Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1998-01-06 PZC MINUTES• • • THE CITY OF ENGLEWOOD CITY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION January 6, 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 the Englewood City Hall, Chairman Douglas presiding. Members present: Tobin, Weber, Welker, Cottle, Dummer, Homer, Douglas Simpson, Ex-officio Members absent: None (Secretary's note: two vacancies) II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES. December 2 , 1997 December 16, 1997 Chair Douglas stated that the Minutes of December 2, 1997 were to be considered for approval. Tobin moved : Homer seconded: The Minutes of December 2, 1997 be approved as written . AYES: NAYS: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: Tobin, Weber, Welker, Cottle, Dummer, Horner, Douglas None None None The motion carried. Chair Douglas stated that the Minutes of December 16, 1997, were to be considered for approval. Tobin moved: Horner seconded: The Minutes of December 16, 1997 be approved as written. AYES: NAYS : ABSTAIN: ABSENT : Weber, Welker, Cottle, Horner, Tobin, Douglas None Dummer None The motion carried . 1 III. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT North Englewood Small Area Plan CASE #CP-98-01 Mr. Douglas stated that the issue before the Commission is a proposed Small Area Plan for North Englewood, and asked for a motion to open the Public Hearing. Welker moved: Horner seconded: The Public Hearing on Case #CP-98-01 be opened. AYES: NAYS: Welker, Cottle, Dummer, Horner , Tobin, Weber, Douglas None ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: None The motion carried. Mr. Douglas set forth parameters for conduct of the Public Hearing, asking that citizens wishing to address the Commission limit their testimony to no more than five minutes , and that repetitive testimony be avoided. Mr. Douglas also asked that the audience be courteous to whomever has the floor . Mr . Douglas asked that staff present the case . Mark Graham, Neighborhood Coordinator with the Department of Neighborhood & Business Development, was sworn in. Mr. Graham stated that he will be presenting the North Englewood Small Area Plan to the Commission. Mr. David Cohen, with whom the City has signed a public/private partnership agreement, will also be speaking. Mr. Graham stated that he anticipated that the Public Hearing on this Plan will need to be continued to January 2om, on which date Civitas, City consultants, will make a presentation to the Commission. Mr. Graham emphasized that the staff is not seeking a vote from the Commission on the proposal this evening. Mr. Graham testified that the North Englewood Small Area Plan (NESAP) is a "focus plan" on one of six neighborhoods identified in the 1979 Comprehensive Plan. Just as the South Broadway Action Plan (SBAP), adopted in 1997, addressed the needs and concerns on South Broadway, the NESAP addresses this particular North Englewood neighborhood, and offers opportunities for development, redevelopment , and revitalization of this area. Mr. Graham testified that the 1979 Comprehensive Plan addressed the need to revitalize housing in this neighborhood, and promote owner-occupancy . Another issue which impacts this particular neighborhood is the General Iron Works site, and the possible uses which could be imposed under the existing heavy industrial zoning. Mr. Graham stated that a moratorium on development of industrially zoned land has been extended by City Council to July 13, 1998 . This moratorium will provide an opportunity to develop the Plan and implement whatever zoning changes are needed . Mr. Graham stated that staff is working to develop zoning that will allow uses with a lower adverse impact on the residential community consistent with the Plan. • • Mr. Graham provided a brief background on comprehensive plans , stating that a • comprehensive plan is a policy document to guide the Planning Commission and City Council on issues of development, investments such as improved infrastructure , budgeting plans, etc. 2 • • • The Comprehensive Plan is a long-term document, whereas a "small area plan" is a shorter-term document, which also contains policies, and is a step in implementing the overall Comprehensive Plan . Mr. Graham addressed efforts at public outreach, noting that NBD staff scheduled four neighborhood meetings -two at Mayflower Congregational Church, and two at Bishop Elementary School. These meetings occurred in August, September, and October. Postcards were mailed setting forth the date, time, and location of these meetings as well as a statement on the intent of the meetings. Staff also designed a door-hanger which was distributed by a Boy Scout Troop prior to the last meeting in October in an effort to generate further neighborhood interest. Staff also scheduled an "open house", which was held on December 16, 1997. Mr. Graham noted that attendance at the meetings has increased since they were begun in August, and noted the good attendance at this Public Hearing. He stated that staff did work with a core group of residents in the North Englewood neighborhood in development of the Plan, but because of the new attendees, much of the previous discussions and efforts must be reviewed and recited for the benefit of the new members of the audience. Mr. Graham testified that proposals made in the early discussions have been modified because further discussion revealed adverse impacts, unworkability, or some other reason necessitating the modification or change. Mr. Graham stated that a goal is to design a Plan that is workable, and does not "sit on a shelf"; it must be capable of being implemented. One proposal cited by Mr. Graham was a "parkway" proposed along the South Fox Street alignment; this has been scaled down because of adverse impacts on abutting properties. Mr. Graham stated that a real opportunity that has been discussed is to consider ways to capitalize on light rail transit. There is an opportunity to attract development that will provide a high employment base and/or a diverse residential base. Such uses will support a light-rail station if RTD commits for a station in this neighborhood . Mr. Graham noted that the Plan has been designed based on the premise that a light-rail station will be approved for the neighborhood; if this does not happen, the Plan will have to be redesigned. Mr. Graham pointed out that the Plan affects this immediate North Englewood area, but also impacts the City as a whole. Mr. Graham stated that the roadway which will be designed to handle the traffic funneling from Denver through the neighborhood to West Dartmouth Avenue will have an impact on the adjoining properties; however, the heavy truck traffic will be directed to one street -South Fox Street, rather than using an assortment of residential streets between Yale and Dartmouth A venues. Mr. Graham stated that staff is working on several large projects, two of which are the redevelopment of the Cinderella City Mall, and the General Iron Works redevelopment area. A public/private partnership between the City of Englewood and Cohen Brothers Development was created; this will provide marketing information and marketing assistance as well as development assistance. The City will provide assistance with environmental assessments and will work with developers to assemble land and develop supporting infrastructure. Mr. Graham noted that land use concepts must be flexible to allow the market to suggest uses, and to assure compatibility with surrounding