Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1964-06-03 PZC MINUTESI I I MEMORANDUM TO THE ENGLEWOOD CITY COUNCIL REGARDING ACTION OR RECOMMENDATION OF THE CITY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION. DATE: May 20, 1964 SUBJECT: Approval of Zone Change Request--2900 and 3000 blocks of South Downing, West Side. Page 773 RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Commission recommend to City Council the rezoning of the 2900 and 3000 blocks South Downing, west side, be approved for the following reasons: (1) The land is adjacent to R-1-C zoned land; (2) The area was previously zoned comparably under the 1955 Zoning Ordinance, and (3) The proposed zone classification would permit compatable and reasonable development of the only vacant land in the area in accordance with its re-subdivision approved by the City in 1959. Respectfully submitted, By Order of the City Planning , and Zoning Commission. Gertrude G. Welty Recording Secretary MEMORANDUM TO THE ENGLEWOOD CITY COUNCIL REGARDING ACTION OR RECOMMENDATION OF THE CITY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION. DATE: May 20, 1964 SUBJECT: Approval of Subdivision Plat RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Commission recommend to City Council the Englewood Industrial Park Subdivision be favorably considered and that the proper bonding require- ments of the Subdivision Regulations be met. Respectfully submitted, By Order of the City Planning and Zoning Commission. Gertrude G. Welty Recording Secretary * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * CITY OF ENGLEWOOD PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION June 3, 1964 Regular Meeting I. CALL TO ORDER. The regular meeting of the City Planning and Zoning Commission was called to order at 8:10 p.m. by Chairman Carlson. Members present: Touchton, Starklo ff, Rice, Parkinson, Fullerton, Carlson Romans, Ex-officio Members absent: None Also present: City Attorney Esch II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES. Fullerton moved: Starkloff seconded: The Minutes of May 20, 1964 be approved as presented. The motion carried unanimously. Page 774 III. NEW ENGLEWOOD CONTRACT CASE #B9-64C Mrs. Romans stated the first Contract of the New Englewood Company relative to the develop- ment of West Floyd Avenue north of the proposed shopping complex was submitted on May 6th for consideration by the Planning Commission. Considerable objection was raised by some of the property owners adjacent to West Floyd Avenue on the north as a result of this initial proposal, and a revised Contract was submitted on May 29th at a work session of the Commission. It was pointed out that the purpose of the Contract is to assure to the City and the property owners that a "buffer" will be provided between the proposed shopping complex and the resi- dential area to the north. The revised plan was displayed for the Commission and audience. An access road of 17-1/2 foot roadway width is proposed to be one-way westbound on the south of the residential area. The proposed planting strip to the north of the New Englewood development is to be 35 feet wide. Mrs. Romans reported the revised proposal ha d been submitted to the Fire and Engineering De- partments for comment. Chief Woods has indicated approval of the plan in his reply; however, City Engineer Davies suggested a minirrum street width of 22 to 25 feet rather than the propo sed 17-1/2 foot width. Mr. Spargur of the New Englewood Company stated the street width possibly could be 20 feet, and that the company would be willing to add the additional 2-1 /2 feet, if it was felt necessary. Mr. Parkinson asked if the street were widened, would the buildings be pushed southward correspondingly? Mr. Spargur stated he could not commit the Company, but pointed out that a ratio of parking has to be maintained for the tenants. The parking ratio has been adjusted once when the revised Contract was presented, and while the New Englewood Company will do their best to cooperate, they do not want to jeopardize the center. Mr. Evers 3250 S. Delaware -Asked how the trash trucks could maneuver the turns from the narrow street into the alleys, or if residents were to store the trash in their front yard. He suggested leaving the street just as it now exists, and narrowing the planting strip. Mr. Spargur stated the New Englewood Company was providing the planting strip on the under- standing the residents wanted it. If such was not so, the Company would be spared considerable expense. Mr. H. C. Jones 3285 South Delaware -stated he understood that Mr. Von Frellick had insisted on the planting strip as a buffer to the north. Mrs. Weishaupl 3290 S. Delaware asked why the street had to be changed at all, and pointed out the screening at the cul-de-sacs was very ineffective. Mr. Rice stated the street was proposed to be narrowed and one-way to serve primarily as an access way for the residents and to attempt to eliminate the possible heavy traffic passing by these homes on the way to the expanded commercial area. Mr. Weishaupl 3290 S. Delaware Mr. Shroyer stated he felt that all areas changed to the point where rezoning was needed eventually. He felt the screening strip would only delay such a change in his area. Mr. Weishaupl also suggested the street be left two- way and the planting strip be cut down. 3216 S. Fox -stated he felt the traffic on Fox Streetvould be increased at least 50% with the one-way street pattern. He also felt Fox would be a back-door delivery street for trucks going to the center. Mr. Spargur stated truck entrances would be from Santa Fe and Girard to the center. Mr. Shroyer stated the truck traffic on Fox Street had increa s ed 100% since he purchased his property, even though the street has been posted. He stated they needed to be given a speed limit sign, and needed to have it and the load limit sign which is posted enforced, as it was not being enforced now. Mr. Fullerton suggested this matter could be investigated thru the City Manager, as it did appear to be a matter of enforcement. Touchton mo ved: Rice seconded: The Planning Commission table consideration of the New Englewood Contract for further study and discussion. The motion carried unanimously. Mr. Carlson stated a petition signed by some residents along Floyd approving the alternate New Englewood Contract had been presented to the Planning Office. Those persons who signed the petition were: R. D. Kelley, Leneata F. Kelley, Mary S. Franzmann, Joel B. Huston, Dorothy C. Huston, Eddie D. Higginson, Elizabeth Higginson, George D. Tyler, Paul A. Franzmann, Sherry Buckholz, Dean Konz, and Jean Konz. Brief discussion followed. Fullerton moved: Parkingon seconded: The Planning Commission receive the petition signed by residents on Floyd giving acceptance of the alternate Contract submitted by the New Englewood Company. The motion carried unanimously. - ------ - - ----- - - - - - - I I I I I I Page 775 IV, BATES-EMERSON DRAINAGEWAY CASE #13-64 The Planning Director gave Commission members a vicinity sketch of the area. This is a . part of the Clark Subdivision, filed in 1956, It was agreed at that time that the subject site not be platted, nor developed, as it is in a very serious drainage-way, Minutes of November 3, 1955, February 2, 1956, February 16, 1956, and March 1 , 1956 , at which time