Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1998-03-03 PZC MINUTES• • • • CITY OF ENGLEWOOD PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MARCH 3, 1998 I. CALL TO ORDER The regular meeting of the City Planning and Zoning Commission was called to order at 7 :00 P .M . in the City Council Chambers of Englewood City Hall, Chairman Douglas presiding. Members present: Dummer, Homer , Lathram, Rininger, Tobin , Weber, Welker , Cottle , Douglas Simpson, Ex-officio Members absent: None Staff present: Neighborhood/Environmental Technician Langon Neighborhood Coordinator Graham Assistant City Attorney Reid II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES February 18, 1998 Chairman Douglas stated that the Minutes of February 18, 1998 were to be considered for ap- proval. Tobin: Rininger: The Minutes of February 18, 1998 be approved as written. AYES: NAYS: Homer, Lathram, Rininger, Tobin, Weber , Welker, Cottle , Douglas None ABSTAIN: Dummer ABSENT: None The motion carried . III. COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE Amendment of I-1 and I-2 Industrial Districts CASE #OR-98-02 Mr. Douglas stated that the case before the Commission pertains to proposed amendment of the I-1 , Light Industrial , and I-2, General Industrial , zone districts . He asked for a motion to open the Public Hearing . Homer moved: Tobin seconded: The Public Hearing on Case OR-98-02 be opened. AYES : NAYS: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: Lathram , Rininger , Tobin, Weber , Welker , Cottle , Dummer , Homer , Douglas None None None The motion carried. Mr. Douglas asked that staff present the case. Ms. Tricia Langon was sworn in. Ms. Langon stated that the proposed amendments are to the 1-1 , Light Industrial , and 1-2, General Industrial, zone district regulations, and will be applica- ble city-wide. Ms. Langon presented the Chair with the Notice of Public Hearing, which was published in the Englewood Herald on February 20 , 1998. Ms. Langon stated that the pro- posed amendments are narrow in scope , and address only the possible use of "car crushing " and "storage of hazardous/toxic waste ". Staff has prepared the proposed amendments in re- sponse to the directive from the City Council to address these possible industrial uses, and to mitigate impacts on adjacent residential areas . Ms. Langon directed the attention of the Com- mission to the Zoning Map , noting the many areas where residential development abuts or ad- joins industrial zoning/development. Ms. Langon emphasized that the proposed amendments are to the regulations of both industrial districts , and as such will applicable to all areas zoned for industrial development. • • Ms. Langon noted three corrections to the proposed amendments: Page 9 of the 1-1 Zone Dis-• trict regulations , subsection (4) to read: " ... from the boundary line of any residential zone district or park ." Subsection (5) to cite subsection "K " rather than subsection "J". Page 5 of the 1-2 Zone District regulations, subsection d to read: " ... boundary line of any residential zone district or park." Ms . Langon referenced a matrix contained within the staff report, which addresses "automo- bile shredding", "automobile wrecking", and "hazardous waste storage or processing ". Ms. Langon discussed expansion and clarification of the definition for "automobile shredding ", to include such operations as crushing, baling, and compacting of vehicles. This use is currently prohibited in both 1-1 and 1-2 zone districts, and is proposed to remain prohibited in both dis- tricts. Automobile wrecking, which includes auto parting , salvage , recycling and similar op- erations , but shall not include shredding, crushing , baling or compacting, is currently a condi- tional use in the 1-1 Zone District , and a permitted use in the 1-2 Zone District ; the proposed amendment till continue the conditional use status in 1-1 , and the permitted status in the 1-2 Zone District. Hazardous waste storage or processing is currently permitted in the 1-1 and 1-2 zone districts. The proposed amendment will make hazardous waste storage or processing a conditional use in both the 1-1 and 1-2 Zone Districts . Ms . Langon clarified that this amend- ment will not affect businesses that use hazardous materials in their operations , onl y the stor- age or processing of hazardous waste. Hazardous waste and the processing thereof requires special handling to avoid illness or injury to people, and damage to property . 