uses. Mr. Graham asked that, during the course of the Hearing, discussions be directed to the "policies" in the Plan, and not to specific issues. • Mr. Graham testified that the General Iron site is ripe for redevelopment; however, the market may bring in uses that are not compatible to residential development in the area, such as a car crusher, hazardous chemical storage, an RTD maintenance garage, etc. Some of the uses 3 which have been discussed with staff are 24-hour per day uses , generate a high level of noise , soil contamination, and present potential hazards or negative impacts to this neighborhood and to the community as a whole. If the City and neighborhood do nothing to address the potential redevelopment of the GIW site , there is a real possibility of an undesirable heavy industrial use development on the currently vacant site. Mr. Graham reiterated that the emphasis of the Plan is on redevelopment and revitalization of this neighborhood; this does not mean a wholesale clearance of existing development; it does, however , mean addressing issues of improved access ramps at intersections , encouraging development of separated curb and sidewalks with the planting of street trees in the parking strip , and other ways to improve general appearance of the neighborhood. Mr. Graham acknowledged that the neighborhood from South Fox Street west to Santa Fe Drive is considered a primary "redevelopment " area , and that the majority of "revitalization" efforts will be directed to the neighborhood east of South Fox Street. Mr . Graham stated that the 1990 Census reflected a 70% rental rate for the residential neighborhood . Efforts will be directed to encourage a higher percentage of owner-occupancy of new and rehabbed homes . The goals of the Plan are to eliminate the threats and impacts to the neighborhood from heavy industrial uses; to balance the rede velopment and revitalization efforts , to create a "front door " along West Dartmouth Avenue , address improved landscaping , improved lighting , etc. Another goal is to pursue study of a light-rail stop in this location and to increase tax revenues from real estate in this neighborhood . Mr. Graham reiterated that the NESAP is a supplement to the South Broadway Action Plan (SBAP); it is difficult to revitalize South Broadway without .. • addressing the needs and providing improvements to the abutting neighborhoods . This • includes improving housing , providing a market for more residents in the neighborhood . Staff believes that the policies and recommendations in the Plan will help to realize the goals for the neighborhood . Improvement of transportation through the area includes development of pedestrian and bicycle trails and linkage to existing trail systems . It is not the intent to encourage "drive-through " or "cut-through " traffic from Denver through to the redeveloped mall ; rather , the traffic from Yale is to be funneled on South Fox Street to West Dartmouth A venue and will disperse from there . Mr . Graham stated that there has been a lot of discussion regarding the type of traffic -is it heavy truck traffic from industrial areas and/or from Denver; neighborhood traffic. The Plan is designed to explore ways to get the traffic out of the neighborhood without going "through " the neighborhood. Mr. Graham briefly addressed implementation of the NESAP , noting that the Plan will require approval by the City Council as will any changes in zoning designation. Other steps to facilitate implementation could include inclusion of projects in the City budget process, application for grants , and working with the private sector to promote redevelopment in the area . Mr . Graham noted that redevelopment and revitalization is not something that will occur immediately; even if a project is included in the City budget process , it could be several years before it becomes reality . Mr. Graham stated that staff is interested in receiving comments from residents and property owners , citing what is of concern to them about the Plan , but he asked that the Plan not be rejected out-of-hand. Staff and representatives from Civitas will then address the concerns that • have been voiced by the residents to try to resolve those concerns . If there is need for 4 • • • extensive revision of the Plan, he asked that the citizens and Commission provide the feedback to enable the staff and consultant the tools with which to proceed . Mr. Horner asked what is going on north of Yale A venue in Denver . Mr. Graham suggested that Mr. David Cohen would address this. Ms. Tobin requested clarification of the "public/private" partnership . Mr. Graham stated that this is a partnership wherein the government (city) can do and/or provide some facets of a project, and the private sector does other facets. In this particular instance, the public part of the partnership can provide the infrastructure improvements, and the private sector has access to the marketing information and development community . Ms. Tobin asked if Mr. Cohen was a "paid consultant". Mr. Graham stated that Mr. Cohen is not a paid consultant on this project. Ms. Tobin asked who would pay for the transit station; does RTD not pay property tax. Mr. Graham stated that RTD does not pay property tax. Payment for development of the transit station development has not been determined; funding could come partially from the community, or from other funding sources. Ms . Tobin asked if redevelopment and infrastructure improvements would be done concurrently with improvements to the water system . Mr. Graham stated that he did not know . Mr. Douglas noted that reference had been made to the GIW site and use of that site by RTD; he asked for clarification . Mr. Graham stated that RTD had proposed development of a maintenance facility on the GIW site; staff met with RTD representatives and asked that the proposal not be pursued at this time. The maintenance facility would have been a 24-hour facility, and would have had an adverse impact on the neighborhood. They do not employ a great number of people, but the use does require a lot of land to store the cars that are in for repair. The facility would not provide a tax revenue source to the City. If the residents of the neighborhood determine that an RTD maintenance area would be acceptable, RTD would reconsider the site. Ms . Cottle asked, if the transit stop does not come to fruition, and the Commission has to go back to amend the Plan in the next six months or so -what guidance can staff give the Commission on this possibility. Mr. Graham acknowledged that this is truly a chicken/egg type of project -the transit station will attract a certain type of development, and a certain type of development is required to support the transit station -but which should and will come first . He pointed out that this Plan is designed for a three to five year implementation, and that it will be entirely appropriate to readdress the Plan in that period of time if it appears certain facets are not going to occur, and to provide redirection to keep the redevelopment/revitalization moving. Mr . Graham suggested that if the transit station does not happen, it is possible an alternative such as maintaining open space and that east/west streets will end with a "mountain view" could be considered. This would probably also result in a much less dense development. Without a "critical mass" of people, the Broadway benefits are diminished; and fewer jobs would be created. There are amenities that can occur if the transit station is part of the development, but which cannot happen if there is no transit station. 