this subject was discussed, were cited. Mrs. Romans asked Mr. Esch for verification of this case, or further explanation if necessary. Mr. Esch agreed that Mr. Clark had agreed the drainage-way would not be developed, nor did he, Mr. Esch, personally feel the land should be improved. Mr. J. E. Hagerty, representing Mr. & Mrs. McMurtry, 2890 South Clarkson, adjacent to the subject area on the north, reviewed the conditions of the area, particularly during flooding seasons. Mr. Hagerty stated the McMurtry's intend to resist any further construction in the area. Mr. Sigler, a realtor with Strout Realty, stated they were attempting to work out a trade with residents of the eastern part of the state who wish to trase their farm for property in town. It was not intended to do anything to worsen the condition that presently exists; rather he felt that it could be improved by cleaning the ditch and developing what is now a vacant lot. Discussion ensued. Rice moved: Parkinson seconded: The matter be tabled and taken under advisement for further considera- tion at a later time. The motion carried unanimously, Mr. Fullerton asked that a definite plan in greater detail be submitted by Mr. Sigler for study and consideration of the Commission. V. RAY SHELTON SUBDIVISION CASE #12-64 Topeka Court and West Lehigh Avenue Mr. Shelton pres~ted additional plats of the proposed subdivision. He stated the owners have attempted to sell this property as one parcel; however, no interested purchaser cared to buy the entire parcel. He indicated it would be developed for small warehousing and storage operations. Mrs. Romans discussed parking problems in the area. Mr. Fullerton asked Mr. Shelton if possibly one lot could be used strictly for off-street employee parking? Mr. Shelton replied he felt the area would be used primarily for storage and was not sure about the use for a parking lot. Rice moved: Fullerton seconded: The Planning Commission receive the Preliminary Plat, refer it to the City Departments and Utility Companies for their consideration and for further discussion of the staff and Commission. The motion carried unanimously. A recess of the Commission was called at 9:50 p.m. The Commission was called to order at 10:05 p.m. VI, NEW ENGLEWOOD COMPANY REZONING CASE #9-64C R-1-C to B-1 Fullerton moved: Rice seconded: The subject of New Englewood Rezoning be removed from the table. The motion carried unanimously, Mrs. Romans asked if there were any explanations desired on the staff findings submitted previously to the Commission. It was pointed out that the evidence and testimony given at the Public Hearing was reviewed and an attempt was made .to cover these points. Discussion ensued. Mr. Rice offered the following motion: Mr. Chairman, I move that the Planning Commission recommend f a vorably to the City Council the rezoning of the following described property from the present zoning of R-1-C to a zoning of B-1 for the following reasons: (1) The citizens have voted in a special election held on April 7, 1964 to sell the city park lands to permit the commercial development of that area; (2) A Public Hearing was held by the Planning Commission on May 20, 1964 on the matter of this rezoning; (3) The Commission has studied the problem extensively, taking into consideration the wishes of the people who voted in the April 7th election, the testimony given at the Public Hearing, and the information provided by previous professional studies; (4) The Commission has also considered the recommendations and findings of the Planning Staff. The findings presented to the Commission by the staff are comprehensive and include the many reasons considered by the Commission in making their determination on this zoning matter. The staff's report of findings as presented to the Planning Commission is hereby made a part of this recommendation to Council for their consideration; Page 776 (5) (6) (7) The proximity to the existing central business district will supplement this specific commercial area; .The existing use as a City Park is not the most desirable land use for this area since access to the area from all directions but the north present dangerous barriers for traffic of children and adults to a recreation facility; The two largest arterial highways in and adjacent to Englewood would provide traffic generators desirable to the development of retailing, service and office areas. Staff findings are as follows: "NEW ENGLEWOOD REZONING CASE #9-64 I would like to review some of the background material relating to the proposed rezoning and development, and to review some of the points brought forth at the Public Hearing on May 20, 1964. It would seem that there are several factors that should be taken into consideration atthis time; for example, the economic feasibility of the proposal, the existing land use of the subject area, the land use of adjacent areas, and the effect the proposed change of zone classification and ultimate development might have on those adjacent properties, the effect on the present businesses in downtown Englewood, the traffic flow, the utilities, etc. I would also like to point out some of the benefits which the staff believes could be realized by the overall community. Since the Commission has considered and discussed this matter in detail on several previous occasions, I will only rather briefly outline the staff's findings in this report. The Larry Smith Study is available if you would like to go into it in more detail and the other material can be amplified. I. DEVELOPMENT OF THE ENGLEWOOD CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT. A. Economic Studies In the fall of 1960, the Englewood Chamber of Commerce retained the firm of Larry Smith & Company, Seattle, Washington, for the purpose of making a comprehensive department store study of metropolitan Denver, with particular emphasis on the southern portion of the urbanized area which might be tributary to new department store facilities in the City of Englewood, and a detailed stody of the commercial opportunities which were and would become available to the business community of Englewood. On October 12, 1960, Larry Smith & Company presented a "Preliminary Memorandum" concerning the retail commercial development potential of Englewood. Although this memorandum was largely devoted to assessing the economic impact of the proposed KLZ site development upon the Englewood central business district, in the opinion of the staff, its analysis has a good deal of application to a retail development of similar size and scope in the New Englewood location, which is closer to the central business district. The basic conclusion of the Preliminary Memorandum was that while the data then existing did not indicate a compelling market demand for major department stores in Englewood at that time, there was sufficient evidence to justify an entry by such businesses and the projected data indicated a favorable growth factor and would probably necessitate such a development in the future. Furthermore, "it must be recognized that the development of 'Cinderella City' or some other major comparison goods retail complex will be proposed and successfully promoted in southern Denver at some time in the future." P. 21. The Preliminary Memorandum also stated that if an entry were to be made, "such a store or stores would probably need to be introduced in a fairly sizable plant, individually or col- lectively, and would need to be attractively planned and designed with parking and satellite shops in order to effectively compete with University Hills and the more distant Cherry Creek shopping areas." P. 18. With regard to location of such a development, the Preliminary Memorandum concludes that if possible, the city should "arrange for the alternative develop- ment of the City Park site in lieu of the KLZ site as the location of a shopping center complex." P. 20. This course of action "appears to offer the most beneficial solution from the point of view of all persons concerned at the present time ....