2 • • • • • Ms. Langon stated that new hazardous waste storage or processing operations will be immedi- ately subject to the Conditional Use regulations; existing hazardous waste storage or processing operations will be subject to administrative review , and if found to be in compliance may be granted Conditional Use status. If existing businesses are not in compliance , the y will have 12 months to come into compliance . Ms. Langon stated that three additional uses have been added to the list of prohibited uses in the 1-1 Zone District , those uses are: Automobile Shredding , crushing , baling , compacting and similar operations; Biological waste , processing; and Radioactive waste , processing . Ms. Langon discussed the restrictions on automobile wrecking yards , which are a Conditional Use in the 1-1 Zone District , noting that these yards must be at least one acre in size , but may not exceed one and one-half acres in size. There are setback restrictions, stacking restrictions , and all automobile wrecking yards must comply with Title 5 , Chapter 10 , of the Englewood Municipal Code . Automobile wrecking yards in the 1-2 Zone District shall have a minimum area of one and one-half acres, and shall comply with Title 5 , Chapter 10 of the Englewood Municipal Code . All automobile wrecking yards must be licensed by the City of Englewood. Ms . Langon pointed out that under the Conditional Use provisions of the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance , the Planning Commission does have the right to impose conditions to pro- tect the health , safety, and welfare of the citizenry. Hazardous waste storage or processing there of is proposed to be a Conditional Use in both 1-1 and 1-2 industrial categories. All such sites used for storage and/or processing of hazardous waste must comply with regulations of the State of Colorado regarding what the hazardous material is , how much can be stored , and how long it can be stored. These uses must also comply with all Building Code and Fire Code regulations . Hazardous waste processing will have to be conducted within an enclosed build- ing, and storage must be within an enclosed building or approved above-ground storage tanks . Ms . Langon reiterated that the proposed amendment to the industrial district regulations re- garding car crushers and hazardous waste storage and /or processing is at the request of City Council. Mr. Douglas suggested that reference to required "Planned Development " either be stricken , or reference be made to "Planned Unit Development ". Ms. Cottle asked if above-ground storage tanks are permitted. Ms . Langon stated that above- ground gasoline storage tanks are permitted. Mr. Douglas referred to the sign-in sheet presented to him , and asked Ms . Kucharski if she wished to address the Commission regarding the proposed amendments. Ms. Marti Kucharski , 511 West Dartmouth Avenue , was sworn , and stated that she has been asked to address the Planning Commission on behalf of the citizens of Englewood. Ms. Kucharski read the following into the record: 3 • "In accordance with the agreement of the Englewood Planning and Zoning Commission and the Office of Neighborhood and Business Development that the North Englewood Small Area • Plan be discontinued until April 21 , 1998 , giving the residents a time to meet and write up what they felt the problems for this area are and also their suggested solutions for these prob- lems are to be incorporated into any future plans for this area. "This the residents did in two separate meetings, the first being held on Feb. 5 , 1998 , with ap- prox (sic) 75 residents in attendance , the second on Feb . 24 , 1998 , with the approx . (sic ) the same number in attendance. The residents broke into small work groups , focusing on issues they felt of the greatest importance or concern . These being Re-zoning , Traffic , Code en- forcement , the Train Depot, etc .. "These finds along with letters to Council person Ann Nabholz were presented to Mr. Mark Graham , of the Office of Neighborhood and Business Development on Friday , Feb. 27 , 1998. They are to be place (sic) into packet form and presented to you the Planning and Zoning Commission before April 21 , 1998 , and into public record. "We the Residents of the New Noth (sic ) Englewood Development Group RESERVE and DEMAND the right to be allowed to review any and all revised or new plans for either ap- proval or disapproval before said plans are presented before the Planning and Zoning Commis- sion . This is to be DONE by proper notice to each of the Residents in this area before April 21 , 1998. "*** At this time the Residents of this area demand that the privileges grant (sic) to Mr. David Cohen , of the Cohen , Bros, Inc . be revoked , as it is our understanding there is NO property for redevelopment and no property available for reinvestment at this time, and if in the future there should be we demand that there be at least 3 developers and three different plans submitted for either approval or disapproval by the residents of this area. "We wish to thank the Commission for its attention to this matter and also for the courtesy shown to us the Residents of the New NORTH ENGLEWOOD