5 Mr. Welker inquired about the traffic coming from the north, across Dartmouth to Floyd A venue; will this direct route be continued south of Cinderella City , and what about the traffic • traveling north -Fox Street disappears in Denver. Will reconstruction of Yale A venue be part of the Plan to be addressed. He asked about the impact additional traffic will have on Dartmouth Avenue. Mr . Graham stated that Dartmouth Avenue changes character when it intersects with Broadway; he suggested that Dartmouth Avenue would be a collector street. The Plan, as presented today , indicates improvements on Dartmouth A venue to Fox Street and resignalization every two blocks between Santa Fe Drive and South Broadway. Mr. Graham stated that Santa Fe will be a major contributor of traffic into the redevelopment area; no plans are developed for improvement of additional east/west routes, such as Bates Avenue or Floyd Avenue . In fact, Bates Avenue is proposed as a "pedestrian route " more than a heavy vehicular route. Mr. Welker asked what happens to the traffic once it gets across Yale A venue to Denver . Mr. Graham reiterated that South Fox will be the primary route to funnel all truck traffic to and from Denver to Dartmouth Avenue ; the Plan is designed to alleviate the residential streets of the heavy truck traffic now experienced. Mr. Graham stated that staff and Civitas consulted with the City Traffic Engineer regarding development of a through truck route , and South Fox Street was the route best suited for these purposes -street grades are better , the stacking distance is sufficient , and there is an elementary school on South Elati Street which would be heavily impacted by truck traffic . Mr. Graham reiterated that initial phases of the Plan proposed a 60 ft. parkway on South Fox ; this proposal was rejected. There will have to be some acquisition of easement rights to facilitate development of detached sidewalks. Mr. Graham discussed proposed "neck-downs " • at several locations to control and discourage through traffic on streets. Mr . Welker asked about the timing on redevelopment of the Mall . Mr. Graham stated that the NESAP does recommend improvement of South Fox in lieu of a projected through street proposed in conjunction with redevelopment of the Mall; staff and Civitas felt that improvement of South Fox Street was preferable to extending a street through Cushing Park to Dartmouth to provide linkage with the mall area. The street through Cushing Park had been proposed early on by the City Public Works Director ; this proposal was rejected because it would be too disruptive. The NESAP proposes that traffic will use South Fox Street southbound from Yale Avenue through to West Floyd Avenue ; use of South Fox Street as a through street is not shown on the existing plans for mall area redevelopment. Mr . Welker asked about more in-depth consideration of the area between West Dartmouth Avenue and West Floyd Avenue . Mr. Graham stated that current plans for the mall area redevelopment indicate that the existing residential development would remain. Mr . Graham commented that use of South Fox Street as the through street creates a "boundary street " to separate diverse types of development. Mr. Douglas asked if the proposed South Fox Street improvements could be done within existing right-of-way . Mr. Graham answered affirmatively , with the exception of the "diagonal " connections. Mr. Graham noted that the "diagonals " locations are not firm . Mr. Dummer asked if Denver is willing to cooperate with Englewood. Can Fox "boulevard " be extended north into Denver -what is in Denver north of Yale A venue . Mr . Graham noted 6 • • • • that the traffic into and out of Denver exists today -the Plan indicates designation of one street to carry that traffic rather than allowing it to impact the entire neighborhood by using all residential streets. Mr. Dummer asked what justification there is to improve and develop South Fox Street to carry the heavy traffic with no evidence of cooperation from Denver. He noted that he formerly worked in this industrial area, and noted there are large semi-trucks coming through this neighborhood; he noted that a lot of them are using South Delaware Street now. Mr . Graham suggested that people living in the area are aware of the semis using the residential streets; the proposed Plan will move that truck traffic west to South Fox Street. Mr. Welker asked if development of South Fox as an improved truck route will increase the heavy vehicle traffic going through the area into Denver. He noted that the majority of the heavy vehicle traffic is coming off of South Santa Fe Drive . Mr. Welker also noted that a light-rail station at West Evans Avenue is proposed. Mr. Graham asked the Commission if they had a proposed solution or alternative on routing the heavy vehicle traffic through this neighborhood. Mr. Welker noted that improvements proposed to South Fox Street will serve the industrial development in Denver very well, but will impact the residential area in Englewood. Mr. David Cohen, Cohen Brothers Development, was sworn in. Mr. Cohen testified that he has been working with City representatives for some time before entering into the public/private partnership agreement in mid to late 1997. He has been considering redevelopment proposals that extend north of West Dartmouth Avenue. Mr. Cohen stated that a primary objective of the small area plan is establishment of policies to govern redevelopment and rejuvenation efforts for this North Englewood neighborhood. Mr. Cohen acknowledged that the GIW operation was a prominent facility in Englewood during the time it was active; however, this site has been basically idle since the mid-1980's, and is now a detriment to the neighborhood. Mr. Cohen noted that, as he sat through the community meetings, he heard a lot about need to improve the area, and the negative impact the idle GIW site ha s had on the neighborhood. The proposed Plan is an effort to move forward proactively, anL -move a negative impact from the neighborhood. Mr. Cohen addressed the public/private partnership agreement, noting that to successfully do something in this area will not be easy -there are very tangible difficulties to any redevelopment; this partnership can provide some assurance of progress on the redevelopment/rejuvenation efforts. Mr. Cohen noted that the South Santa Fe corridor has not, until very recently, been a traffic/business corridor to attract investment moneys for improvement; there are the railroad tracks in close proximity to the area, the sewer plant, the PSC power plant, and Cinderella City. Mr. Cohen reiterated that he is working with the City to try to move improvement of this neighborhood forward in a very optimistic way; it will not be an easy endeavor, and there are a lot of limitations. Mr. Cohen further reiterated that he has been working with the City for approximately 18 months, and that the public/private partnership was entered into only three or four months ago. He stated that he and City officials have worked very compatibly on the proposal, and feels that the efforts have been very productive. Mr. Cohen addressed the issue of transit-oriented development; the possibility of a light-rail station can be part of the redevelopment, and the Plan is, today, focused to transit-oriented development (TOD). Mr. Cohen acknowledged that the light-rail station might not be a