part of a com- munity . Mr. Willis s poke regarding the Urban Centers; he stated that when he thinks of "growth", it is on the out-skirts of the metro area. He suggested a change in terminology to indicate "development or redevelopment" rather than growth. Brief discussion ensued. Mr. Graham stated that devel- opment certainly acknowledges Englewood's "growth". Mr. Welker commented that growth would also include any increase in density. Mr. Welker reiterated his opinion that incorporation of the Regional Plan, as written , as an ele- ment of the Comprehensive Plan is acceptable to him; however, the implementation plan needs to be more specifically focused on Englewood. Mr. Welker asked if there were further comments or questions. He asked for a motion to close the Hearing. Stockwell moved: Rininger seconded: The Public Hearing on Case #CP-2000-01 be closed. AYES : NAYS: ABSTAIN : Willis , Lathram, Rininger, Sauter, Stockwell , Weber, Welker None None H:IGROl.:PIBOARDSIPLANCOMM\Minutes\Minutes 2000\PC:.t 05·20008 .doc • • • • • • ABSENT: None The motion carried. Mr. Welker asked the pleasure of the commission. Rininger moved: Stockwell seconded: The Planning Commission recommend to City Council that the Engle- wood 1979 Comprehensive Plan be amended to include a Regional Plan element, by adding the following Concepts and Objectives. OPEN SPACE Concept: A regional open space system that shapes the region's form, protects environmental resources and prov ides recreational opportunities will be planned. Objectives: • Develop a regional open space system as a key part of the regional plan. • Conserve and pmtect important natural resources , including environmentall y sensitive lands . wetl ands and wildlife habitat • Use environmental features , constraints, and impacts to guide development into areas that minimize environmental degradation and avoid natural and man-made hazards; • Prov ide for the physical and aesthetic enjoyment of the out-of-doors; • Shape the region 's pattern of growth and development by buffering and defining commu- nities ; • Protect prominent visual features such as the Rocky Mountain Front Range and the South Platte River corridor. BALANCED, MUL TIMODAL TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM Concept: The transportat ion system will include rapid transit , a regional bus network, regional beltways , bike and pedestrian facilities and improvements to the existing roadway system. Objectives: • Restore and maintain the designed transportation function of ex isting and future transpor- tation facilities ; • Provide high-capital transportation facilities where development actions support the effi- cient use of those facilities ; • Implement rapid transit to reduce the need for traditional roadway capacity and reconfig- ure the bus network to serve the rapid transit system; • Implement high service frequency on principal bus corridors and alternative bus serviCes for suburb-to-suburb travel and other markets not well served by the rapid transit system ; • Enhance the attractiveness and convenience of nollilJrotorized modes in serving non- recreational travel; • Improve the connection of passenger and commercial transportation systems within modes , between modes , and between the metropolitan area and other areas of the state ; and, H:IGROUP\BO ARDS\PLA NC O MM\M inute s\Minu tes 2000\PCM 05·20006.Joc • Demonstrate the need for increased revenues to close the gap between needed facilities and the region's ability to pay for them. URBAN CENTERS Concept: A range of urban centers will serve as transit origins and destinations that support retail, em- ployment and housing, and contain higher densities than average that encourage pedestrian- oriented travel. Objectives: • Focus a major portion of future growth into urban centers to reduce land consumption and the loss of open space while increasing transit ridership; • Create compact, mixed-use centers thereby making transit, bicycle, carpooling and walk- ing more feasible alternatives to single-occupant auto travel;· • Locate employment, services, housing and other development in close proximity so that walking between activities is easier and multipurpose trips are encouraged, thereby reducing auto travel and auto emissions ; • Develop a network of urban centers so that jobs, entertainment, public spaces and retail services are in closer proximity to a greater number of residents ; • Create urban centers designed for pedestrians to achieve a sense of place and community identity; and , • Promote a network of connected streets and sidewalks, with buildings oriented toward sidewalks rather than parking lots, to create more usable public spaces and amenities . ENVIRONMENT AL QUALITY Concepts: Metro Vision acknowledges that the location , type of growth and land development have