Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1967-05-03 PZC MINUTESI I I I. CALL TO ORDER . CITY OF ENGLEWOOD PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION May 3, 1967 Page 959 The regular meeting of the City Planning and Zoning Commission was called to order by Chairman Carlson at 8:00 P.M. Members present: Woods, Touchton, Rice, Love, Parkinson, Carlson Romans, Ex-officio Members absent: None Also Present: City Attorney Criswell Planning Assistant Hammond II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES. Mr. Carlson stated the Minutes of April 19, 1967, were to be considered for approval. Parkinson moved: Rice seconded: The Minutes of April 19, 1967, be approved as written. The motion carried unanimously. III. J. J. CAREY KLZ Site Touchton moved: REZONING R-1-A to R-3-A CASE #7-67B Parkinson seconded: The Public Hearing on the rezoning request of J. J. Carey to rezone the tract of land commonly referred to as the KLZ Site from R-1-A (Single-family Residential) to R-3-A (Multi-family Residential~ be opened. The motion carried unanimously. Mr. Carlson stated that an application had been file d by J. J. Carey to zone the subject site R-3-A (Multi-family residential) and that this public hearing had been called to aid the Commission in making a recommendation to the City Council. He asked that those speaking refrain from repetition in their comments. He asked Mrs. Ro~ans for a summary of this re- quest. Mrs. Romans stated the application for rezoning was filed by Mr. Carey on April 5, 1967. Public Hearing was set by the Planning Commission on that date ; the property was posted on April 17, 1967, and publication was given in the official city paper --The Englewood . Herald --on April 13, 1967. The request is f or R-3-A (multi-family) zoning, and does nqt encompass the entire KLZ tract. From the centerline o f Floyd Avenue south for a d~stance of 150 feet, extending from Franklin Street on the west to the east boundary line of the property the zoning is proposed to remain in the R-1-C (Single-family residential) zone district. A summary of the restrictions set forth in the 1963 Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance was given by Mrs. Romans. Mr. Carlson asked for the proponents o f the zone change request to speak. Mr. Lou Carey, applicant, stated he has been engaged in housing development f or 25 years, and has been active in the development of Briarwood, Greenmountain, and the University Hills residential areas. Mr. Carey stated he had studied the housing developments in the Denver area and that more than 1/3 of the new housing developments are multi-family units. He stated his proposal for this site will be called "The Village" and will be developed with multi-family units. The structures will be arranged in groups or clusters, with an old-world atmosphere. Some of the apartment buildings will be devoted to senior citizens; others will be designed for young people with one or tw o children. These will be separated, i.e., the senior citizen units will be grouped in one area; the units for the younger residents in another area. Mr. Carey stated that underground parking would be provided for residents o f this proposed complex. "Guest" parking will be provided on the surface. He stated that it might be necessary to . have two levels of underground parking, inasmuch as it will require approximately 350 square feet per automobile, and most families now have two cars. Pedestrian overpasses over the street that will run through the "Village" are also being considered in order that the possibility of conflict between pedestrians and vehicles will be minimized. Mr. Carey discussed a proposed plot plan which he displayed. Houses on the north 1/3 of the site on the plan were shown as single-family "patio"-type houses. If these houses were to be put on the market, they would sell for at least $25,000 and most o f them would be in the $35,000 to $40,000 bracket. Access to these homes would be proposed to be from Floyd Avenue, and each unit would have its own ga rage. The area to the north across Floyd Avenue would be screened i r om this area. Mr. Care y stated that other structures proposed in the complex would be 2, 3, 4, or possibly 6 stories in height. Swimming pools will be provided and two, or possibly three, churches will also be planned in the area. Also considered in the complex for future development is a central service area, with specialty shops serving the residents of "The Village". He stated that his plans are based on a possible total of 1400 to 1600 dwelling units on the 55 acre site, with a probable population of 5,ooo. Mr. Dick Voight, 463 Circle Drive, stated he was with Van Schaack and Company, and was working with Mr. Carey on this transaction. He stated he felt this development would add to the City's image and prestige. He stated it was the finest proposal of this type that he has seen. Page 960 Mr. Paul Stratton, 3280 South Marion, stated he has lived in Englewood for thirty