reality, and that this must be contemplated . Mr. Cohen discussed the issue of through traffic, noting that there is a great deal of truck traffic, which originates in Denver, that is traveling through the Englewood residential area -therefore, it is Englewood's problem to address. There needs to be some action taken to lessen the impact of this heavy 7 truck traffic, and the improvement of South Fox Street to handle this traffic would clear the residential streets from Broadway to Fox from use by the large trucks. Mr. Cohen stated that there are a number of issues that must be taken into consideration -land use in the Denver area , environmental issues in Denver, and in Englewood -there are a variety of issues that must still be addressed before the Plan can be implemented. ********** Mr . Douglas declared a brief recess of the meeting. The meeting reconvened at 8:25 P.M ., all members of the Commission in attendance . ********** Mr. Douglas referenced sign-in sheets which had circulated through the audience. Kathy Wilks 3038 South Galapago Street -was sworn in. Ms . Wilks stated that she and her husband live in a single-family attached home they purchased approximately two years ago . She stated that she and her husband are Englewood natives, and that she is a veterinarian by profession. This is a nice "starter home " for them , and noted that with the influx of people from other states to Colorado , the housing market has become very limited. Ms . Wilks stated that she and her husband want the "American dream " -to own their own home , begin a family , etc. Ms. Wilks stated that the indecisiveness of the Plan is of concern to her , and believes it limits the home owners should they decide to sell the existing house to move to a larger house. Ms . Wilks stated that she is in favor of seeing the area redeveloped , and believes that Eng ewood presents a lot of opportunities. Ms. Wilks stated that she does not want to see a car crusher or some similar use just up the street from her home. Ms . Wilks stated that she is basically in favor of the Plan, but there are facets which need to be further addressed. Ms . Wilks stated that they did receive the postcard mailings and the door hangers, and have been involved in the discussions since the beginning. Ms. Wilks did advise that more of the community needs to be involved in the proposal , and questioned whether residents were informed of proposed usages for the former GIW site. Ms . Wilks stated that when she and her husband purchased their home, the neighborhood was very quiet. Ms. Wilks reiterated that the Plan, in general, isn 't bad , but that the neighborhood needs to have more involvement. Steve Van Cleave 2884 South Elati Street -was sworn in. Mr. Van Cleave stated that his concern is economic ; he asked what feasibility studies ha ve been done , and what formula will be used to determine compensation to property owners whose properties have to be acquired for the redevelopment. Mr. Van Cleave stated that the Plan indicates that his property will be taken -he owns property on the northeast corner of South Elati Street and West Bates Avenue . Mr . Douglas asked if Mr . Graham could answer this question. Mr . Graham stated that in • • general the guidelines established by the State for property acquisition/compensation would be • followed . Properties would have to be appraised , sales prices ne gotiated , and , if necessary , funds escrowed in court for condemnation proceedings . Compensation is based on fair market value , and two appraisals . 8 • • • Mr. Douglas noted that the proposal is a "Plan '', but is not site-specific at this point . Mr. Graham agreed that what is before the Commission is a "Plan -or a guide ". It may indicate a need for more open space in the general area , but not that a specific site will be devoted to open space , or to a retail development, or an industrial use. Mr. Douglas asked if efforts will be made to retain existing businesses in Englewood. Mr. Graham agreed that staff would hope that existing businesses can be relocated and stay in Englewood -the City needs the small businesses , and there may have to be assistance made available to these businesses who do need to relocate. Marvin Hall 2800 South Elati -was sworn in . Mr. Hall stated that "this is a solution looking for a problem ", and questioned whether the "Plan developed by Civitas and NBD staff isn 't a Plan to justify their own existence ". Mr. Hall discussed the improvement of the "so-called truck route", noting that truck traffic is carried primarily by Bates Avenue over to Galapago Street; if South Fox Street is improved more truck traffic will be encouraged through the neighborhood . Mr. Hall stated that he has never heard of the 1979 Comprehensive Plan , and again questioned who initiated this particular "Plan" -"this wasn 't initiated by the neighborhood " . Mr . Douglas advised that the Commission is asking those citizens in attendance to express their concerns regarding the proposed Plan. He noted that everyone wants to see something good happen on the GIW site, and noted that there has been concern regarding truck traffic using neighborhood streets. He suggested that relocating the truck traffic to South Fox will free other residential streets to the east from the heavy traffic impact. Mr. Hall asked if the reason the truck traffic isn 't put on South Galapago was because of the Winslow ownership , and they were in opposition to through traffic on that street. Mr. Hall stated that he was not notified of any of the meetings regarding the development of the proposed Plan. Mr. Hall stated that he wanted additional information on several issues, such as: who initiated this Plan -he suggested that "somebody with big ambitions is behind it ". He stated that he did "not know what Mr. Graham and Mr. Simpson have done before , but if Trolley Square is an example , [he] wants to see something that will work." Mr . Weber asked Mr. Hall what he would envision for redevelopment. Mr. Hall suggested that if the neighborhood viewed a modern car crusher , they would not object to such a use . Vehicles are hauled out on rail , which is available. Mr. Hall stated that truck traffic uses South Elati , and travels in front of his ownership/business, and thinks that use of Bates to Galapago will be continued by truckers . Mr . Hall suggested that there are alternatives to truck routing unless those property owners will not cooperate . Mr. Hall stated that he wants to receive a copy of the cooperative agreement between Mr . Cohen and the City of Englewood , and suggested that copies of this agreement should be available to anyone in the neighborhood who wants one. Mr. Hall asked what Mr. Cohen 's relation is to the owners of the GIW site . Mr. Hall referenced the proposed light rail station, and stated that he had contacted his RTD Board member who told him he had never heard of such a proposal. He further suggested that there is no provision for a parking area for those who might be using the light rail station -where will they park their personal vehicles . 