Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1999-11-16 PZC MINUTES• • I. CITY OF ENGLEWOOD PLANNING AND ZONING C01\1MISSION NOVEMBER 16, 1999 CALL TO ORDER The re gular meeting of the City Planning and Zoning Commission was called to order at 7 :00 p .m . in the Community Room of Englewood City Hall, Chairman Welker presiding. Members present: Members absent: Al so present: Ransick, Stockwell , Weber , Douglas, Hayduk, Welker Rininger, Willis, Lathram Senior Planner Graham Assistant City Attorney Reid II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES November 2 , 1999 Chairman Welker stated that the Minutes of November 2 , 1999 were to be considered for ap- proval . Douglas moved: Ransick seconded : The Minutes of November 2, 1999 be approved as written . AYES: NAYS : ABSTAIN : ABSENT : Stockwell , Weber , Douglas , Hayduk , Ransick , Welker None None Rininger , Willis , Lathram The motion carried. III. STUDY SESSION Regional Plan and Evaluation Matrix Comprehensive Plan Mr. Graham led discussion on a memorandum included in the Commissioner 's packet regard- in g the Regional Plan and a proposed evaluation matrix. Topics cited for evaluation criteria for projects to be considered by the Commission include: + Legal and Administrative Considerations + Consistency with Regional Plan • + Consistency with Englewood's Comprehensive Plan 1 + Zoning Analysis + Physical and Site Analysis + Market Analysis + Environmental Impacts + Social Impacts + Fiscal Impacts + Traffic Impacts + Infrastructure Costs Mr. Graham stated that the Metro Vision 2020 Plan (regional plan) will impact Englewood on a city-wide basis , not just along the Santa Fe /Platte River corridor. The Commission also needs to be cognizant of how Englewood 's Comprehensive Plan will mesh with Plans from Littleton , Denver , and Sheridan on issues such as traffic, open space along the River, and whether there may be conflict with facets of the Regional Plan. Mr . Graham stated that there are specific issues cited in the State Statutes which Planning Commissions must take into account when considering plats, rezonings , etc .; however , there ma y be items in community goals that also merit consideration. Englewood has , in the past , taken a strict constructionist approach in regard to the Zoning Ordinance and Comprehensive Plan. Howe ver , this approach does not allow consideration of various "community goals", or issues such as fiscal impacts, or social impacts. • Mr. Graham stated that staff is exploring community index models and software that would • allow preparation of an annual report on use of the evaluation matrix and effects on actions of the Commission. Mr . Graham asked if separating the issues of the Metro Vision 2020 Regional Plan from the South Santa Fe Drive /South Platte River corridor issue will help clarify things for members of the Commission . Mr . Ransick asked if staff is proposing establishing a place in the City Comprehensive Plan for the "regional plan ". Mr. Graham responded affirmatively. Mr. Hayduk suggested that evaluation items be located in one general place in the City Comprehensive Plan, with a state- ment that these items could and should be applied to consideration of regional issues . Discus- s ion ensued . Mr . Graham discussed the work program staff has underway , and noted that there will be a lot of issues coming before the Commission this next year -not only the Metro Vision 2020 and Comprehensi ve Plan , but updates to the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance , as well as case is - sues from the general public . Commission members discussed cohesiveness between the Regional Plan and the local Com- prehens ive Plan. Mr. Stockwell suggested the "umbrella " approach -the regional plan being 2 • • • • the overall umbrella, the local comprehensive plan being the second "layer ", and the individual parcel /development covered by both the local and regional plans. The "vision " of what Commissioners and citizens want Englewood to be was discussed. The need to begin at the northern boundary of the City, use practical observations and application of the regional/local guidelines, and determine what Englewood should be in the next 20 years or so was brought up for discussion. Mr. Welker commented that when the Commission con- sidered the north Englewood Small Area Plan a couple of years ago , it was not considered from a "regional point of view". Ms. Reid stated that if the Commission and staff develop checklists that are clearly written and easily understood , people who come before the Commission with a development request will know what guidelines are applicable for decisions the Commission renders. If regional and local guidelines are set forth , the Commission can show what they are considering and how a proposal fits into City and Regional Plans. Mr. Stockwell again advocated beginning with the regional plan guidelines -begin on a "wider " basis, and then narrow it down to local guide- lines , and further down to individual parcel/development plans . Mr. Welker noted that who- ever brings an issue forward to the Commission will be viewing their proposal only on the lo- cal impact level -not the regional. Discussion ensued . Mr. Stockwell suggested that the City Comprehensive Plan needs to be rewritten -it is 20 years old . Mr. Graham stated that staff is not advocating a total rewrite . The intent is to have stated policies written into the Plan to help meet whatever "v is ion " of Englewood is devel- oped. Mr. Douglas stated that it appears that the Commission will begin pl acing greater reliance on the Comprehensive Plan when considering proposals before the Commission . He stated that almost everything the Commission has considered has been tied to guidelines cited in the Zon- ing Ordinance. Mr. Graham stated that legally, everything the Commission must consider is dependent upon the Comprehensive Plan; whenever there is a deviation in zoning and/or de- velopment from the Comprehensive Plan , it is "suspect ". Mr. Douglas noted that typically staff reports contain only a brief sentence that a proposal is or is not consistent with the Comprehensive Plan Mr . Graham stated th at the Commission does have the right to be more demanding of staff; the Commission can require staff to cite policies from the Comprehensive Plan to substantiate whether a project is in compliance . Mr. Welker agreed that using policies from the Comprehensive Plan as a basis for evaluating proposals and projects will provide a different perspective for the Commission. M r. Ra nsick discussed the time involved in writing policies and developing procedures . Discussion ensued. Ms . Reid commented that, as she recalled, the number of large PUDs and developments before the Commission has not been that many . The majority of projects have been small , and have been in compliance with the Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Hayduk stated that the Commission should give themselves credit , because they have been using the Plan as guidance. 