DEVELOPMENT GROUP! "Thank you! Any questions ?" Mr. Horner asked Ms . Kucharski if she had any comments pertaining to the proposed amend- ment of the 1-1 and 1-2 Industrial Zone District regulations. Ms . Kucharski stated that she did not , having just picked up a copy of the proposed regulations at the beginning of the meeting . Ms . Kucharski stated that, in her opinion , the City didn 't do its job in proposing the North Englewood Small Area Plan, citing the location of Cushing Park and Bishop Elementary School. Ms. Kucharski discussed the speed limits in the area, along Dartmouth Avenue and other streets , and commented that there were four different speed limits in this very small area . Ms. Kucharski stated that she has "nothing to do with NEON ". Ms. Kucharski reiterated that she was asked to speak on behalf of the residents of Englewood . 4 • • • • • Mr. Homer asked if those residents who asked Ms. Kucharski to represent them are from her neighborhood. She stated that the residents are in the area bounded by South Broadway, West Yale Avenue, South Santa Fe Drive, and West Floyd Avenue. Ms . Nabholz asked her to rep- resent this neighborhood. Mr. Welker asked if Ms . Kucharski had looked at the proposed amendments to the industrial zone districts. Ms . Kucharski stated that the residents of the area do not feel that their "fight" is with the General Iron Works site; their fight is to stop this Plan and provide input into de- velopment of any subsequent plans . Mr. Douglas stated that the issue before the Commission is the proposed amendment of the 1-1 and 1-2 zone district regulations, and that testimony should be regarding that issue . Cindy Scott, 3063 South Fox Street, was sworn in . Ms. Scott stated that she did not see the proposed amendment until this evening , but does have a couple of questions. She asked if haz- ardous waste is specifically defined. Mr. Douglas referred Ms . Scott to the very last page of the handout. Ms. Scott then inquired about the "external effects" restriction noting that there seems to be a lot of room for interpretation; she felt there needed to be more clarification if the City wants more control over businesses. She reiterated that there seems to be a lot of lee-way for interpretation. Nicole Baraga, 2875 South Bannock Street, was sworn in. Ms. Baraga stated that she has owned her home for three and one-half years. Ideally, she said, the proposed amendments would be more restrictive; she doesn't want to see any hazardous waste storage or processing in the City . She suggested that the Commission recommend prohibition of both hazardous waste and auto wrecking. Ms. Baraga stated that the proposed amendments are "workable ", but urged that there be additional , more restrictive, changes made in the future. Ms . Baraga stated that the entire neighborhood is very concerned : they don't want noise or pollution . They want to see more restrictions and assistance in upgrading the area. Ms . Baraga stated that she felt Ms. Kucharski's comments regarding the Plan should be taken into account. Mr. Douglas clarified that the issue before the Commission for Public Hearing this evening is the proposed amendment of the 1-1 and 1-2 Industrial Zone district regulations, and not to re- ceive testimony on the NESAP which has been continued to April 21 . Ms. Tobin stated that members of the Commission had inquired about attending the neighbor- hood meetings, and those she spoke to felt attendance by staff and Commission members might be too restrictive on the free-flow of ideas for the residents . Mr. Douglas asked if anyone else wished to address the Commission. No one else indicated a desire to address the Commission. Tobin moved : Lathram seconded: The Public Hearing on Case OR-98-02 be closed . 5 AYES: NAYS: Rininger, Tobin, Weber, Welker, Cottle, Dummer, Horner, Lathram, Douglas None ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: None The motion carried. Mr. Douglas asked the pleasure of the Commission. Welker moved: Horner seconded : The Planning Commission approve the proposed amendments to the I-1, Light Industrial Zone District , to the I-2, General Industrial Zone Dis- trict, and to Section 16-8-1, Definitions, and forward the proposed amendments to City Council with a favorable recommendation. Mr. Douglas asked if there was any discussion. • Mr. Welker asked if there is an appeal process for existing uses hazardous waste stor- age/processing that administration will review ; if the administrative review finds them to not be in compliance, and they cannot be in compliance within 12 months, to whom do the y appeal the administrative decision. Can they appeal to the Planning Commission? To the Board of Adjustment & Appeals? Ms. Langon stated that there is one hazardous waste storage site that staff is aware of; inasmuch as it is only a matter of verification