Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1999-06-22 PZC MINUTES.. • • • CITY OF ENGLEWOOD PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION June 22, 1999 I. CALL TO ORDER The regular meeting of the City Planning and Zoning Commission was called to order at 7:03 p.m. in the City Council Chambers of Englewood City Hall, Chairman Welker presiding. Members present: Weber, Willis, Douglas, Hayduk, Lathram, Stockwell, Welker Members absent: Rininger (entered later in the meeting) Secretary's Note: One (1) vacancy Staff present: Harold J. Stitt, Senior Planner M. Kate Newman, Planning Technician Nancy Reid, Assistant City Attorney II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES May 18, 1999 Chairman Welker stated that the Minutes of May 18, 1999 were to be considered for approval. Douglas moved: Stockwell seconded: The Minutes of May 18, 1999 be approved as written. Mr. Rininger entered during the vote call; therefore, his vote is recorded. AYES: NAYS: Willis, Douglas, Hayduk, Lathram, Rininger, Stockwell, Weber, Welker None ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: None The motion carried. III. COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE Group Living Ordinance CASE #ORD-99-02 Chairman Welker stated that the memorandum in the Planning Commission packet is request- ing a further continuance of the Public Hearing . He asked for a motion to reopen the Public Hearing . 1 Douglas moved: Rininger seconded: The Public Hearing on Case #ORD-99-02 be reopened. AYES: NAYS: Douglas, Hayduk , Lathram, Rininger , Stockwell , Weber, Willis, Welker None ABSTAIN : None ABSENT : None The motion carried. Mr . Stitt stated that the continuance of the Public Hearing was to provide time for staff and legal counsel to address issues raised during the course of the first phase of the public hearing. Most of those issues have been addressed. However , some additional issues have arisen, and staff is requesting additional continuance of the Hearing. Staff is suggesting that the Hearing be continued to August 3rd ; the Liquor Licensing Board has a public hearing scheduled for July 7m, and has use of the Council Chambers for that evening, and Mr. Elliott , the consultant who is writing the group living ordinance , will not be in town on July 2om . Therefore , August 3rd is su gge sted by staff as a date for continuance . Douglas moved : Lathram seconded: The Public Hearing on Case #ORD-99 -02 be continued to August 3 , 1999. AYES: NAYS : Hayduk , Lathram , Rininger, Stockwell, Weber, Willis, Douglas, Welker None ABSTAIN: None ABSENT : None The motion carried . IV. ENGLEWOOD CITY CENTER Preliminary Subdivision Plat CASE #SUB 99-01 Chairman Welker stated that this issue is a Public Hearing on a proposed preliminary subdivi- sion plat. He asked for a motion to open the public hearing. Douglas moved : Weber seconded: The Public Hearing on Case #SUB-99-01 be opened . AYES: NAYS : Hayduk , Lathram , Rininger, Stockwell, Weber , Willis, Douglas, Welker None ABSTAIN : None ABSENT : None The motion carried. 2 .. • • • - • Mr. Welker asked that staff present the case . Harold Stitt, Senior Planner was sworn in. Mr. Stitt stated that there are two types of subdivi- sions: Major and Minor. A Minor Subdivision is for smaller residential properties, a resubdi- vision, or three or fewer industrial lots. He testified that the plat before the Commission is a major subdivision of the former Cinderella City Mall site, now called Englewood CityCenter. The Planning Commission must consider a subdivision plat at Public Hearing at the "prelimi- nary plat" level; modifications are then made, if required, and incorporated on the Final Plat. The Final Plat, once approved by the Commission, is then referred to the City Council for ap- proval. Mr. Stitt stated that certified letters were mailed to 26 adjoining property owners giving notice of the date, time, and place of the Public Hearing; to date, only three return cards have not been received by the Department of Neighborhood and Business Development. The property does not have to be posted for hearing on subdivision procedures. Mr. Stitt stated that this property still has utilities on-site that will have to be relocated and de- fined; existing utility easements will have to be vacated, and roadways still have to be defined and described. Mr. Stitt noted that lot "size" is not an issue on this plat. The Planned Unit Development approved in the fall of 1998 set forth the types of uses permitted in the develop- ment, and the design guidelines set forth required setbacks, and other physical development standards. The Planning Commission must confirm that the Preliminary Plat is in confor- • mance with the Planned Unit Development. • Mr. Stitt then proceeded to review the proposed preliminary