9 .. Mr. Douglas suggested that the light-rail station would probably serve primarily the residents who live in the immediate area who may want to travel to and from jobs in Denver or south in • Littleton. Or, it may bring employees into the area if the redevelopment includes a job-generator. Mr. Hall again discussed the issue of the truck traffic on South Fox Street, noting there is no tie-in with Denver on South Fox. Mr. Hall suggested that if this Plan is really tied to a transit stop, the issue needs to be resolved with RTD; he suggested that RTD will not be interested in developing transit stops every two blocks. Mr. Hall addressed the issue of "open space" -this will be unproductive and untaxed. Where is the money coming from to finance the infrastructure improvements. Mr. Hall stated that it appeared to him that the "City is jumping into something with both feet when they should keep one foot on dry land." David Peterson 2990 South Galapago -was sworn in. Mr. Peterson stated that he is an owner of property at 2990 South Galapago Street. He asked if the intent of the Plan is really to encourage more traffic on West Dartmouth Avenue . He suggested that the neighborhood would like to see the amount of traffic using West Dartmouth Avenue decrease. Mr. Peterson noted that reference is made to "high density housing", and to the owner-occupied unit versus the renter-occupancy rate ; he suggested that townhouses and condominium units typically become rentals. The townhomes are lower cost housing, and purchasers may live in them for a few years, then move on to something more up-scale . Mr. Peterson expressed concern regarding the "neck-downs" and suggested that this proposal will only create a place for accidents to occur; • will the "neck-downs" slow traffic or merely squeeze it together . Kathryn Graham 3064 South Galapago -was sworn in. Ms. Graham suggested that "whoever thought this up should be shoved off to a retirement home". She stated that she didn't know how or why the old depot was moved into the area, Cinderella City has become a white elephant. Ms. Graham stated that her home is paid for, she has lived there for many years, and she doesn't want to move. She stated that she is "too old to make payments on a house". Cindy Scott 3063 South Fox Street -was sworn in. Ms . Scott addressed the issue of "notification", and stated that despite the attempts to notify persons recited by Mark Graham, the majority of people did not know that discussions on the Plan were going on, or did not know the nature of the discussions. Ms. Scott emphasized that "you cannot say that people were not interested". She referenced the attendance at this meeting in support of her statement that people are interested. Ms . Scott stated that she had done some research in her immediate area on ownership versus rental properties; she also researched Arapahoe County records. Contrary to the 1990 Census, which indicated this area had a 70% rental rate, her research indicates a 60% ownership/occupancy rate. Ms. Scott commented that during the course of redevelopment, properties will be sold, demolished, and the rate of home ownership will decrease while the redevelopment occurs. Ms. Scott stated that if the Plan is adopted, she wants to see more assurance on what will happen -the Plan lacks specificity. Ms. Scott stated that the staff report "addresses those who will remain, but doesn't say what will happen to those who won't stay." As far as the GIW site, she is aware that something will be developed on this property; 10 • • there is no industrial use that will be unobjectionable to someone, but there are industrial uses that are acceptable. Ms. Scott stated that she has seen the Littleton car-crusher, and did not find it objectionable. She suggested that redevelopment of the GIW site and increased traffic would be more objectionable to her. Ms. Scott stated that she , also, would like to see a copy of the City /Cohen agreement. Mr. Weber agreed that there may be some industrial uses that are acceptable ; however , the permitted principal use list in the industrial d istricts is quite lengthy and covers a wide variety of uses . The City cannot pick and choose which industrial use can go on any specific site ; there can be no guarantee that an acceptable industrial use would , in fact, be placed on the GIW site. Ms . Scott stated that there are conditions and regulations that can be imposed on development , and does not accept the premise that the City has no control over what use goes where. Mr. Welker asked if Ms. Scott's concern on traffic is because of problems she experiences at the present time. Ms . Scott pointed out that if this Plan is adopted , her property will be taken for redevelopment; it will not be retained for residential purposes. Mr. Welker asked Ms . Scott if she was categorizing industrial uses that might be acceptable based on the amount of traffic they might generate. Ms. Scott stated that her assumptions are based on that , and the number of people that could be attracted to the area. Ms. Scott stated that it seems the assumption has been made that a nice, clean residential area is good , and an industrial area is bad. She said she would rather see the few trucks that presently go through the area than the • increased traffic that could be generated by redevelopment. • Mr. Dummer noted that if no Plan is developed, the GIW site and the neighborhood in general would remain pretty much as it presently is. Ms . Scott stated that it is her belief that improvement will occur naturally in the neighborhood , albeit at a slower pace . Mr . Dummer pointed out that this Plan, if approved, will serve as a guide for any redevelopment, and that approval of the Plan is not the final step; in fact , the Plan will have to go before City Council for approval , and there will be other implementing steps that will come forward for Hearing before both the Commission and C ity Council. Mr. Dummer noted that without a Plan , a use such as Waste Management could develop the site . Ms. Scott stated that she is not suggesting there is no need for a Plan , but that this proposal does need to be modified. Ms . Scott stated that she has had several telephone conversations with Mr. Mark Graham , and has found him to be very gracious to give his time to discuss the issue and address her concerns. Carol Rigdon 3296 South Fox Street -was sworn in. Ms . Rigdon stated that she is scared; she doesn 't know what will happen on Floyd A venue with the redevelopment of the mall area , and to now have South Fox improved to a "boulevard " could have horrendous impact on the residential area south of Dartmouth Avenue. Ms . Rigdon noted that the traffic volume on Floyd Avenue has lessened since closure of Cinderella City , and she doesn 't want to see more traffic with the redevelopment of the mall area. Ms. Rigdon stated that her car was totaled this summer -she had it parked on her street, and it was hit. She stated that she does not want to have to park in the alley and be fearful getting from the alley into her house. 