signifi- cant effects on the region's air and water quality. The integration of air, transportation , devel- opment patterns, and water resources is crucial in protecting environmental quality in the region . Restore and maintain the chemical and physical integrity in order to assure a balanced ecological community in waters associated with the region. Water Qualitv Objectives: • Achieve a locally defined, balanced, ecological community through implementation of water quality protection and appropriate water resource management initiatives, provided that a balance will be maintained between the natural environment and those designated uses of the resource; • Restore and maintain the chemical and physical integrity of the region's aquatic envi- ronments through a coordinated watershed management process; • Identify effective wastewater treatment through a regional process, with local implemen- tation of wastewater management strategies; • Achieve effective and balanced storm water and no point source management through local implementation processes; and • Develop integrated resource management programs to provide effective and cost-efficient water quality management and water supply. Air Qualitv Objectives: • Protect human health and environmental quality into the future by achieving and main- taining national ambient air quality standards; H:IGROUPIBOARDSIPLANCOMM\M inu1c s\Minu1cs 2000\PC~ 05-20008 .doc 10 • • • • • • • Reduce growth in mobile source air pollution emissions by changing key features of the pattern of urban development to reduce the dependence on auto travel; • Modify local comprehensive plans and zoning ordinances to provide greater community accessibility and pedestrian , bicycle and transit travel opportunity; and • Provide pedestrian and transit transportation facilities as needed adjuncts to automobile travel in the future. Mr. Welker asked if there was discussion on the motion. No discussion followed. He then called for the vote. AYES: NAYS : ABSTAIN ABSENT : Lathram, Rininger, Sauter, Stockwell , Weber, Willis, Welker None None None The motion carried. V. PUBLIC FORUM No one was present to address the Commission. VI. DIRECTOR'S CHOICE Mr. Graham reminded Commission members that City administrative offices will be relocating beginning June 91 \ and that present City Hall will be closed for business on that date. The City administrative offices will be open for business beginning June 1th at 8:00 a.m . at 1000 Engle- wood Parkway. There will be a ribbon-cutting ceremon y at 4 :00 p.m. on June 1th, and other ceremonies will be scheduled over the next three months -light rail opening on July 14th , the opening of the Wal-Mart store in August or September, and other celebrations are coming up . Mr. Graham stated that staff will prepare an expansion on the Comprehensive Plan up-date, and develop a timeline for this project. Mr. Graham stated that he would hope to have this done and available for the Commission b y their next meeting , June 27th, which will be in the Civic Center at 1000 Englewood Parkway . VII. ATTORNEY'S CHOICE Ms. Reid stated she had nothing to bring before the commission. VIII. COMMISSIONER'S CHOICE Mr. Willis reported on his attendance at the Real Estate Development Class. He noted that a va- riety of classes were offered --Growth Management, Affordable Housing in Denver, Healthy Downtowns, Building Communities. Mr. Willis thanked the Commission for the opportunity to attend . H:IGR OU PIBOARDSIPL ANCO MM\Minut<slMinu tes ZOOOIPCM OS-20008.doc 11 Mr. Willis, Mr. Welker, and Mr. Sauter reported on their attendance at the Denver Regional Council of Governments-sponsored Planning Commissioner's Workshop. Mr. Welker stated this workshop was pretty good, and he and Mr. Willis attended a discussion on Economics of Rede-• velopment, presented by a Denver Planner. Mr. Sauter stated that he attended a session on "ethics"; this session discussed the "conflict of interest" issue. He stated that he was surprised to learn that only if there is financial impact on the Commissioner is there a "conflict of interest". Ms. Reid stated that technically, this is true; however, the City Attorney's Office has typically asked commission members to recuse them- selves if there was even the "appearance" of a conflict of interest. She cited several scenarios whereby the public might perceive a conflict of interest. Brief discussion followed. The Commission called a brief recess, and relocated to the Community Room for the remainder of the meeting. IX. SHUTTLE SERVICE UPDATE Ms. Dannemiller made a visual presentation on the shuttle service project. Ms. Dannemiller stated that a grant was received from the Governor 's Office of Energy Conservation , and these funds were used to conduct a study to identify potential multi-modal transportation