Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1966-05-18 PZC MINUTESI I I Page 9 11 Mr. Woods asked if System 5 will be a study upon which the jurisdictions can rely? Mr. Burton stated it was very important to reach an agreement on the surface street system (4B), and then attempt to pin the freeway corridors down; this, he felt, would aid in acquiring needed right-of-way. Mrs. Romans discussed the traffic congestion on South Broadway in the recent Brookridge annexation, and asked if it was felt a 4-lane major arterial could carry the projected volume of traffic? Mr. Burton commented that part of the Broadway traffic congestion was a conflict in the roles the street is required to serve --thru traffic versus shopper traffic. He felt that an adequate freeway, such as the proposed Columbine Freeway, would aid in the solution of this problem. Mr. Parkinson asked if any consideration had been given to financing of the system? Mr. Trenka commented that every city should give very detailed consideration to financing the system, and pointed out that in some cases right-of-way could be reserved at the time a subdivision is given approval. Discussion ensued. Mr. Carlson stated that freeways must be planned and located now, or they will be unobtainable. Mr. Burton agreed, and commented that traffic volumes have increased 30% within the past six years, and would more than double in the next 20 years. Mrs. Romans inquired of Mr. Brandt on the progress of the street classification study under- taken by Inter-County Regional? Mr. Brandt replied there was "no uniformity in terminolog~ width, or anything else" within the jurisdictions of the Denver Metropolitan area. He stated that the information had been obtained from the subdivision regulations of the various municipalities and counties. He stated that it would be the recommendation of ICRPC that there be a degree of uniformity, and a maximum-minimum street width set forth. Mrs. Romans discussed the proposed one-way street pattern within the City of Englewood, and commented that an opposing petition has been submitted already. Mr. Burton stated the purpose of streets was to move traffic, and that a governmental agency does have the police power to use streets for specific purposes. Mr. Brandt commented that people seem to feel that because their property abuts a street, it is their private property, but this is not so; they may not always have parking, etc. on this street, as it is to serve an entire area, not just that one property or block. Mr. Burton stated he realized that Englewood was in a peculiar position of being a "bridge" city, that is, located between Littleton and Denver, thus necessarily having to carry the through traffic on the streets. Mr. Truesdale stated that the New Englewood development in Englewood will undoubtedly in- crease the traffic in Sheridan, and possibly aid in new development in Sheridan. He commented that he would not want another freeway with the Highway 70 design,(no curb cuts in Sherida~ to go through; he did not feel this would aid the town at all. Mr. Woods expressed the appreciation of the Commission for the opportunity to meet with the representatives of the various agencies, and thanked them for coming. The next regular meeting of the Planning Commission will be May 18, 1966, at which time it is proposed we meet with the Parks and Recreation Commission. The meeting adjourned at 10:10 P.M. Gertrude G. Welty Recording Secretary * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * "'*' CITY OF ENGLEWOOD PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING May 18, 1966 I. CALL TO ORDER. The regular meeting was called to order by Chairman Woods at 8:25 P.M. Members present: Parkinson; Rice; Touchton; Woods Romans, Ex-officio Members absent: Carlson; Love II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES. Chairman Woods stated minutes from the meetings of May 4, 1966, and May 11, 1966, were to be considered for approval. Parkinson moved: Touchton seconded: The Minutes of May 4, 1966, and May 11, 1966, be approved as written. The motion carried unanimously. III. ANNEXATION. The potential for growth of the City of Englewood was discussed. Page 912 IV. MASTER STREET PLAN CASE #2-65N Mrs. Romans discussed the meetings which have been held with representatives of the Denver and the Arapahoe County Planning Departments, Inter-County Regional Planning, and the State Highway Department. These meetings have been primarily concerned with the System 4B of DMATS. System 4B is a "surface street" pattern; the pattern coincides rather closely with the proposed street plan of the City. The Director recommended that System 4B be incorporated into our revised Master Street Plan, in order that there would be continuity between the major routes in Englewood and those