years, ai_rt the KLZ site has never been anything but a site for weeds. He stated he has seen and considered the photos of this type of proposed development, and he is happy that Mr. Carey is proposing this for Englewood. There were no other persons speaking in favor of the application. Mr. Carlson asked for the opponents to speak. Mr. Ke r wi n Fulton, 2191 East Floyd Avenue, stated representatives f ro~ the Northeast Englewood area h ave been meeting with Mr. Carey in an attempt to reach agreement on restrictions resi- dents want imposed on the property. he stated that residents are concerned that the area will be over-developed ; they are concerned about the proposed density of population on the site; the number of dwelling units proposed and the height of those units. They are concerned about the "commercial" area Mr. Carey mentioned for the site. They are concerned about the "permitted uses" in the R-3-A classi f ication --hotels and motels; screening concerns them, as does drainage. Mr. Fulton stated they would continue to work with Mr. Carey, but asked that the Commission give very careful study to the proposal before rendering a decision. Mrs. Kelley, 3141 South Vine, asked if there was sufficient water to accommodate an additio_nal 5,000 people? Mr. Rice stated there is not a shortage of water in the City; there are problems of water pressure , which are being corrected, but the City does have adequate water. Mr. John Welles, 3602 South Gilpin , stated he is chairman o f the Committee to Preserve Zoning Integrity , and is representing the citizens residing to the south of State Highway #70. Mr. Welles stated that he was one of the citizens working with Mr. Carey and that he was quite pleased that Mr. Carey was willing to work with them. He stated it was the desire o f his Committee that when the KLZ Site is developed, that it be an asset to the City and the en- tire community. Mr. Baker, 3225 South Williams, stated he was representing six other home owners in the area. He stated they are opposing the rezoning request, and would like to see the area developed with single-family residential uses. Mr. Kelley, 3141 South Vine, stated he would like to have a couple of questions considered: 1) has the total traffic capacity been adequately studied? Would Highway 70 have to be widened, and would Floyd Avenue also have to be widened? 2) what school district would tre children living on this KLZ site attend? Mr. Carlson stated note would be made of these questions for consideration and answer at a later time. Mr. Vince Reiger , 9 Village Road, stat.ed he wished to commend Mr. Carey on his plan , as shown on the displayed plat. Mr. Reiger stated he was the developer of Kent Village immediately to the east of the KLZ Site; this area was recently approved for multi-family use by the Arapahoe County Commissioners.. He stated he felt one important factor in rezoning requests was the "need"; he stated he could not see where there was need for 55 acres of multi-family zo n ing. He further stated he felt the City would want a "successful" development on this site , and questioned whether there was the market at this time in this area for the type of housing Mr. Carey was proposing? He suggested zoning a portion of the area for multi-family use, and leaving the remainder in an R-1-A classification. Mr. Douw Fonda, 3500 South Franklin, asked why the high density was felt to be necessary to the developer? He stated he was concerned about the traffic that would be generated by this development. Mr. Cervi, 1900 East Belleview, stated he was a veteran of zoning problems concerning this property. He stated he was asked to attend the meeting, and feels that his paper (Cervi's Journal) has an influence on zoning integrity and civic duty. He stated the character of the entire southeast Denver area will be changed by this development and that Englewood must consider this. He pointed out that these citizens attending the meeting did their shopping in Englewood --there was none whatsoever in Cherry Hills or Greenwood Village. He also stated that as a result of the successful court suits against the City, the New Englewood shopping complex is now located on the former City park adjacent to the central business district. Mr. Cervi stated he had talked to Mr. Terry of Time-Life, Inc.; the selling price of the KLZ site is $2,500,000. He indicated he felt this fact affected the proposed density. Mr. Cervi also stated that if this zoning request were approved, litigation would follow, and would be pursued to the United States Supreme Court. Mr. Richard Eason, 2261 East Dartmouth Place, cited Section 22.3, Amendments, of the 1963 Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance. He stated he could not see that any evidence had been presented which warranted "need" for a change .. Mr. Eason reviewed court cases on this land as well as other cases which he felt were pertinent to the issue, in which cases it was stated that property owners do have the right to rely