that this use is in compliance , it • didn 't seem practical to require this one business to go through the hearing process before the Commission. Mr. Welker asked to whom they would appeal if the administrative review should reveal non-compliance. Ms. Langon stated that it would, in that event , be brought be- fore the Planning Commission. Brief discussion ensued. Ms. Tobin asked that the appeal pro- cess be written into the proposed amendments . Mr. Welker referenced the definition of hazardous waste , and asked if the Fire Department and Building Department had worked with staff on this issue. Ms. Langon stated that she worked with the Fire Marshall on this revision . Mr . Welker referenced Page 9 and the proposed 500 hundred foot distance requirement from residential zone district or public park ; he asked about including such public uses as the water filter plant; and should the distancing factors be increased over and above 500 feet. Ms . Lathram asked if the Commission could not impose additional distance at such time as a pro- posed use is before the Commission for Conditional Use consideration. Ms. Langon stated that Federal and State guidelines will impact location of hazardous waste sites . Mr. Welker asked why special mention is not made of radioactive materials in the definitions . Ms . Langon stated that radioactive materials are toxic waste , and that in fact , radioactive waste and biological waste are both included as prohibited uses in the I-1 Zone District regulations . 6 • • • • Mr. Welker inquired about the storage of vehicles at auto wrecking yards . Ms . Langon stated that auto wrecking yards must be in compliance with Title V , Chapter 10 of the Englewood Municipal Code . Mr. Welker discussed the 500 foot distance requirements , and related this requirement to the General Iron site; would any portion of that site be available for hazardous waste storage . It was pointed out that the GIW site is 18 acres in area , and the distance requirements are only 500 feet from residential district boundaries ; there is a part of the GIW site that could be used for hazardous waste storage and still be in compliance with the proposed regulations. Mr . Welker suggested that the distancing factors need to be increased. Mr . Simpson discussed the difficulty in drafting regulations to mitigate impact on residential areas from some uses , and at the same time , not restrict rights of industrial property owners. He noted that staff had many obstacles to consider in drafting the proposed amendment. Mr. Simpson also commented that there is much in the industrial district regulations that is yet in need of revision. Brief discussion ensued. Mr. Rininger asked how many hazardous waste businesses are in Englewood. Ms. Langon stated that there is one such business that staff is aware of; this is an accumulation center , wi th a 20 day turn-around time. Hazardous waste is stored on the site no longer than 20 days , and shipped to other parts of the country for disposal. Mr. Rininger asked about car shredders . Ms . Langon stated there may be one , but it is li- censed as "auto salvage ". Mr. Douglas asked if the storage of cedar shingles would be storage of hazardous materials . Discussion ensued. Ms. Cottle what are "external effects ". Ms. Langon stated that there is no specific definition for "external effects ", but referenced §K-1, 2, and 3 on Page 9 of the 1-1 District regulations; these pertain to volume of sound, vibration, heat , glare , radiation , dust , and fumes generated by any specific use . Ms. Cottle asked if the City has considered imposing Conditional Use requirements on all sites where Brownfields assessments are to be done . She suggested that some standards for Brown- fields site assessments /development may have to be developed to assure accessibility to com- plete the assessment. Discussion followed. Ms. Reid suggested that she isn 't sure how long a Brownfields assessment may last , and suggested it might be a "takings " issue to be considered. Ms. Cottle suggested that in an auto wrecking yard , they might be required to move the vehicle part stacks to allow assessment of soil beneath. She stated that it would be a shame were new business to interfere with clean-up of contaminated sites . Ms . Reid stated that this issue will require more research. Ms . Cottle suggested contacting the EPA. Mr. Simpson suggested that Ms. Cattle 's suggestion on the Brownfields sites does need to be addressed , and suggested that this be done in the course of rewriting the total ordinance. Mr. Simpson stated that one of the 7 primary goals on the Brownfields program is to try to create incentives to clean up contami- nated sites ; we do not want to create any disincentives to site clean-up . • Mr. Weber cited Paragraph K on Page 9 of the 1-1 Zone District regulations , and noted