3 Mr. Douglas recalled the Brook.ridge PUD for mini-warehousing units; this proposed use did not necessarily comply with the Comprehensive Plan, and all the surrounding neighbors spoke • in opposition. However, the Commission and City Council approved the request ; it does fit in with the Brookridge Shopping Center area, and does not appear to impact the neighborhood negatively. Mr. Welker agreed. Ms. Reid reiterated that if the Commission develops a set of policies and procedures, as well as a checklist of issues to be considered , developer , staff, and Commission will all be on the same page during the course of project review. Mr. Weber stated that even though the Englewood Comprehensive Plan is 20 years old , and some things have been accomplished , it is still a good Plan, and still quite applicable . He questioned the assertion that the Plan must be rewritten just because it is 20 years old. Mr. Graham agreed that increased reliance on polices and procedures set forth in the Compre- hensive Plan may constitute a new way of "doing business ". The Commission will become more "pro-active" in their considerations -a wider range of consideration will be used , in- cluding fiscal , social, community impacts . Mr. Stockwell cited a number of issues that, in his opinion, the Commission could consider, including such issues as goals for land directly abutting the South Platte River , goals for land to be developed for open space, goals for traffic patterns, the Broadway corridor, etc. Mr. Hayduk stated that it seemed, in his opinion, that it will be simpler to have a "regional" statement in the Englewood Comprehensive Plan rather than list issues. Mr. Welker suggested that policies should be developed first , and procedures written to implement the policies. Mr. Graham stated that it is helpful to him to hear what the Planning Commission is saying, and stressed the importance for the Commission to articulate what their vision is for the City . He did point out to the Commission that whenever new goals, policies and/or procedures are adopted by the Commission for the Comprehensive Plan, these goals, policies and /or proce- dures must be ratified by City Council. Mr . Graham discussed a recent meeting with the consultant doing the economic analysis of the Santa Fe corridor. He also further discussed use of a "fiscal model", and information that can be generated using this tool. Mr. Graham pointed out that if the Commission adopts a "social model ", criteria will have to be developed. Ms . Reid suggested that part of the criteria for a social model could be support and/or inclusion of art or protection of "pockets" around schools. The Commission discussed the format for writing these policies and procedures. Mr. Welker suggested possible use of a "bullet" format versus a lot of verbiage . Mr. Stockwell discussed writing the wording of the policies and procedures; will staff do this, or will members of the Commission assume this responsibility and staff do editing and polish- 4 • • ... ing. Discussion ensued . Mr. Graham suggested that the core elements of the Metro Vision • 2020 Plan be cited, and applicability of those core elements to Englewood be determined. • • Ms. Reid commented that , in her opinion, the Commission already uses many of the items contained on Mr. Graham 's list, but the use is not articulated . Mr. Douglas stated that one vision he would like to see for Englewood is to get back to the "grid street pattern ". He stated that, in his opinion , this will help move traffic through the City . Mr. Douglas stated that the street system around the Waste Management development on West Union Avenue is a "mess " because the grid pattern was not implemented . He noted that the grid street system is being redeveloped in the CityCenter Englewood project, which he ap- proves of. He asked whether the existing Comprehensive Plan addresses establishment or re- establishment of grid street systems . Discussion ensued. Mr . Hayduk stated that the intent of Comprehensive Plans is to be "broad ", and not tied to specifics . Mr. Graham cited "Chapter 3 , Comprehensive Plan ", from the Planning Commissioner's Handbook. Mr. Graham stated that the Handbook is being revised , and a new version will be available in the near future. Mr. Graham stated that Chapter 3 outlines the context and pur- pose of a Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Stockwell recalled that at a previous meeting, the issue of medians in West Oxford was raised. He asked what department had proposed the medians, and can such a determination be made without going through the Planning Commission . Mr . Graham stated that the Public Works Department had proposed development of medians on West Oxford Avenue; he had discussed this with Director Ross who was most amenable to further consideration of the pro- posal. The issue of Comprehensive Plan amendment was further discussed. Ms . Reid stated that the Plan doesn 't change every year , and there is no need to do so. If the Plan is amended too fre- quently, it might indicate a lack of consistency for staff, citizens , developers, etc. Mr. Welker suggested that at some point in time, the Commission needs to review the entire Plan, and go on record stating the 1979 Plan is still valid and/or update to a current date on the document. Mr. Ransick asked what the number one priority is. Mr. Graham stated that to update the Comprehensive Plan and assure consistency with the Regional Plan. This will be of assistance in writing and getting grants. Mr . Graham stated that revisions will be forthcoming. Agendas for upcoming meetings were reviewed. Mr. Welker suggested that something be brought back to the Commission in January , 2000 . 5 IV. PUBLIC FORUM No one was present to address the Commission . \r. DIRECTOR'S CHOICE Nothing was brought before the Commission. VI. ATTORNEY'S CHOICE Ms. Reid brought nothing before the Commission. VII. COMMISSIONER'S CHOICE Nothing was brought up for discussion. The meeting was declared adjourned . - Gertrude G . Welty , Recording Secre ry f:\dept\nbd\gro up\board s\plan co mm\m inu tes 1999\pcm l l-99b .doc 6 • • •