improve- ments. The goals of this project were: • Identify multi-modal (pedestrian , bicycle , shuttle) connections to mitigate traffic prob- lems; • Increase light-rail ridership ; • Develop strategies to reduce current and forecast vehicular volumes predicted with new development ; • Conserve energy and reduce fuel consumption ; · • Provide a vision for these alternatives and predicted costs and benefits Kimley Horn , transportation consultants , began work on the study in September, 1999, and com- pleted their report in December, 1999 . During the course of developing the study , which in- cluded public input and participation , a steering committee composed of community, business , and professional representatives, guided the project through four phases: • create a "transportation snapshot" • consensus building • v1s10nmg • visioning in motion . Four primary areas of the city were the focused in the study: • Downtown/CityCenter Englewood Medical Complex • Oxford Light Rail Station • General Iron Works site • South Broadway Auto District Ms. Dannemiller stated that major employers were considered in development of possible shuttle routes. These employers included Swedish Medical Center, Craig Hospital, and the School Dis- H:IGROUPIBOARDSIPLANCOMM\Mi11 ute s\Minu1<s 2000\PCM 05 ·20008.Joc 12 • • • • • ·trict. Residential and industrial areas were also considered ; new trends in development in these areas could impact traffic, and traffic patterns can impact development. Ms. Dannemiller stated that major thoroughfares in and through Englewood, and the "level" of service of those streets, were also considered. Ms. Dannemiller cited Santa Fe Drive, South Broadway, and U .S . 285. The "barrier" concept of streets such as South Broadway, or Dartmouth A venue, must be ad- dressed, and means for pedestrians to safely cross these streets must be found . Ms. Dannemiller addressed short-term action plans, and longer-term solutions. Improvement of a circulator bus system and/or shuttle system that would serve the high employment centers of the City is suggested. Formation of a Transportation Management Association (TMA) is also a possibility. Connections to the light rail facilities at CityCenter Englewood, and at the Oxford site , are vital. Ms. Dannemiller noted that some employers such as the medical complex have "shift" employees arriving and departing at different hours of the day and night; if they are to make use of the light rail , there must be a 24-hour means to get these employees safely to and from the light rail station . The Oxford light rail stop has no provision for long-term parking for potenti a l riders. The lack of parking for riders will impact the neighborhood , as will acquisition of sites for development as parking lots . A safe means for pedestrians to cross both Oxford A venue and Santa Fe Drive at Oxford is also needed. The Englewood golf course , located in the City of Sheridan , is on the west side of South Santa Fe Drive north of Oxford , as well as a trail system along the river. One solution might be extending an RTD route the length of Oxford A venue. Ms. Dannemiller discussed the General Iron Works site . Pedestrian and bicycle connections across Dartmouth A venue to access the park and open space on either side of Dartmouth are de- sirable . There is a bicycle/pedestrian path under Santa Fe Drive at Dartmouth. Ms. Dannemiller then cited the South Broadway auto district. She noted that pedestrian and bi- cycle access to and across Broadway is very poor. Ms. Dannemiller stated that a statement that "it was never planned to have pedestrians crossing Broadway" was voiced during the course of the development of the study . The need for improved pedestrian crossing the length of South Broadway was discussed. Mr. Sa uter asked whether impro vements being made to South Broadway will be of assistance to pedestrians . Mr. Graham stated that improvements to the portion of Broadway north of U.S. 285 will incorporate "bulb-outs", wh ich should lessen the distance a pedestrian has to cross. This bulb-out treatment is not proposed for the length of Broadway, at least at this time . Ms . Dannemiller stated that proposed solutions include: • Development of or .improvement of a local circulator system; • Formation of a Transportation Management Assoc iation (TMA); • Development of or improvement of bicycle and pedestrian connections; Ms. Dannemiller further briefly addressed issues such as a demand analysis on the proposed shuttle system -who will make use of the shuttle , scheduling , days of service ; funding and ac- quisition of shuttle buses; alternative transportation -electric vehicles, use of alternative fuels . H:IGRO UPIB OARD S\P LA NCO MMl.