11 Ms . Tobin asked if there was concern about access to Cushing Park . Ms. Rigdon stated that her child is a teenager, but she does not want the child frequenting Cushing Park because of the transients frequenting that Park, and of the drug dealing that goes on there. Ms. Rigdon • emphasized that her concern is not based on the traffic between her home and the Park, but on the drug dealing. Mr. Welker noted that Ms . Rigdon lives in an area that will be impacted by redevelopment of the mall area as well as redevelopment of the north Englewood area. He asked if Ms. Rigdon is following the proposals for the mall redevelopment, and providing her comments and input to staff regarding that. Ms. Rigdon stated that she has done so, but not consistently. Ms. Rigdon stated that she "won't be happy looking at the backside of Wal-Mart." Carol Tomasso 2998 South Bannock -was sworn in. Ms. Tomasso stated that she understood Mr. Graham has mailed over 900 postcards giving notice of the four community meetings, and got less than a 23 return. Ms. Tomasso stated that she and her husband are members of North Englewood Organization of Neighbors (NEON). Mr. Tomasso attended the first NESAP meeting, and reported that it was a "cumulative" process -information imparted at each meeting was a "build-upon" from previous meeting discussions. Ms. Tomasso stated that there were facets of the initial Plan that were alarming, such as four lanes of traffic on West Dartmouth Avenue. Concerns were expressed, and City staff and the consultants have tried to address those concerns. The information and the Plan has changed during the course of the community meetings. Ms. Tomasso stated that the City staff has been working with NEON and with the entire community. Ms. Tomasso stated that Mr. Graham has been invited to attend a meeting • scheduled for January 12, 1998, 6:30 p.m. at the Mayflower Congregational Church to discuss the proposed Plan; Mr. Graham has agreed to attend. Ms. Tomasso stated that there is a lot of fear and panic in the neighborhood related to displacement and relocation issues. They want more information on this so the neighborhood can make an informed decision on whether to support or oppose the proposed Plan. There are a lot of questions that may or may not be answered during the course of the Public Hearing; they want to have more neighborhood involvement. Mr. Douglas commented that the Public Hearing may be continued to January 2om; this has not been determined at this time. Ms. Tomasso stated that it is in the best interest of the community to get involved. She noted that the Plan does not address retail concerns, nor the impact of retail development on the residents. Ms. Tomasso stated that there are concerns within the neighborhood that existing residents will become "victims", and that there will be a loss of property value. The entire community would be very concerned if this were to occur. Ms. Tomasso suggested that we begin with the GIW redevelopment and development of a light-rail stop; address those issues satisfactorily. Then, proceed to address other redevelopment issues; this should provide the residents and property owners an opportunity to benefit from increased property values if and when they are displaced/relocated. Ms. Tomasso likened Englewood to a "sieve" noting that traffic travels through the City north and south, east and west. Unless this entire neighborhood • were to be "cul-de-sacd" there can be no control over the through traffic . Ms. Tomasso stated that there is concern about the transit stop, and advocated the need for more information to enable the neighborhood to determine whether this will be a positive facet of the Plan. 12 • • • Ms. Tomasso suggested that there should be another point of access from South Santa Fe Drive, and not rely only on West Dartmouth Avenue . Ms. Tomasso stated that she has spoken with Mr. Graham on several occasions, and that "he doesn't have horns and a forked tail , and does really listen to people." Ms . Tobin noted that points of intersection with Santa Fe Drive are governed by the Colorado Department of Highways, not the City of Englewood. Ms . Cottle asked if businesses have been involved in the NEON meetings. Ms. Tomasso stated that NEON has been a grass-root effort of the residents in this neighborhood, but they are trying to get more residents and the business people involved. Bob Ryan Ed Sabin 3036 South Galapago Street -was sworn in. Mr. Ryan stated that he was speaking on behalf of Mr. Sabin , who is developmentally disabled. Mr. Ryan stated Mr. Sabin has purchased his home, and is very proud of his home. Mr. Sabin does not want to move, and a relocation would impact Mr . Sabin quite severely. Mr. Sabin has fears that even if he were to be relocated , could he replicate what he has now . Mr. Ryan reiterated that change and relocation would be very hard for Mr. Sabin. Mr. Sabin's home is right in the middle of the area designated for redevelopment. Mr. Sabin's present location is convenient -he can walk to stores if he needs to, and uses RTD to travel further distances . Mr. Ryan asked why the City would think this redevelopment would be successful if Cinderella City has been unsuccessful. Mr. Ryan stated that Mr. Sabin has indicated that the GIW site is fine as it is ; he just wants to stay in his home. He feels there is the potential that something could happen is a threat to the neighborhood residents, and makes them all uneasy. George Levings 595 West Eastman A venue -was sworn in. Mr. Levings testified that "it seems a little premature for a pie-in-the-sky development" plan to be pitted against something just getting off the ground . Mr. Levings stated that he did not receive any postcard, nor did he get a door hanger notifying him of any of the community meetings. He stated that he purchased his house as an investment , and he has a four-year-old son. Mr. Levings noted that classes from the elementary school walk to the Park and back. Mr . Levings stated that he is used to truck traffic using South Fox and Dartmouth A venue. He suggested that if we want to revitalize the neighborhood, there is need to work with the residents. Mr. Levings also noted that the first step to revitalization is to "clean up Broadway -Broadway is a pig-sty". Once Broadway is improved , the abutting neighborhoods will improve. Mr. Levings noted that when he first moved to Colorado , he lived at Kimberly Woods, and his vehicle was broken into three times. He bought a home to get out of a high density area. Now, the Plan proposes to put high density into this area, which will contribute to an increase in crime rate. Mr. Levings stated that he presently hears buses in the area from 5:30 a.m. to midnight. He noted there are three main arteries serving the area -South Broadway, South Santa Fe Drive, and U .S. 285. Mr. Levings suggested that the redevelopment of the mall will ta x financial resources of the City. He urged that more thought be put into this Plan before the bulldozers are brought into the neighborhoods; wait a few years to determine what impact the redeveloped mall will have on the neighborhood. 13 Dennis Shum 3053 South Galapago Street -was sworn in. Mr. Shum noted that a lot of concerns have been expressed during the course of the Public Hearing . No one has explained what Galapago is • like: he stated that he has trains to the west, and cranes to the south. Mr. Shum stated that he can estimate at least 40 to 50 big trucks per day travel down his street, including wrecking trucks with vehicles in tow. He saw the old Depot be moved in; people have been purchasing homes and moving in; homes and the neighborhood have cleaned up. Mr. Shum stated that he has a three-year-old and a four-year-old, when he puts his kids into the car, he has to place himself in the line of traffic to protect his children. Mr. Shum referenced the discussion about traffic going through the area into Denver; this will not stop with the new Plan. The GIW site will develop -the industrial area in this neighborhood could be a "warehouse dream". Mr. Shum discussed financing street improvements, noting that Denver won't be investing any money in infrastructure improvements until they see revenue coming in. Mr. Shum testified that the imposition of the moratorium on industrial development and threat of possible rezoning has dropped his property value. People who want to sell their property are