of adjacent jurisdictions. The necessity for a future east-west freeway in the South Metropolitan area was discussed. The present location of Highway 70, Quincy, Belleview and Orchard are "corridors" being considered by various members of the DMATS Committee. Taking into account the development along each of these routes and the projected plans of the City, the Director recommended that Highway 70 be designated as a freeway in the projected street plan. This would coincide with the plans prepared by the Denver Planning Office and has been considered feasible by ihe Inter-County Regional Planning Commission Traffic Engineer and the Arapahoe County Planning Department. Mr. Rice questioned if anything would be gained to discuss this matter further when two members of the Commission were absent. He felt .it was most important to have complete attendance. Mr. Woods agreed. Discussion followed; it was determined that a special meeting, possibly on May 25, or the regular meeting of June 8, be scheduled for discussion of the traffic pattern. Other phases of the Master Plan were reported upon briefly. The office will be concentrating on the Master Plan this summer, and it is intended that the Plan be completely compiled and printed in this time, anticipating a Hearing on the Plan in the Fall. Mr. Touchton discussed the lack of uniformity which presently exists, and questioned the economic feasibility of adopting a street plan prior to the achievement of this much needed uniformity. Mrs. Romans stated .that the adoption of System 4B will be a beginning in achieving the uniformity needed throughout the metropolitan area. Discussion followed on the proposed designation of Highway 70 as a freeway. The street plan, as it will effect the New Englewood shopping development was discussed. It was suggested that Mr. Von Frellick be invited to meet with the Commission to discuss the street plan, and the Director was requested to write a letter to Mr. Von Frellick inviting him to meet with the Commission at his earliest convenience. The meeting adjourned at 9:40 p.m. Gertrude G. Welty Recording Secretary * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * I. CALL TO ORDER. CITY OF ENGLEWOOD PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION Special Meeting May 25, 1966 The Special Meeting of the City Planning and Zoning Commission was called to order at 8:05P .M., Chairman Woods presiding. Members present: Carlson; Love; Parkinson; Rice; Touchton; Woods Romans, Ex-officio Members absent: None Also present: Planning Assistant Hammond; Gerri Von Frellick; John Jameson. Mr. Woods stated this meeting was a special meeting for the discussion of the Master Street Plan. He asked the Planning Director to review the previous discussions of the Street Plan. Mrs. Romans summarized our meetings with representatives of the Denver Planning Department, Arapahoe County Planning Department, Inter-County Regional Planning Commission, and the State Highway Department to discuss the DMATS System 4B, which is the surface street system. System 4B closely parallels the proposed street pattern for the City of Englewood, with the exception of State Highway 70, which is designated as a 6-lane major divided arterial in System 4B. The concept of the one-way pattern which is being considered was approved in 1965, by the Planning Commission and City Council. That plan involved a reciprocal one-way pattern for Highway 70, using Floyd Avenue for west-bound traffic and the present Highway 70 for east- bound traffic. The Director stated it was felt the one-way west-bound designation of Floyd Avenue should possibly be reconsidered in light of t he State Highway Department's negative decision on the proposal to work Highway 70 into a one-way couplet. Also of utmost importance to the City is the designation of Highway 70 as the east-west freeway in the South Denver Metropolitan Area. The DMATS Committee is considering four possible locations for the free- way --Highway 70, uincy, Belleview, or Orchard. The designation of any one of the latter three would route traffic completely away from the Core Area, and would impose the freeway traffic upon primarily residential areas. Mr. Von Frellick stated he understood the Master Street Plan had been given definite approval, and had oriented the shopping complex in accordance with the Plan; 40 leases are signed and another 1,000 are under negotiation --all based on this Plan. He said he was not particularly concerned with the north /south one-way pattern, but was very much concerned about the east- west pattern. He did not agree that the Floyd one-way proposal was ever dependent on Highway 70 being one-way. He is also concerned that traffic north-bound on Broadway will be unable to have adequate left-turn phases at Hampden and Floyd Avenues. I I I