• [It] would be beneficial to the downtown merchants because the site would have ready availability to Broadway and the CBD, the established arterial and shopping districts of this area. The short distance between this site and the existing CBD (four short blocks) would offer the opportunity for eventually integrating these two areas by the redevelopment of the intervening areas as a major commercial complex over the long run." P. 21. In summary, the report of Larry Smith and Company indicates that: a. major department stores will locate somewhere in the southern Denver/Englewood area; b. these types of stores probably must locate as part of a major retail shopping complex ; and c. from Englewood's standpoint the best location for such a complex is on the existing park land and the privately-owned land to the west of the park. No significant steps were takeri to carry out the suggestions of Larry Smith and Company until the spring of 1963. At that time, City Council created a Downtown Improvement District which was rather limited in its scope and was finally repealed by the Council on July 15, 1963. At the same meeting, at the suggestion of the Chamber of Commerce, Council took action to ratify the appointment of the Citizens' Action Committee. You will recall that a traffic consultant, Mr. James Small , Small-Cooley and Associates, was hired by the Council to work with the Action Committee members, and after many meetings of the Committee at which numerous plans were studied, the Action Committee on October 9, 1963, announced its plans to request Mr. Von Frellick to construct the proposed retail complex on the land now under consideration. In January of this year, Council took the initial steps of approving a proposed contract for sale of the existing park land to New Englewood Company, which is owned by Mr. Von Frellick. The sale of the park land was made subject to ratification by the voters of the city at an election held April 7, 1964. The contract was approved by 64% of the votes cast. In addition to arranging for the purchase of the City Park land, Mr. Von Frellick has obtained options to purchase substantially all of the privately owned property between the park and the railroad right-of-way. It is my understanding that substantial sums were paid on or before May 15, 1964 to extend these option rights until November 15, 1964. I I I I I I Page 777 II. LAND USE FACTORS. ---- A. The Property Sought to be Re4oned. The subject property is currently zoned R-1-C; however, no residence use is located on it. The present uses are the City Hall, the Park, a small golf course and a golf driving range. The City Hall is a permitted use in this District; the golf course and the Park are con- ditional uses under the 1963 Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance. The proposed development of this large tract of land as a major regional retail center, which will be a logical extension of the existing central business district, will, we believe, have highly beneficial long- term effects upon the city as a whole. (1) Land Use Planning. Although the land is now used principally for recreational purposes, such use does pose problems. First, it is not located in a major residential area, and second, because it is not readily and safely accessible for pedestrian and bicycle traffic. The CBD lies to the east, Santa Fe Drive and the railroad tracks to the west, and Hampden Avenue to the south. All of these tend to be barriers which make it difficult for children walking or on bicycles to reach the area. The only nearby residential area of any size lies to the north. In the opinion of the staff, it is much better that recreation facilities be located in the various residential neighborhoods and that the recreation facilities not be separated from these neighborhoods by such formidible and dangerous barriers. Because this land is located immediately adjoining the present CBD and because it is very near the intersection of Santa Fe and Hampden, the two largest traffic arterials in Englewood, the staff believes the use of this land for a major retailing, service and office area is logical and desirable. (2) Effect on Nearby Areas. In the opinion of the staff, the development of this land, whether as a retail center or for any other purpose, is not likely to have any substantial impact upon the lands to the south and west because of the very wide barriers which separate the tracts from these other lands. Santa Fe and Hampden form natural boundaries which separate one use from another. There are some housing areas located to the east, between the site and the present CBD. These presently constitute a spot of isolated residential zoning, hemmed in by the CBD on one side, Hampden on another, and an industrial plant on a third. It would seem that the ultimate destiny of these lands could be for development as part of the CBD, whether or not the New Englewood project is constructed. The project could have the effect of greatly increasing property values in this area, and this could result in termination of residential uses there within a few years. This, we believe, is a desirable development and one which should be encouraged, since residential neighborhoods should be homogeneous and not mixed up with industrial and commercial uses as this one is now. The lands to the north of the site are, as you know, used for residential purposes, and appropriate steps must be taken to preserve the character of this good residential neigh- borhood. This, we believe, can be done through the creation of a buffer between the site and the lands lying to the north of Floyd. The staff believes that the best method of accomplishing this would be through the creation of a parkway-type planting strip which will serve as a "screen" on the north side of the shopping complex. This has, as you know, already been pro- posed by the developer at the May 6th meeting of the Planning Commission and an alternate plan was filed by the New Englewood Company on May 29th for consideration of the Planning Commission. The proposed development as it relates to Floyd Avenue has been of much concern to the staff and the property owners adjacent to Floyd on the north. I would suggest that we continue to work with our traffic consultant and the developer and adjacent property owners in order that we can work out a feasible plan that will be reasonable and yet as satisfactory as possible to the majority of those concerned. (I am reasonably sure that we cannot please everyone with any given plan.) It was suggested at the Public Hearing that we might zone an area on the north of the site B-3. There has been consideration given to the