redun- dancy . Mr . Douglas stated that staff has stated that there are many areas of the ordinance which need to be cleaned up . Mr . Rininger expressed his concern regarding transportation of hazardous waste through Englewood. Ms. Langon noted that transportation of the hazardous waste is regulated by the Federal government , and is not a zoning issue . Mr. Douglas asked if there were further questions or discussion. Hearing none , he called for the vote: AYES : NAYS: ABSTAIN: ABSENT : Tobin , Weber , Welker , Cottle , Dummer , Horner , Lathram , Douglas Ringer None None The motion carried . Mr. Douglas thanked members of the audience for their attendance. IV. PUBLIC FORUM No one addressed the Commission under Public Forum . V. DIRECTOR'S CHOICE Mr. Simpson stated that the Fence, Wall, and Visual Barriers ordinance was approved by Council, and will become effective in late March. The Landscape Ordinance amendments have been forwarded to City Council; a Public Hearing has been scheduled for April 20 , and a study session has been scheduled for March 30 . The Telecommunications Ordinance will be discussed at study session with City Council in early April. The South Broadway Focus Group continues to meet; they are considering urban design ele- ments. Property owners the length of South Broadway are included in these meetings . Mr. Simpson stated that some staff did attend the meeting with the North Englewood citizens group last Tuesday evening , and will be looking at the recommendations forwarded to staff • from this group . • 8 ' • • • Mr . Simpson provided a brief update on the redevelopment of the Mall. Agreements with Miller/Kitchell have been approved by City Council. A pre-construction developers agree- ment, which will be in effect for 180 days, was signed . A mid-point review date of May 11 before City Council has been scheduled. The contract requires that Miller/Kitchell work with the City staff to identify a transit oriented development plan to include elements of residential , retail, general merchandising, City Hall on-site, and the transit station. The Plan must be shown to be market acceptable as well as financially feasible. City Council will determine if we move forward, or make a change in direction of redevelopment. Ms. Tobin asked if a big box development is still proposed. Mr. Simpson stated that one store, approximately 120,000 square feet in size, is included in the proposed plan. Mr. Simp- son stated that there are further agreements in place with Citiventures and with Calthorpe & Associates. If a financially feasible, market-acceptable plan is presented and found acceptable by City Council, the redevelopment plan will come to the Planning Commission in early sum- mer, 1998 . Mr. Simpson reported that the asbestos abatement in the mall continues . City Council has given authorization to look at the reuse of the former Foley's building as a City Hall. Mr. Simpson stated that it is with great regret that he announce the resignation of Ms. Kristin Cottle from the P la nning Commission. Mr. Simpson stated that he wanted to congratulate Ms . Cottle on her professional opportunity, which necessitates relocation, and noted that it has been a pleasure to work with her , and thanked Ms. Cottle for her contribution to the Commission and to the City. VI. ATTORNEY'S CHOICE Ms. Reid stated that the landscaping revisions will be before City Council in April. VII. COMMISSIONER'S CHOICE Ms. Tobin stated that she will miss Ms. Cattle's attendance and participation on the Commis- sion. She stated that Miss Cottle has brought a great deal to the Commission through her in- terest and participation. Mr. Douglas asked that Ms. Cottle explain her professional opportunity. Ms. Cottle stated that she has been offered the opportunity to begin a project in Helena, MT . She will be moving to Montana on March 14th, and starting the project on March 16th. She stated that her Englewood home is on the market if anyone is looking for a nice home. Ms. Cottle stated that her has enjoyed her service on the Planning Commission. All members of the Commission wished Ms. Cottle well. Mr. Horner stated that he mentioned at the last meeting the presentation he attended on the EDDA downtown plan, and suggested that if an agenda in the near future is light, perhaps staff 9 could invite the EDDA to a study session on the plan. Mr. Simpson stated that he will see if it can be scheduled for March 17th. • Mr. Douglas cited wording on the sight distance triangle of the new fence ordinance, which he found confusing. Mr. Simpson stated that the restriction should be "within" the sight triangle. Ms. Reid agreed. There being no further business to come before the Commission , the meeting was declared adjourned . . Aef~~~~- Gertrude G. Welty, Recording&cr; ry \nbd\group\boards\plancomm\minutes 98 \pcm 03-98a.doc 10 • • '