plat, noting the location of the nine blocks, the various lots within those blocks, and parcels identified as A, B, C, and D . Mr. Stitt stated that at this time, the entire site is under the ownership of the Englewood Envi- ronmental Foundation (EEF). All streets and public areas, such as the plaza, will remain un- der the ownership of the EEF, and will not be "publicly dedicated streets". Easements for the access routes (streets) will be recorded as will utility easements once the location for those easements has been determined . Mr . Stitt noted that "Tract C" incorporates extension of Englewood Parkway, and that part of this extension will cross through Lot 1, Block 9, which will be sold to Wal-Mart. An easement for the Tract C extension will be recorded against the Wal-Mart property, and will be included in the deed when the property is sold to Wal-Mart. Mr. Stitt also noted that the easement shown on the plat for Little Dry Creek does not correctly reflect actual location of the conduit. Mr. Welker noted designations on the plat for South Inca Street and South Galapago Street, in addition to Tract C; what is the area between Block 5 and Block 6, and between Block 7 and Block 8 -is this going to be an area for vehicular traffic also, and part of the private street designations. He inquired further regarding the easement across Block 9, and whether Wal- Mart has agreed to this easement across their property. Mr. Stitt stated that negotiations are still on-going with Wal-Mart; the agreements have been signed, but closing on the property will not occur until late August. This is one portion of the 3 • street system that will not be maintained by the EEF, but will be maintained by Wal-Mart. Mr. Stitt discussed the Common Area Maintenance Agreement (CAMA) which will be negoti-• ated and signed off with each and every developer in the site; the property owners will be as- sessed a common area maintenance fee, payable to the EEF; the EEF then pays for mainte- nance of all common areas. This removes the maintenance of the streets from City mainte- nance responsibility. The maintenance agreements are separate instruments between the EEF and the land owners/developers in Englewood CityCenter. These documents will be recorded once the participants are identified. Mr. Welker asked if blocks in addition to Block 9 in CityCenter would be sold to developers . Mr. Stitt responded affirmatively. Sale of any property will contain a clause regarding the common area maintenance agreement. Mr. Douglas asked why the streets will be private rather than dedicated public rights-of-way. Mr. Stitt stated that 1) privitization removes the burden of maintenance from the City -the de- velopers will pay for the maintenance of the streets through the CAMA; and 2) the streets and all public areas will be controlled by the CAMA and administered by EEF. The Foundation guarantees public access to and through the redevelopment site . Mr. Douglas asked about Tract A. Mr . Stitt stated that this Tract is on the south side of Cushing Park, and will be used for access from Inca Street to Huron Street. Mr. Stitt stated that the site cannot be used for anything but public open space or access purposes. Mr. Doug- las questioned that this particular parcel was shown on the original PUD district plan. • Mr . Douglas inquired about Block 5, Lot 1. Mr. Stitt stated that Lot 1, Block 5, is part of the Floyd Avenue right-of-way . Mr. Douglas asked about Lot 4, Block 3; is this owned by the EEF. Mr. Stitt stated that it is now owned by EEF. Mr. Douglas asked what uses will be developed on these small parcels which were not shown on the PUD District Plan. Mr. Stitt reiterated that Lot 1, Block 5 is to be used for street right-of-way, as is Tract A. Lot 4, Block 3 may be developed with any retail use allowed in the B-1 Zone District inasmuch as this parcel was not part of the original PUD. Mr. Stitt reiterated that all streets will be private and under the control and maintenance of the EEF. Ms . Lathram asked if there will be a median in the reconstructed West Floyd A venue. Mr. Stitt responded affirmatively . Mr. Weber commented on the alignment of South Galapago Street; it appears that there are several "jogs" in the alignment of this street. Mr. Stitt stated that South Galapago, as shown, will align with South Galapago south of U.S. 285; there are off-sets on the alignment within the CityCenter site, and a 30 foot easement should be retained on the west side of Lot 1, Block 9, to accommodate sufficient travel lanes. Mr. Douglas discussed the configuration of Lot 1, Block 9 (Wal-Mart pad site), and asked why this wouldn't be shown as two separate parcels with the extension of Tract C (Englewood 4 • • Parkway) between the two parcels. Mr. Stitt stated that one large lot is the way