\fo1ut<s\Min u1c s 2000\PC M 05·20008 .doc 13 Ms. Dannemiller discussed the need to compile the needs assessment, and apply for additional grant funding; we then need to find vehicles to use for the shuttle service . Ms . Dannemiller es- timated that it will probably be a year before this all comes together -the shuttle service will not • be in place ready to provide service when the light rail opens in July, 2000. Mr. Sauter asked how information contained in the Kimley Hom study correlate with the Com- prehensive Plan. Ms. Dannemiller stated that the study was not envisioned as an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan. City Council has been briefed during a study session. She suggested that some of the issues -such as funding -might be addressed through the Capital Improvement Program. She stated that she is not sure how information contained in the report would become part of City policy. Mr. Graham suggested that if the Commission wants to make a recommendation to Council that the report information be incorporated as part of the Comprehensive Plan, they can do so. If the intent is to recommend purchase of buses to begin the shuttle service, this would not become part of the Plan. Brief discussion ensued. X. CAPITAL 11\llPROVEMENT PROGRAM Five Year Plan : 2001-2005 Mr. Stitt distributed information to members of the Commission that included copies of Budget 2000 Public Improvement Fund and Capital Projects Fund pages , as well as Goals and Courses of Action as cited in the 1979 Comprehensive Plan . Mr. Stitt discussed the information con- tained in his memorandum to the Commission, wh ich set forth statutory requirements of the Commission in regard to consideration of capital improvement items, set forth the requirements imposed on the City Manager regarding capital improvement items, and citations from a recent Planners Advisory Service R eport entitled Capital Improvement Programs -Linking Budgeting and Planning . Mr. Stitt also cited the following definitions from the 1979 Comprehensive Plan : CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT: Any substantial physical facility constructed by the City govern- ment such as a City Hall , fire or police station, a bridge , highways , the water and sewer system, the storm drainage system, or parks; or, any major non-recurring governmental expenditure , for example , the acquisition of a major piece of equipment such as a fire pumper. CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM: A schedule of permanent improvements and major acquisitions budgeted to fit the financial resources of the city. The Capital Improvement Pro- gram is projected five or six years in advance and should be updated annually. The projects in the Capital Improvement Program (CIP) should implement the goals of the Comprehensive Plan and , to link Planning to the annual budgeting process , the Planning Division coordinates the re- quests of the various City departments and the City Planning and Zoning Commission prioritizes the projects and refers them to the City Manager. Mr. Stitt stated that the Finance Department approaches the issue of the Capital Improvement Program and Capital Expenditures from a different perspective : H:\G ROU PIB OARDSIPLANCO MM\M in ut<s\Min ui<s 2 000\PC~ 05 -20008.doc 14 • • • • • • Does the item have a long-life -over one year; • The expense of the item -over $5,000; • Does not occur on an annual basis. Mr. Stitt noted items cited in the Capital Projects Fund, Budget 2000 pages -while in excess of $5,000, do not fit the definition of Capital Improvements, and do not "implement" goals of the Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Stitt reviewed items cited in the Public Improvement Fund pages, and cited the following items which may be said to implement elements of the Plan. • South Broadway Medians/Widening • Santa Fe & Broadway Landscaping • Inca Extension South • Girard Avenue/Parkway Alignment • South Broadway Action Plan • City Beautification/Signage • Centennial Park Ball field/Trail development • Girard A venue Improvements • Entry Port Monumentation • Oxford A venue Traffic C alming Other items, such as paving programs , parking lot enlargements , etc , while capital expenditures, do not implement any element of the Comprehensive Plan . Mr. Stitt stated that the budgeting process doesn 't really appreciate what the Commission can provide in the ClP process. Mr. Stitt briefly discussed the placement of items on the ClP list , and the rating of project submittals; he stated that the Public Works Department and the City Manager 's Office have, in recent years, done the rating and designation of projects on the list. The goals and courses of action from the Comprehensive Plan should serve as a check list for the Commission to use in considering the ClP requests. Brief discussion ensued. Mr. Welker stated that the Commission. needs to have the ability to suggest