possibility of zoning a certain portion of the subject site to a zone district other than B-1, i.e., R-4, Residential-Pro- fessional, or B-3, Shopping Center. Both of these zone districts have requirements for screening. However, to comply with the intent of our Rules and Procedure Manual, the zone district should be the depth of an average city block. This could then permit uses at a later date that could be incompatible with the residences to the north. Also, the require- ments for screening in those Districts are less than the New Englewood Company has proposed in the alternate plan submitted on May 29th. We therefore feel that the "strip" zone would not protect the area to the north as well as the proposed planting area. To conclude: We do not believe that the development of the project at this site in the manner now proposed will have any materially adverse effect upon the a d jacent and nearby lands. In fact, it would be difficult to find another site which could be developed with so little adverse effect upon its stirroundings. On the other hand, we think that development of the project should have highly beneficial effects upon a most important part of the city, the CBD. In our opinion, a city of Englewood's size should have a single, compact, prosperous, well-maintained downtown area containing most or all of the major office, service and shopping units. Such a CBD must, of course, be supplemented by convenient shopping in and near the outlying residential areas. In the downtown area we now have many older buildings which are badly in need of replacement or remodeling. This is difficult to accomplish because it is hard to make satisfactory assemblage of land there, and many merchants and property owners are understandably reluctant to make a large investment in view of the traffic and parking situation, which is becoming increasingly congested. If present trends continue, we anticipate that there would be a flight of business from the CBD to peripherally located shopping areas, and this could well leave a condition of blight in its wake. Even if there should be no deterioration of the CBD as a result of such a movement, fragmentation of retail and office areas in a city the size of Englewood is highly undesirable. Page 778 We believe that development of the proposed site in the manner now projected will help to stimulate business in the downtown area because it will bring into the central business district perhaps 25,000 or 30,000 people per day who are not presently using that ~rea. T~is should have a beneficial effect upon the retail stores now located along Broadway if the city plans for appropriate linkage so that the project becomes part of the CBD and not an isolated island by itself. We would expect that property owners and tenants in the present CBD will maintain a high standard of maintenance and modernization of the structures now there, and ~ntinue to upgrade their business practices in order that they will be able to attract their share of this new business. I t i s g oin g to be essential, however, that certain steps be taken immediately if we are to attract and retain these potential customers to the Broadway area rather than distract their attention from the shops and stores by confro n t ing them with a maze traffic confusion and a lack of easily accessible off-street p~rking. We recommend that a program be implemented as soon as possible that will provide for the acquisition of land for off-street parking, an improved traffic circulatory pattern which should include a modernized traffic signal system, and steps must be taken to improve access to the total business area. (3) Parking. It would appear that adequate off-street parking spaces will be provided for the development (up to 4,000 c a r s ) which will be available for anyone using the downtown area--not merely for customers of the stores in the project. (4) Traffic Flow. The proposed construction of upwards of 750,000 square feet of bui l ding space, which will be visited by perhaps 25,000 people per day, is bound to effect the existing street network. Fortunately the parcel adjoins both Santa Fe Drive and Hampden, which have the largest carrying capacities of any streets in the Englewood area, so it is ideally located from that point of view. It is obvious a rapid and convenient method of getting cars from these two arteries into the center without blocking traffic will have to be provided, and the developer has expressed a willingness to cooperate in this. Of course an interchang e at Broadway and Hampden and better access to the CBD in the area of Dartmouth and Santa Fe and Floyd and Broadway have long been a desirable . part of the city's traffic planning and the need for these items is only accelerated by the current project. (5) Parks . Construction of the project will replace the city's only major park. For the reasons described above, we do not think the present location has been without problems. It will be necessary to replace these facilities with at least equal facilities in better locations. With funds obtained from the developer for the sale of the park land, the City expects to obtain much better situated park lands , distributed throughout the City, and to provide much needed park development in these areas. In the staff's opinion, this development will be a long forward step in the creation of an adequate park and recreational system for the City. (6) Schools . The project will, of course, be exceedingly beneficial to the Englewood School District because it will produce a large amount of additional tax revenues. (7) Financial . The most immediate financial effect of the center will be to provide $1,000,000 for purchas e and construction of badly needed park improvements. While we recognize that additional City services will need to be provided, it is anticipated that the project will produce considerable additional tax revenue which will exceed any increase in the City's expenditures. We realize that the KLZ site is presently zoned commercially and on the surface, it might appear that adding the property under consideration to the amount of property presently available for commercial purposes would result in an excessive amount of commercially zoned property. However , legal problems resulting from the litigation surrounding the KLZ site zoning renders the use or rezoning of the site impossible at this time. Also, our Land Use Study shows that a substantial portion of the property presently zoned for commercial uses is actually used for residential purposes, and hence the amount of property currently available for and devo t ed to commerce is considerably less than the total acreage zoned commercially." Property to be rezoned is as follows: A tract of land lying in Sections 33 and 34, T. 4 S., R. 68 W., 6th P. M., Arapahoe County, Colorado, described as follows: Beginning at the point at which the center line of Bannock Street intersects with the north line of the S 1 /2 SW 1 /4 of said Section 34; thence westerly along said north line of said S 1 /2 SW 1 /4 to the northwest corner of said S 1 /2 SW 1 /4; thence westerly along the north line of the SE 1 /4 SE 1 /4 of said Section 33 to the easterly l i n e of the Santa Fe Railway right-of-way; thence southwesterly along the easterly line of said right-of-way a distance of 1128.33 feet; thence on an angle