the deal was negotiated with Wal-Mart, and they apparently did not want a "street" going through their parking lot; they will, however grant an "easement" for this accessway through the parcel. Mr. Stitt reiterated that the sale contract has been negotiated and signed on this Lot; the closing is scheduled for late August. Mr. Stitt emphasized that, even though the sale contract has been negotiated and signed, the ground is still under the control of the EEF and closing will not oc- cur until the easement for extension of Tract C (Englewood Parkway) through Lot 1, Block 9, is written into the sale documents. Mr. Douglas stated that he still does not understand why this is not designated as right-of-way and shown on the plat. Mr. Stitt stated that the Commission must be made aware, and keep in mind, that the EEF makes sure that each and every action, contract, agreement, negotiation, etc. is approved by the Englewood City Council. Mr. Welker stated that he wants to see the easement for extension of Tract C described and delineated on the plat prior to granting approval to a Final Plat. The width of the easement was discussed. Tract C is shown on the Plat as 150 feet in width west of South Galapago. Mr. Douglas questioned the need for the 150 foot easement, and suggested a figure of 60 feet width for the easement through Lot 1, Block 9. Mr. Douglas noted that Lot 1, Block 9, will also be subject to granting the 30 foot wide easement for South Galapago. Mr. Welker in- quired about the easement shown on the north along Floyd Avenue, and the utility easement for Little Dry Creek. Mr. Stitt stated that the northern easement, and alignment of Little Dry • Creek is part of West Floyd A venue reconfiguration. • Mr. Willis asked where the light rail lines will be in conjunction with Tract C, and will any portion of Tract C be sold to RTD. Mr. Stitt stated that the light rail lines are on the west of the area shown on the subdivision plat; the west line of the subdivision abuts the rail line The bridge from the plaza area to the light rail station will be built in Tract C. Ms. Lathram noted that the plat shows an offset on South Inca Street on the west sides of Blocks 5 and 6; will an easement be obtained on these blocks to align the street with Inca north of Floyd Avenue. Mr. Willis asked what parcels have been purchased, or have sale contracts negotiated. Mr. Stitt stated that at this time, only the Wal-Mart site (Lot 1, Block 9), has a negotiated sales contract. Mr. Douglas discussed width for the strips of land between Blocks 5 and 6, and between Blocks 7 and 8; will 47 feet in width be sufficient to allow maneuverability for fire vehicles, trash trucks, and large delivery vans . Mr. Stitt stated that until a development plan and site plan are presented, it is difficult to predict trash pick-up locations. However, the access routes have been designed to accommodate fire vehicles, and the plan has been reviewed and ap- proved by the Fire Department. 5 The Little Dry Creek easement, as shown on the plat, was discussed. Mr. Willis asked if • easements which need to be vacated will come before the Commission. Mr. Stitt responded affirmatively. Mr. Weber asked if contours of a site were not typically shown on subdivision plats. Mr. Stitt stated that contours are shown on drainage plans and grading plans, but not typically on a sub- division plat. Mr. Welker asked if a drainage plan and road plan have been prepared for the site. Mr. Stitt stated that the preliminary grading work on the site will be completed in the near future. Once the drainage and grading plan are completed, they will be presented to the Commission. Mr. Welker stated that the Commission also needs to see a utilities plan. Mr. Stitt stated that until ownership of the various parcels and development is determined, it is difficult to know where utilities will be installed. These utilities are certainly available up to the site boundaries. Mr. Welker stated that the Commission wants to see the location of the water and sewer lines. Mr. Welker addressed Tract C, asking if there is any of this parcel that will be deeded to RTD for parking purposes. Mr. Stitt stated that all of RTD's land holdings will be within their right-of-way abutting this subdivision on the west. There will be an Intergovernmental Agreement between the City and RTD for use of parking lots. Mr. Willis asked about the RTD parking lot locations. Mr. Stitt indicated those areas which will be parking. Mr. Welker asked about bus routes to reach the RTD light rail station. Mr. Stitt stated that • buses will use Englewood Parkway to Elati, north on Elati to Floyd Avenue, west on Floyd to the west side of the site, south to the station/tum-around, and back out the same route . Mr. Willis asked who will maintain the bus tum-around