priorities on the ClP requests . It was also noted that more clarification is needed on the projects -the present format doesn 't even include a descriptive sentence . Mr. Stitt reminded the Commission members to keep in mind that the ClP is a political process ; and, that what has been distributed is copies of Budget 2000 pages. The budget process for 2001 has not yet begun ; new forms should be received -probably shortly after the relocation of the administrative offices. The Commission will have the opportunity to suggest projects , and will then ha ve the opportunity to view the proposals after requests of all departments have been com- piled. Mr. Stitt suggested the possibility of meeting with various departmental directors , and asking that the requests be clarified at that time. Mr. Stitt reiterated that the Commission will have at least one more meeting regarding the ClP process this year. Mr. Welker stated that as the Planning Commission becomes more vocal , he anticipated that the Commission will have more to say in the process. He stated that he wanted to see the final SBAP implementation plan to see what ClP projects are implementing that plan. He asked that all members of the Commission receive the SBAP implementation plan . H:IGROUP'\llOARDSIPLANCOMMIMinuu:s\Minu1es 2000\PCM 05-2000 8 .uoc IS Mr. Willis asked for explanation of the "depot contingency". Mr. Graham explained the land swap between the City of Englewood and the Englewood Housing Authority (ERA). The Au- thority had fronted money to the Englewood Historical Society (EHS) to acquire property and • relocate the Englewood Depot; EHS could not repay the loan to ERA; the City of Englewood became involved, and traded properties acquired for the "Project BUILD" program to EHA for the Englewood Depot property on West Dartmouth. EHA acquired properties they are continu- ing to develop with new single-family housing; the City has the Depot property and the park area developed to the east. Further discussion ensued regarding the Englewood Depot. Mr. Willis recalled that the EHS was going to use the Depot for a museum. Mr. Graham agreed that this is the intent of the EHS. Mr. Weber noted that 2001 PIF projects are almost double the costs projected in 2002, 2003, 2004 and 2005. He asked for an explanation. Mr . Stitt reviewed several projects, which were projected for 2001 , such as $1 ,000,000 for the extension of Inca Street south; this expenditure is not carried forward to future years. Other projects included in 2001 which are new projects are $200,000 for landscaping on Santa Fe and Broadway; $750 ,000 for sidewalk improvements, $249 ,000 for Safety Services parking lot enlargement; $400,000 for Oxford traffic calming and other projects. Mr. Stitt ad vised the Commission to keep in mind that projects can be moved from year to year depending on funding availability. Mr . Welker stated that he had several items on a list he would like to see included on a capital improvement list; these items include: • Pedestrian and bicycle access across major streets; • Open space improvement , including existing walkways and bicycle paths ; • Continue Belleview Park development across to the South Platte River; • Use of Oxford A venue and Quincy A venue rights-of-way for green areas or bicycle paths ; • Land acquisition for parking areas at the Oxford Light Rail station ; • Continuance of greenbelts , bicycle paths, pedestrian walkways to tie into and through CityCenter; • Connect the park lands on both sides of Dartmouth A venue ; • Improve pedestrian access between Broadway and the Little Dry Creek green- belt/walkway ; • Cultural Arts Mr. Stockwell stated that, in his opinion, the shuttle service is a major priority , and should be operational when the light rail station opens. He suggested that any transportation lines on Ox- ford A venue be extended eastward to South Clarkson Street. Mr. Stockwell further suggested a routing circuit for the Shuttle . Mr. Welker stated that acquisition of buses , shelters, where the shuttle stops will be -all this needs to be determined before the shuttle can begin operation. Brief discussion ensued. Mr. Graham emphasized that the funds for Capital Improvement pro- jects are limited, and noted the possibility that some projects might be accomplished on a year- H:IGROU PIB O ARDSIPLA NCO MM\Min uie s\'<l inutcs 2000\PC'¥1 05·20008.Joc 16 • • • • • by-year funding basis. Mr. Welker agreed that some projects can be accomplished in "steps". Funding from other sources was briefly discussed; Mr. Graham noted that DRCOG does have some funds, and applications for funds are accepted every two years . No further business was brought up for discussion. The meeting adjourned. Gertrude G. Welty, Recording Secret H:IGROUPIBOARDS\PLANCOMM\Minutcs\Minutes 2000\PCM OS -2 0008.doc 17