stymied because of the disclosure requirements; no one will want to purchase residential property if there is a possibility they will be moved out and lose money. Mr. Shum noted that developers buy the property up and then pocket money once the development has occurred. He suggested that the developers will provide the money and the City will do the condemnation work . Mr. Shum stated that he is required to live within 15 to 20 minutes from his job -he stated that he works for the City Utilities Department -and he will feel really bad if the City kicks him out of his home. Englewood is composed of working class people; he stated that he purchased his home for $69,000 and has put a lot of money into improvements. But why make more improvements -why even paint a house -if it is scheduled to be bulldozed within one or two years. Mr. • Shum stated that the police officers won 't come out to the neighborhood to take a report when something does happen. Mr. Shum suggested that the neighborhood isn't "dilapidated -it's only the way the City views it". Mr. Shum stated that he and other residents would like to see their property values increased, and suggested that the City come up with a plan to assist the existing residents and businesses in fixing up their properties -a no or low-interest loan program available for fixing up their property. Mr. Shum urged that more options be explored and investigated. Mr. Shum recalled the December 16m open house at which time he said he was told that the "pictures weren't important; the words are what was to be approved". He noted that many people feel they have been "rolled over by government", and that "big money motivates them". Mr. Shum noted that redevelopment of the GIW site doesn't mean a car-crusher will go in. He urged that staff talk to people -the residents are scared. Mr. Shum reiterated that rezoning will devalue property. Lynette Lansdon 3034 South Galapago -was sworn in. She testified she purchased her home 2.5 years ago; this is her first home, and she is a single mother. She stated that it's great for Englewood to be redeveloped, and that the neighborhood needs a "pick-me-upper". There is a lot of traffic in the neighborhood, and she takes her child to school and to the Park. Ms . Lansdon stated that if this Plan is pursued, staff really needs to sit down and talk to the people. Sue Hall 455 Sherman Street -stated that she was speaking as a representative of the GIW property owner. Ms. Hall stated that GIW ownership has never been notified of any of the meetings over the last several months, either by postcard, by doorhanger, or by telephone. Ms. Hall 14 • • • • stated that there is no relationship between David Cohen and the GIW owners . Ms . Hall stated that there has been a lot of "innuendo " regarding proposed uses for the GIW site . Ms. Hall testified that there has never been consideration of a hazardous chemical storage , or car crushing operation; there was one use which was an auto parts reuse operation that was considered . Ms. Hall suggested that there are ways to put two unlike uses next to each other and to mitigate the impacts of those uses. Ms . Hall stated that the GIW ownership will not put any obnox ious use on the site which will impact the City and the residential neighborhood. Ms. Hall stated that this is an old historical building and use ; businesses from years ago had no concerns about environmental issues and land contamination . Ms. Hall stated that she cannot envision any really heavy industrial uses wanting to use the GIW site ; she did point out, however , th at there are very few sites in the metro area zoned for heavy industrial use that have rail access , which the GIW site has. Ms . Hall stated that the GIW site, as it is today , is not dangerous, but does have a lot of serious environmental issues that need to be addressed. There is an on-going fact-finding assessment going on at this time . Ms. Hall stated that any kind of zoning or overlay district at this time will be very premature; nothing can be done until the environmental problems have been identified and remediated . Ms. Hall reviewed some of her professional history, noting that she had worked with the Denver Urban Renewal Authority over 20 years ago , and discussed the approach used at that time by clearing sites and noted that it has taken 22 years to rebuild the downtown area . Ms . Hall stated that a community is composed of people -not plans. She stated that the GIW ownership pledges to work with the City and the community in any redevelopment of the site , but cautioned that she did not foresee redevelopment of this site happening in the short-term . Steve Deyo 3053 South Fox -was sworn in. Mr. Deyo suggested that it will be a shame to displace residents; he has lived in his home for 18 months. Mr. Deyo stated that he has seen homes being improved. Mr . Deyo testified that it will be difficult for anyone to sell their property because of the chaos created by the proposed Plan. This has created a lot of problems for residents -people have had to put their lives on hold for some time since the moratorium went into effect and now extended . Mr . Deyo stated that 70 to 80 year old homes shouldn't be demolished . The Plan is powerful, but doesn 't really give anything back to the property owners or to the City of Englewood. The Plan needs to give more to the neighborhood and to the City . He stated that it is a shame to see an older neighborhood "shoved under the rug ." Brian Gay 3049 South Fox -was sworn in. Mr. Gay stated that there has been a lot of good input given during the course of the Hearing. He urged that the Commission and City make a decision on the Plan because it is unfair to the neighborhood to wait around while the Plan is refined. Mr. Gay stated that he has put a lot of work into his property , but with the uncertainty fostered by the proposed Plan , he doesn 't really want to even take his trash out. Diane Schimansky 2957 South Fox Street -was sworn in ; she stated that she is the third generation to live in her home , and the house is paid for. She is employed by "Meals on Wheels", a low-paying job , and she could not qualify for a new loan were she to have to purchase another home . Ms. Schimansky stressed that this is really a "family home". She urged that the Commission not forget the people; many of them have lived in this area for a long time, and don't want to have to leave. 