area. Mr. Stitt stated that this will be maintained by EEF; RTD will be a participant in the CAMA. Traffic control was discussed. Mr. Welker asked whether there will be traffic controls at Inca and Floyd A venue, which is shown as a full intersection. Mr. Welker asked about bicycle routes; are there changes in the routes. Mr. Stitt stated efforts are being expended to establish connections between the routes along Little Dry Creek and into the Park. There are major street crossings that must be addressed. Mr. Stitt noted that the City has been awarded a Smart Growth Grant, and bike route linkages is one of the things which will be considered. Mr. Welker asked if this would include bicycle routes to the RTD light rail station. Mr. Stitt responded affirmatively; all modes of transportation will be consid- ered. Mr. Hayduk discussed the requirements for the "vicinity map", and pointed out that the vicin- ity map shown does not include location of the nearest school, park, etc. as required. Mr. Stitt agreed that this needs to be included . Mr. Willis asked what impact the residential units to be developed as part of Englewood City- Center might have on the schools . Mr. Stitt stated that the residential development will be on 6 • • • • Blocks 6 and 7; these will be high-end rental units of buffet, one, two, and a few three bed- room units. It is not anticipated that these units will be rented by families with children, but the school district has been included in the discussions, and we have been assured that Bishop Elementary School can accommodate additional students. Mr. Willis asked how many residential units are proposed, and will there be sufficient parking. Mr. Stitt stated that between 300 and 350 units total will be constructed by Forest City; all re- quired parking must be provided on those parcels controlled by Forest City. The parking re- quired is based on the size of the units. Mr. Welker asked if the Commission will see further plans on the Forest City development before they proceed; who will determine adequacy of parking if the Commission doesn't see the plans. He reiterated his desire to see development and parking plans for Forest City. Mr. Welker asked if there were further questions from the Commission. Hearing none, he asked if members of the audience wanted to address the Commission. Carol Rigdon, 3296 South Fox, was sworn in Ms. Rigdon asked for clarification on the recon- figuration of West Floyd Avenue. Mr. Stitt stated that the north portion of West Floyd Ave - nue, as it exists, will be used as an "access road" for the residential district north of Floyd, and accommodate traffic, bicycle and pedestrian paths, and landscaping . There will be no through traffic allowed on Huron, Galapago, or Fox Street. There will be a full intersection at Floyd A venue and South Elati Street. There will be a buffer area between this access road and the reconfigured Floyd A venue on the south, which will be two way, and where the buses will travel. The barrier to prevent through traffic was discussed; Mr. Stitt stated that bollards will be installed in the median/barrier which may be moved by the Fire Department to allow emer- gency through traffic for fire equipment. Ms. Rigdon asked if any properties north of Floyd Avenue will have to be taken to accommo- date the access road. Mr. Stitt stated that no properties will be taken. Ms. Rigdon asked about traffic control devices -stop signs or signalization , to slow traffic using the access road. Ms. Rigdon also asked what will control speed of traffic using reconfig- ured Floyd Avenue. Mr. Stitt stated that traffic control will be determined by the traffic divi- sion of Public Works. Ms. Rigdon thanked the Commission and staff for explaining the treatment of Floyd Avenue. Ms. Jeanne Piz, 3290 South Huron Street, was sworn in. Ms. Piz stated that she appreciated receiving the certified letter notifying them of the hearing. She stated that she and her husband are very interested in the proposed redevelopment because they own property just north of Floyd Avenue and "have a lot at stake". She asked that the residential owners be kept in mind when the Commission is reviewing any plans or proposals for the site . She stated that she is in accord with the proposed treatment of Floyd Avenue, and the bicycle paths. She asked if there will be additional meetings on the redevelopment. 