to the left of 106 °54 1 23" a distance of 66.69 feet; thence on an angle to the right of 90 °38'42" a distance of 44.0 feet to the center line, as extended, of the alley lying north of and parallel t o the center line, as extended, of W. Hampden Avenue, the center line of said alley being 201.0 feet, more or less, north of the south line of said S ection 33; thence easterly along said center line, as extended, of said alley a distance of 970.0 feet, more or less, to a point 50.0 feet east of the west line of said Section 34; thence northerly and parallel to the west line of said Section 34 a distance of 54.86 feet; thence on an angle to the right of 45 °13'10" a distance of 127.43 feet ; thence on an angle to the right of 11 °40 1 39" a distance of 65.12 feet; thence southerly and parallel to the west line of said Section 34 a distance of 362.50 feet, more or less, to a point on the center line of W. Hampden Avenue; thence easterly along said center line a distance of 780.65 feet, more or less, to a point on the center line of Elati Street as extended from the north; thence northerly along said center line, and center line as extended, of said Elati Street a distance of 642.99 feet, more or less, to a point on the north line of the SE 1 /4 SW 1 /4 SW 1 /4 of said Section 34; thence easterly along the north line, and the north line as extended, of said SE 1 /4 SW 1 /4 SW 1 /4 to a point on the west line of McKinley's Subdivision, Second Filing; thence northerly along said west line of said McKinley's Subdivision, Secon d Filing, to the northwest corner o f said McKinley's Sub- division Second Filing; thence easterly along the northerly line of said McKinley's Subdivision, I I I I I I Page 779 Second Filing, a distance of 311.15 feet, more or less, to the northeast corner of said McKinley's Subdivision, Second Filing; thence southeasterly along the northerly line, as extended, o f McKinley's Subdivision to a point on the center line of the alley lying between said McKinley's Subdivision and Flood's Addition, said center line being 8 feet west of the west line of Lots 9 through 8, inclusive, of said Flood's Addition; thence northerly along said center line o f said alley to the south line, as extended, of Lot 2 of said Flood's Addition; thence easterly along the south line, as extended, of said Lot 2 to a point on the center line of Bannock Street; thence northerly along said center line to the point of beginning." Mr. Parkinson seconded the motion. Brief discussion f ollowed . The motion carried unanimously. VII. CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM. Mrs. Romans stated it was a duty of the Planning Commission to recommend a list of Capital Improvements to the City Council. She suggested a letter and an accompanying form be sent the various departments asking them to list improvements they feel will be necessary. Brief discussion followed; Mrs. Romans was directed to proceed as suggested. VIII. MRS. LORI CELENTANO 3827 South Delaware CONDITIONAL USE Nursery School CASE #14-64A Mrs. Romans reviewed previous contact with Mrs. Celentano in January, 1964, at which time it was determined she should obtain written approval of all properties within 100 foot boundary of the site for the proposed Nursery School before the Commission could consider approval. Nothing further has come before the Planning Office; however, Mr. Wallace, Chief Building Inspector, forwarded the f ollowing letter to the Planning Department. "DATE: June 3, 1964 INTER-OFFICE MEMORANDUM TO: Mrs. Dorothy Romans, Planning and Traffic Director FROM: Beryl A. Wallace, Chief Building Inspector RE: Inspection of proposed Nursery School -3827 South Delaware Capitain William Hamilton, Fire Department, and myself made an inspection at the above address for use of a proposed nursery school, If the Planning· Commission approves this conditional use and the f ollowing corrections are made the Fire and Building Department will approve this building f or this use. 1. Provide clearance around vent pipe, through floor. 2. .Enclose or protect vent through closet, from floor to ceiling. 3. Provide additional electrical outlets for appliances. 4. Install fire protection above furnace, at ceiling. 5, Revamp steps and provide proper hand rails from rear exit. 6. Repair fence in rear play yard. 7. Notify Building Dept. when the above is done. cc: Chief R. George Woods Mrs. Lori M. Celentano BAW /ss" Sincerely, Beryl A. Wallce. Discussion ensued. It was agreed no approval could be given until further contact by Mrs. Celentano is made. IX. WILKERSON CORPORATION CASE #15-64 Mrs. Romans presented a parking plan submitted earlier in the day by the Wilkerson Corpora- tion. The staff has not had an opportunity to review the proposal It was pointed out that this case was referred to the Planning Commission by the Board o f Adjustment and Appeals. Brief discussion followed. The Commission referred the proposal to the Planning staff for study and recommendation. Rice moved: Fullerton seconded: The meeting be adjourned. The motion carried unanimously, and the meeting was declared adjourned at 11 P. M. -- -- ------- Respectfully submitted, Gertrude G. Welty Recording Secretary --- - --- - - - Page 780 MEMORANDUM TO THE ENGLEWOOD CITY COUNCIL REGARDING ACTION OR RECOMMENDATION OF THE CITY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION. DATE: June 3, 1964 SUBJECT: Approval of New Englewood Rezoning --R-1-C to B-1 RECOMMENDATION: Mr. Rice offered the following motion: Mr. Chairman,! move that the Planning Commission recommend fav o rably to the City Council the rezoning of the following described property from the present zoning of R-1-C to a zoning of B-1 for the following reasons: (1) The citizens have voted in a special election held on April 7, 1964 to sell the city park lands to permit the commercial development of that area; (2) A Public Hearing was held by the Planning Commission on May 20, 1964 on the matter of this rezoning; (3) The Commission has studied the problem extensively, taking into consideration the wishes of the people who voted in the April 7th election, the testimony given at the Public Hearing and the information provided by previous professional studies; (4) The Commission has also considered the recommendations and findings of the Planning Staff. The findings presente d to the Commission by the staff are comprehensive and inclu de the many reasons considered by the Commission in making their determination on this zoning matter. The staff's report of findings as presented to the Planning Com- mission is hereby made a part of this recommendation to Council for their consideration; (5) The proximity to the existing central business district will supplement this specific commercial area; (6) The existing use as a City Park is not the most desirable land use for this area since access to the area from all directions but the north present dangerous barriers for traffic of children and adults to a recreation facility; (7.) The two largest arterial highw ay s in and adjacent to Englewood would provide traffic generators desirable to the development of reta i ling, service and office areas. Staff findings are as follows: "NEW ENGLEWOOD REZONING CASE #9-64 I would like to review some of the background material relating to the proposed rezoning and development, and to review some of the