15 Terry Shaw was sworn in, and testified that he did not sign in to speak. Mr. Shaw cited new development in a block south of U.S. 285 which was formerly developed with greenhouses; • this block has been developed with new-single-family homes. He suggested that the same procedure could be done in this neighborhood. Englewood schools are going down hill; in Englewood there are typically one and two bedroom homes. We need to construct three and four bedroom homes and encourage young families to locate here; this would improve the neighborhood. Bill Schimansky 2957 South Fox Street -was sworn in. Mr. Schimansky addressed the GIW site, noting that he had been employed at General Iron for many years. Many people's livelihood depended on General Iron. He doesn't like hearing it being called a "piece of junk". Dean Buffington 590 West Bates -was sworn in. Mr. Buffington noted that it appears a road will be going through the center of his building . He stated that he received no notification of any meetings, and the only way he was aware of this meeting was by "happenstance". He asked by what means will property owners be compensated for the loss of their property and/or business. Will this compensation be through the public/private cooperation. He is also interested in the zoning process even though it appears that his property will be taken. Mr. Buffington reiterated his desire to know more about the reimbursement proposals. Mr. Buffington asked about future notification processes; he wants to be aware of what is taking place in regard to this Plan. Mr. Douglas noted that once the public hearing process at the Planning Commission level is completed, the proposal will be referred to City Council which body is also required to hold a Public Hearing . Notice of Public Hearing will be published in the Englewood Herald; he advised Mr. Buffington that he may also call the Neighborhood & Business Development Office at any time to find out what is occurring . Ms. Tobin advised that Mr. Buffington can also call his City Council representative. Mr . Simpson advised that it is more appropriate to discuss the proposed Plan with representatives of the Planning Commission and NBD staff at this time until the Plan is referred to City Council. Mr. Simpson suggested the need to continue to take testimony at the Planning Commission level, provide staff an opportunity to refine the Plan to try to address concerns that have been expressed, and not involve the City Council until it is time for the Public Hearing before that body. He strongly urged that citizens with questions call the NBD office. Mr. Welker emphasized that the public hearing before the Planning Commission is not the end of the process, but only the beginning . There is a lot of business yet to be addressed before this Plan becomes reality. Mr. Buffington asked that his name be added to the notification list. Mr. Horner stated that the Planning Commission is a citizens board appointed by City Council; he asked that any member of the audience interested in serving on such a board make 16 • • application for appointment. Mr. Horner stated that the Planning Commission is an advisory board to the City Council, and that all members of the Commission are required to be residents • of the City of Englewood. • • Marti Kucharski 511 West Dartmouth Avenue -was sworn. Ms. Kucharski stated that she has also spoken with Mr. Graham, and is very confused. The proposed Plan isn't "definite" -it's a maybe, a possibility, etc. and she doesn't like this. Ms. Kucharski stated that her home was built in the 1890's; they have put over $100,000 into improvement of the property, and resents the implication that it is of no value. Ms . Kucharski stated that there is no need for an "arch" .or a front door to Englewood. She asked "when will you listen to the people of Englewood". The residents of this neighborhood love Englewood and that is why they choose to live here. She noted that her mother is 102 years of age, and still lives in Englewood in a nursing home . Ms . Kucharski stated that she and her husband distributed flyers advising of this hearing over the weekend, and they heard "horror stories" -people are wondering why we needed arches. Ms. Kucharski stated that Mark Graham said we needed the arch, and that people don't want to drive by old, broken-down homes. Ms. Kucharski stated that nobody she or her husband spoke to received mailings or flyers regarding previous meetings. Ms. Kucharski stated that traffic has increased over 2003, and there is an elementary school in the neighborhood. She stated that she counted and clocked vehicles for one minute: there were five semi trucks, three dump trucks, a [Budweiser] truck and 55 cars which went by her home in that one minute time. Where are all these vehicles going. Ms. Kucharski stated that the small homes are good starter homes -what will happen to them -will they be scraped off. She urged that the proposed Plan be "scrapped"; no one in this area had anything to say about development of this Plan. She stated that she is not part of the NEON group . If people received a flyer , "they thought it was an invitation to a donut party". Ms. Kucharski stated that she had also opposed construction of Cinderella City, and of Trolley Square; both of the projects have "failed", and we don't need another project to blow up in our face. Rhonda Mennard 2727 South Delaware -was sworn in. She stated that she is a single parent, has lived at this location for eight years. She is trying to buy her home . She doesn't want her child to grow up in a high-density neighborhood, and wants to keep her daughter in the Englewood school system. She suggested that a better Plan can be developed. She noted that Dartmouth Avenue cannot be crossed unless at a signalized intersection. If the present Plan is implemented, how will kids get to the elementary school. She urged that the residential area be left alone. She stated that she lives in very close proximity to the GIW site, and doesn't want to see things changed. Joe Steinback 3080 South Fox -was sworn in. Stated he bought his property two years ago, which was a shambles, but he saw potential in the property. He stated that he has been putting a lot of money into the property --structural improvements, as well as new landscaping. If the Plan is approved and implemented, and South Fox Street becomes a major truck route, he will have done a lot of work for nothing. He stated that he has a three-year-old son who would be attending Bishop Elementary School when he reaches school-age . He urged the Commission to think about the kids -improve the residential areas around the schools . Bringing in more trucks and traffic isn't the right thing to do. He stated that he did work for Kimberly Woods, 17 an apartment development in east Englewood; he agreed with a previous speaker regarding the high crime incidence, and noted that in high density neighborhoods no one knows who lives where . He feels that the North Englewood area can improve by itself without someone [a • developer] coming in because of financial benefit. Mr. Steinback urged that the Plan concentrate on improvement of and creation of more residential development; he questioned that retail development would be of benefit to the neighborhood. He suggested that possibly some small office buildings would be acceptable -some type of development that will not attract large trucks. Mr. Douglas asked if anyone else wished to speak. No one else indicated they wanted to speak . He thanked all members of the audience for their attendance. Mr. Douglas called for a vote to continue the Public Hearing. Welker moved: Horner seconded: The Public Hearing on Case #CP-98-01 be continued to January 20, 1998 at the hour of 7 :00 P .M . AYES : NAYS: Cottle, Dummer, Horner, Tobin, Weber, Welker, Douglas None ABSTAIN: None ABSENT : None The motion carried. IV. DIRECTOR'S CHOICE Mr. Simpson stated that he had nothing to bring before the Commission. V. ATTORNEY'S CHOICE There was no member of the City Attorney's staff present. VI. COMMISSIONER'S CHOICE Mr. Douglas asked if a study session will be held to work on the NESAP. Mr. Simpson stated that Mr. Graham will be attending the NEON meeting on January 12th. The Public Hearing has been continued to January 20th; he anticipated that some additional testimony will be taken at that meeting, and that the Commission may want to conduct a study session at the conclusion of the Hearing to consider a revision strategy to the Plan. There being no further business to come before the Commission, the meeting was declared adjourned at 10:40 p.m. 18 • •