7 Mr. Welker stated that there will be additional issues brought before the Commission. Mr. • Welker asked if anyone else wished to address the Commission. No one so indicated. Mr. Welker then asked for a motion to close the Public Hearing. Rininger moved: Willis seconded : The Public Hearing on Case #SUB-99-01 be closed . AYES: NAYS : Lathram, Rininger, Stockwell, Weber, Willis, Douglas, Hayduk, Welker None ABSTAIN: None ABSENT : None The motion carried. Mr. Welker asked the pleasure of the Commission. Weber moved : Lathram seconded: The Planning Commission approve the Preliminary Plat of Englewood CityCenter. Mr . Welker stated that he wants to be assured that any amendments will be brought before the Commission. Easements need to be defined and shown. Mr. Douglas is concerned that "there will never be any easements" if they aren't shown on the plat; this preliminary plat does not show any easements for utilities , and there are corrections or modifications needed on those shown for access. He suggested that the Preliminary Plat could be "conditionally approved ". He stated that he does want to see the easement for exten- sion of T ra ct C across Lot 1, Block 9 shown on the Plat. Mr. Welker stated that the Commission can ask that a Final Plat, incorporating any conditions or modifications the Commission may recommend, be prepared and brought back for consid- eration . Mr. Weber suggested that the majority of subdivision platting procedures require showing pro- posed easements on the plat. Mr. Welker stated that no easements are defined on the plat be- fore the Commission. He suggested that easements along the west side of Lot 1, Block 9, and ex tension of Tract C across this same lot be shown. He stated that he also wanted clarification and definition of the strip of land between Blocks 5 and 6, and Blocks 7 and 8 -are they streets or alleys . Mr. Welker stated that he wants to see all access points defined and de- scribed on the Plat. Discussion ensued . Douglas moved : Stockwell seconded : The motion to approve the Preliminary Plat for Englewood CityCenter be amended by asking that the following be shown on the Final Plat : 1) A 30 foot easement on the west side of Lot 1, Block 9, be shown. 8 • • • • • 2) 3) The easement for extension of Tract C across Lot 1, Block 9, be shown. Definitions of parcels of land between Blocks 5 and 6, and be - tween Blocks 7 and 8. 4) All street dimensions be defined and shown on the Plat. 5) A 12.5 foot easement along the west sides of Blocks 5 and 6 be shown. Brief discussion ensued . The vote on the amendment was called. AYES: NAYS: Stockwell, Weber, Willis, Douglas, Hayduk, Lathram, Rininger, Welker None ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: None The motion carried. The vote on the motion to approve the Preliminary Plat, as amended by inclusion of the five requirements previously cited, was called: AYES: NAYS: Rininger, Stockwell, Weber, Willis, Douglas, Hayduk, Lathram, Welker None ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: None The motion carried . Mr. Welker thanked members of the audience for attending. V. PUBLIC FORUM No one addressed the Commission. VI. DIRECTOR'S CHOICE Mr. Stitt introduced Ms. Kate Newman, Planning Technician, who was recently employed in the Department of Neighborhood and Business Development. Mr. Stitt stated that he had nothing further to bring before the Commission. VII. ATTORNEY'S CHOICE Ms. Reid stated that she had nothing to bring before the Commission . 9 VIII. COMMISSIONER'S CHOICE Mr. Welker asked if Mr . Dummer has submitted a letter of resignation. The Recording Sec- retary answered affirmatively. Ms. Reid stated that City Council has interviewed for vacancies , and will be formalizing ap- pointments to the various boards and commissions on July 6th. Mr. Christopher Ransick is to be the new appointee to the Planning Commission. Mr . Stockwell reported that he had written a letter to the Mayor and City Council regarding the Parks, Recreation , and Open Space (PROS) ordinance and the amendment City Council made prior to approval on first reading which eliminated any means of public input. He un- derstood that City Council has taken this under adv isement. Mr. Welker asked if staff could update the Commission on the status of the PROS ordinance. Mr. Stitt stated that City Council did not approve the proposed ordinance on second reading, and it has been remanded to staff to be rewritten to include a provision for public input. After rewrite , this proposed ordinance will again be submitted to the Parks & Recreation Commis- sion and to the Planning Commission for public hearing before referral to the City Council. Mr. Welker stated that he doesn 't care who holds the public hearing on parks projects -either the Parks and Recreation Commission or the Planning Commission can do so; but, public input must be allowed. Mr. Douglas stated that he is concerned that no criteria was set forth in the • PROS ordinance. Brief discussion ensued. • No further business was brought before the Commission; the meeting was declared adjourned. ertrude G. Welty, Recording Secretary \ \en g_ ch\sys\dept\n bd \g roup \boards\plancomm \m inute s 1999\pcm 06-99a.doc • 10