points brought forth at the Public Hearing on May 20, 1964. It would seem that there are several factors that should be taken into consideration at this time; for example, the economic feasibility of the proposal, the existing land use of the subject area, the land use of adjacent areas, and the effect the proposed change of zone classification and ultimate development might have on t h ose adjacent properties, the effect on the present businesses in downtown Englewood, the traffic flow, the utilities, etc. I would also like to point out some of the benefits which the staff believes could be realized by the overall community. Since the Commission has considered and discussed this matter in detail on several previous occasions, I will only rather briefly outline the staff's findings in th:is report. The Larry Smith Stuey is available if you would like to go into it in more detail and the other material can be amplified. I. DEVELOPMENT OF THE ENGLEWOOD CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT. A. Economic Studies. In the fall of 1960, the Englewood Chamber of Commerce retained the firm of Larry Smith & Company, Seattle, Washingt o n, for the purpose of making a comprehensive department store study of metropolitan Denver, with particular emphasis on the southern portion of the urbanized .area which might be tributary to new department store facilities in the City of Englewood, and a detailed study of the commercial opportunities which were and would become available to the business community of Englewood. On October 12, 1960, Larry Smith & Company presented a "Preliminary Memorandum" concerning the retail commercial development potential of Englewood. Although this memorandum was largely devoted to assessing the economic impact of the proposed KLZ site development upon the Englewood central business district, in the opinion of the staff, its analysis has a good deal of application to a retail development of similar size and scope in the New Englewood location, which is closer to the central business district. The basic conclusion of the Preliminary Memorandum was that while the data then existing did not indicate a compelling market demand for major department stores in Englewood at that time, there was sufficient evidence to justify an entry by su c h businesses, and the projected data indicated a favorable growth factor which would probably necessitate such a development in the future. Furthermore, "it must be recognized that the development of 'Cinderella City' or some other major canparison goods retail complex will be proposed and successfully promoted in southern Denver at some time in the future." P. 21. The Prelimim ry Memorandum also states that if an entry were to be made, "such a store or stores would probably need to be introduced in a fairly sizable plant, individually or col- lectively, and would need to be attractively planned and designed with parking and satellite shops in order to effectively compete with University Hills and the more distant Cherry Creek shopping areas.'' P. 18. With regard to location of such a development, the Preliminary Memorandum concludes that if possible, the city should "arrange for the alternative develop- ment of the City Park site in lieu of the KLZ site as the location of a shopping center complex." P .. 20. This course of action "appears to offer the most beneficial solution from the point of view of all persons concerned at the present time ..... [It] would be be neficial to the downtown merchants because the site would have ready availability to Broadway and the CBD, the established arterial and shopping districts of this area. The short distance between thi s site and the existing CBD (four short blocks) would offer the opportunity for eventually integrating these two areas by the redevelopment of the intervening areas as a major commercial complex o v er the long run." P. 21. I I I I / I I Page 781 In summary , the report of Larry Smith and Company indicates that: a. major department stores will locate somewhere in the southern Denver-Englewood area; b. these types of stores probably must locate as part of a major retail shopping complex; and c . from Englewood's standpoing the best location for such a complex is on the existing park land and the privately-owned land to the west of the park. No significant steps were taken to carry out the suggestions of Larry Smith and Company until the spring of 1963. At that time , City Council created a Downtown Improvement District which was rather limited in its scope and was finally repealed by the Council on July 15, 1963 . At the same meeting, at the sugg est ion of the Chamber of Commerce, Council took action to ratify the appointment of the Citizens' Action Committee. You will recall that a traffic consultant, Mr. James Small, Small-Coo ley and Associates, was hired by the Council to work with the Action Committee members, and after many meetings of the Committee at which numer o us plans were studied, the Action Committee on October 9, 1963, announced its plans to request Mr. Von Frellick to construct the proposed retail complex on the land now under consideration. In January of this year, Council took the initial steps of approving a pro posed contract for sale of the existing park land to New Englewood Company, which is owned by Mr. Von Frellick. The sale of the park land was made subject to ratification by the voters of the city at an election held April 7, 1964. The contract was approved by 64% @f the votes cast. In addition to arranging for the purchase of the City Park land, Mr. Von Frellick has ob- tained options to purchase substantially all of the privately owned property between the park and the railroad right-of-way. It is my understanding that sub s tantial sums were paid on or before May 15, 1964 to extend these option rights until November 15 , 1964. II. LAND USE FACTORS. A ~ The Property Sought to be Rezoned. The subject property is currently zoned R-1-C; however, no residence use is located on it . The present uses are the City Hall, the Park, a small golf course and a golf driving range. The City Hall is a permitted use in this District; the golf course and the Park are conditional uses under the 1963 Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance. The proposed development of this large tract of land as a major regional retail center, which will be a logical extension of the existing central business district, will, we believe, have highly beneficial long-term effects upon the City as a whole. (1) Land Use Planning. Although the land is now used princi p ally for recreational purposes, such use does pose problems. First, it is not located in a major residen tial area , and second, because it is not readily and safely accessible for pedestrian and b i cyc l e traffic. The CBD lies to the east, Santa Fe Drive and the railroad tracks to the west, and Hampden Avenue to the south. All of these tend to be barriers which make it difficult for children walking or on bicycles to reach the area. The only nearby residential area of any size lies to the north. In the opinion of the staff, it is much better that recreation facilities be located in the various residential neighborhoods and that the recreation facilities not be separated from these neighborhoods by such formidible and dangerous barriers. Because this land is located immediately adjoining the present CBD and because it is very near the intersection of Santa Fe and Hampden, the two largest traffic arteries in Englewood, the staff belie v e s the use of this land for a major retailing, service and office area , is logical and desirable. (2) Effect on Nearby Areas. In the opinion of the staff, the development of this land, whether as a retail center or for any other purpose, is not likely to have any sub- stantial impact upon the lands to the south and west because of the very wide barriers which separate the tracts from these other lands. Santa Fe and Hampden form natural boundaries which separate one use from another. There are some housing areas located to the east, between the site and the present CBD. These presently constitute a spot of isolated residential zoning, hemmed in by the CBD on one side, Hampden on anot}:x:)r, and an industrial plant on a third. It would seem that the ultimate destiny of these lands could be for development as part of the CBD, whether or not the new Englewood project . is constructed. The project could have the effect of greatly increasing property values in this area, and this could result in termination of residential uses there within a few years. This we believe, is a desirable development and one which should be encouraged, since residential neighborhoods should be homogeneous and not mixed up with industrial and commercial uses as this one is now. The lands to the north of the site are, as you know, used for residential purposes, and appropriate steps must be taken to preserve the character of this good residential neigh- borhood. This we believe, can be done through the creation of a buffer between the site and the lands lying to the north of Floyd. The staff believes that the best method of accomplishing this would be through the creation of a parkway-type planting strip which will serve as a "screen" on the north side of the shopping complex. This has, as you kno w, alr~ady been pro- posed by the developer at the May 6th meeting of the Planning Commission and an alternate plan was filed by the New Englewood Company on May 29th for consideration of the Planning Commission. Th e pr o p os ed d e v e lo p me nt as it relates to Floyd Avenue has been of much con- cern to the staff and the propoerty owners adjacent to Floyd on the north. I would suggest that we continue to work with our traffic consultant and the developer and adjacent property owners in order that we can work out a feasible p l a n t h at wil l b e reasonable and yet as satisfactory as possible to the majority of those concerned. (I am reasonably sure that we cannot please everyone with any given plan.) It was suggested at the Public Hearing that we might zone an area on the north of the site B-3. There has been consideration given to the possibility of zoning a certain portion of the subject site to a zone district other than B-1, i.e. R-4, Residential-Professional or B-3, Shopping Center. Both of these zone districts have requirements for screening. However, to comply with the intent of our Rules and Procedure Manual, the zone district should be the depth of an average city block. This could then permit uses at a later date that could be incompatible with the residences to the north. Also, the requirements for Page 782 screening in those Districts are less than the New Englewood Company has proposed in the alternate plan submitted on May 29th. We therefore feel that the "strip" zone would not pro- tect the area to the north as well as the proposed planting area. To conclude: We do not believe that the development of the project at this site in the manner now propo s ed will have any materially adverse effect upon the adjacent and nearby lands. In fact, it would be difficult to find another site which could be developed with so little adverse effect upon its surroundings. On the other hand , we think that develop ment of the project should have highly beneficial effects upon a most important part of the City, the CBD. In our opinion, a city of Englewood's size should have a single compact, prosperous well-maintained downtown area containing most or all of the major office, service and shopping units. Such a CBD must of course be supplemented by convenie n t shopping in and near the out- lying residential areas. In the downtown area we now have many older buildings which are badly in need of replacement or remodeling. This is difficult to accomplish because it is hard to make satisfactory assemblage of land there, and many merchants and property owners are un d er s tandably reluctant to make a large investment in view of the traffic and parking situation, which is becoming in- creasingly congested. If present trends c o ntinue we anticipate that there would be a flight of business from the CBD to peripherally located shopping areas, and this could well leave a condition of blight in its wake. Even if there should be no deterioration of the CBD as a result of such a movement, fragmentation of retail and office areas in a city the size of Englewood is highly undesirable. We believe that development of the proposed site in the manner now projected will help to stimulate business in the downtown area because it will bring into the central business district perhaps 25,000 or 30,000 people per day who are not presently using that area. This should have a beneficial effect upon the retail stores now located along Broadway if the city plans for appropriate linkage so that the project becomes part of the CBD and not an isolated island by itself. We would expect that property owners and tenants in the present CBD will maintain a high standard of maintenance and modernization of the structures now there, and continue to upgrade their business practices in order that they will be able to attract their share of this new business. It is going to be essential, however, that certain steps be taken immediately if we are to attract and retain these potential customers to the Broadway area rather than dis- tract their attention from the shops and stores by confronting them with a maze traffic c o n- fusion and a lack of easily accessible off-street parking. We recommend that a program be implemented as soon as possible that will provide for the acquisition of land for off-street parking, an improved traffic circulatory pattern which should include a modernized traffic signal system, and steps must be taken to improve access to the total business area. (3) Parking. It would appear that adequate off-street parking spaces will be provided for the development (up to 4,000 cars) which will be available for anyone using the downtown area--not merely for customers of the stores in the project. (4) Traffic Flow. The proposed construction of upwards of 750,000 square feet of building space, which will be visited by perhaps 25,000 people per day, is bound to effect the existing street network. Fortunately the parcel adjoins both Santa Fe Drive and Hampden, which have the largest carrying capacities of any streets in the Englewood area, so it is ideally located from that point of view. It is obvious a rapid and convenient method of getting cars from these two arteries into the center without blocking traffic will have to be provided, and the developer has expressed a willingness to cooperate in this. Of course an interchange at Broadway and Hampden and better access to the CBD in the area of Dartmouth and Santa Fe and Floyd and Broadway have long been a desirable part of the city's traffic planning and the need for these items is only accelerated by the current project. (5) Parks. Construction of the project will replace the city's only major park. For the reasons described above, we do not think the present location has been without problems. It will be necessary to replace these facilities with at least equal facilities in better locations. With funds obtained from the developer for the sale of the park land, the City expects to obtain much better situated park lands, distributed throughout the City, and to provide much needed park development in these areas. In the staff's opinion, this develop- ment will be a long forward step in the creation of an adequate park and recreational system for the City. (6) Schools. The project will of course be exceedingly beneficial to the Englewood School District because it will produce a large amount of additional tax revenues. (7) Financial. The most immediate financial effect of the center will be provide $1,000,000 for purchase and construction of badly needed park improvements. While we recognize that additional City services will need to be provided, it is anticipated that the project will produce considerable additional tax revenue which will exceed any increase in the City's expenditures. B. The KLZ Site. ------ We realize that the KLZ site is pres ent l y zoned commercially and on the surf a ce, it might appear that adding the property under consideration to the amount of property presently available for commercial purposes would result in an excessive amount of commercially zoned property. However, legal problems resulting from the litigation surrounding the KLZ site zoning renders the use or rezoning of the site impossible at this time. Also, our Land Use Study shows that a substantial portion of the property presently zoned for commercial uses is actually used for residential purposes and h e n c e the amount of property currently available for and devoted to commerce is considerably less than the total acreage zoned commercially." Property to be rezoned is as follows: I ' I I I I I A tract of land lying in Sections 33 and 34, T. 4 S., R. 68 W., 6th P. M., Arapahoe Co Colorado, described as follows: Beginning at the point at which the center line o f Ba Street intersects with the north line of the S 1 /2 SW 1 /4 of said Section 34; thence w sterly along said north line of said Sl/2 SW 1 /4 to the northwest corner of said S 1 /2 SW 1 /4, thence westerly along the north line o f the SE 1 /4 SE l /4 of said Section 33 to the ea terly line o f the Santa Fe Railway right-of-way; thence southwesterly along the easterly lin of said right-of-way a distance of 1128.33 feet; thence on an angle to the left o f 106 °54'23" a distance of 66.69 feet; thence on an angle to the right of 90 °38 1 42 11 a distance of 4 .O feet to the center line, as extended, of the alley lying north of and parallel to the line, as extended, of W. Hampden Avenue, the center line of said alley being 201.0 fee , more or less, north of the south line of said Section 33; thence easterly along said center line, as extended, of said alley a distance of 970.0 feet, more or less, to a point 50.0 feet east of the west line of said Section 34; thence northerly and parallel to the west line of said Section 34 a distance of 54,86 feet; thence on an angle to the right o f 45 °13'1 " a distance o f 127.43 feet; thence on an angle to the right of 11 °40'39" a distance of 65,12 feet; thence southerly and parallel to the west line of said Section 34 a .distance of 3 2.50 feet, more or less, ot a point on the center line of W. Hampden Avenue; thence easterl along said center line a distance of 780.65 feet, more or less, to a point on the cente line of Elati Street as extended from the north; thence northerly along said center lin , and center line as extended, oi· said Elati Street a distance of 642,99 feet, more or 1 ss, to a point on the north line of the SE 1 /4 SW 1 /4 SW 1 /4 of said Section 34; thence eas erly along the north line, and the north line as extended, of said SE 1 /4 SW 1 /4 Sw 1 /4 to point on the west line of McKinley's Subdivision, Second Filing; thence northerly along said west line of said McKinley's Subdivision , Second Filing, to the northwest corner o said McKinley's Subdivision, Second Filing; thence easterly along the northerly line of said McKinley's Subdivision, Second Filing, a distance of 311,15 feet, more or less, to the northeast corner of said McKinley's Subdivision , Second Filing; thence southeasterly al ng the northerly line, as extended, of McKinley's Subdivision to a point on the center lin of the alley lying between said McKinley's Subdivision and Flood's Addition, said center 1 ne being 8 feet west o f the west line of Lots 3 through 8, ioclusive, of said Flood's Addi ion; thence northerly along said centerline of said alley to the south line, as extended of ot 2 of said Flood's Addition; thence easterly along the south line, as extended, of said ot 2 to a point on the center line of Bannock Street; thence northerly along said center l'ne to the point of beginning. Mr. Parkinson seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously. Respectfully submitted, By Order o f the City Planning and Zoning Commission. Gertrude G. Welty Recording Secretary * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * I, CALL TO ORDER. CITY OF ENGLEWOOD PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION July 16, 1964 The meeting was called to order at 8:10 p.m. by Chairman Carlson. Members present: Carlson, Fullerton, Parkinson, Touchton Romans, Ex-officio Members absent: Rice Staff present: Harrison, Monson II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES. Touchton moved: Fullerton seconded: The Minutes of June 3, 1964 be approved as written . The motion carried unanimously. III. REPORT BY SMALL-COOLEY ASSOCIATES. Mr. James Small and Mr. Martin Tessler o f Small-Cooley Associates were present to discuss with the Commission the work they have undertaken as Traffic Consultants for the City o f Englewood. A brief review o f the events leading up to the contract with Small-Cooley, Associates was given: A Citizens' Action Committee was appointed by the City Council app oxi- mately one year ago to identify needs and problems--traffic wise--of the City, and to att mpt to work out feasible solutions. The Tra ffic Consultants were hired shortly thereafter to work with the Action Committee. At the time Mr. Small began working with the Action Comm ttee, the problems of traffic access and circulation to and within the Central Business Distric 1 was being given very thorough study, as was the pending denial by the State Highway Depar ment of left-turns at State Highway 70 and South Bannock Street. It was felt that these two problems were the most pressing at that time. Mr. Small sta te d that numerous studies had been done previously, but no concrete actipn or completion had resulted. Mr. Small outlined the five major problems existing in the Central Business District: (1) access to the Central Business District; (2) circulation within the Central Business District; (3) parking, both on-street and of-street ; (4) merchandising, and (5) attractiveness.