on existing zoning regulations when no material change occurs which would require rezoning in the public interest. He stated the land has always been zoned for single-family residential purposes, and there has been no change in the character of the area which would warrant a change in zoning. Mr. Whiting, 3601 South Franklin, stated there were several factors he felt should be con- sidered. First, will the zoning continued as .it is create a hardship on the property owner? Second, the zoning on three sides of the site is R-1, on the .east side there is multi-family zoning, but o f much lower density •. Third, the public health, morals, and welfare of the area are not threatened if tbe property continues in the R-1-A classification. Next, Mr. Whiting stated the property values of residents in the area should be considered. He stated that aesthetics should also be considered, and while he realized that the site might never be developed as ,a park , he felt it should be developed as attractively as possible. Mr. Whiting said he was also concerned about school problems, traffic and police protection for this site and the surrounding area, and sewage and water services and facilities. Mr. Whiting stated that drainage o f the area is from the east and south to the west and north, and questioned whether adequate provisions are being made to accommodate this? I I I ~1 I I Page 961 Mr. Parkinson asked the acreage of Mr. Reiger's development to the east? Mr. Reiger stated he has 11.75 acres; this site will be developed with one story units, average size between 1800 and 2000 square feet per unit. Each unit will be provided a private garage. There will be approximately 5-1/2 homes per acre. He stated that his development will be "owner occupied". He again questioned the feasibility o f Mr. Carey's proposal and the need for such a develop- ment. Mr. Kennedy, 3225 South Race, stated he felt the price of anything was determined by its desirability. He asked why the high density was considered if it were not based on the selling price of the property and an attempt to make a profit. Mr. Kennedy asked if the Commission was considering a possible tax base at the expense o f other homeowners in the area? Mr. Price, 2269 East Floyd Place, stated he fe~t the group that has been working with Mr. Carey has been doing so very quietly. He stated he felt something had to be done with the ground, and he stated he felt that Mr. Carey's figures on density etc. were high. He further stated he was not speaking for or against the proposal at this time.. He stated he felt the fact that the land was used as the KLZ tower site for many years did in deed, change the character of the land from strictly single-family. He stated that apartments are extending further southward from Capitol Hill area in Denver constantly, and that this particular site will not be developed as a single-family residential area. He suggested considering a lower- density apartment complex. Mr. Roehrs, 2369 East Floyd Place., asked if the proposed service area in the center of the proposed development was a subtle attempt to eventually obtain commercial zoning on the en- tire parcel? Mr. Kettering, 3575 South Gilpin, asked the City Attorney if the covenants they were con- sidering between Mr. Car~y and the residents were legal and enforceable? Mr. Criswell stated that legal covenants filed on ground are enforceable by parties who enter into the agreement. Mr. Stamps, 2098 East Floyd Place, stated he was concerned about the fact that this proposed development would be confined to "renters" and not "home owners"; he stated he felt that "renters" did not respect other residents property. He was also concerned about the water and sewer facilities in the area. Mr. Dykstra, 3150 South Lafayette, stated that he was concerned because traffic using Lafayette Street would be going right by Charles Hayes School. He also pointed out that there is a drainage way in this immediate area, but that if this site is fully developed, he did not feel the d r ainageway could accommodate the run-off. Mr. Mino r, 3121 South Vine, asked if it was possible and feasible to have underground parking --approximately 20 acres --he stated he could not visualize such development. Mr. Hartmuller, 3201 Sou th Race, asked if a survey had been conduc te.d determining the need for such development in this area? Mr. Carey replied he had made the survey. Mr. Carlson asked if there were other opponents who wished to speak? Mr. Deuth stated he would wait for the rebuttal. Mr. Carlson then asked Mr. Carey if he wished to answer some of the ~1estions posed by the opponents? Mr. Carey stated that the site is split into two s chool districts: fro m South Franklin Street west, the land is in the Englewood -School Dist rict; from -Franklin Street east, the land is in the Cherry Creek School District. He stated he had talked to repr esentatives of both school districts, and th at he has been assured there is no problem in either district. He s tated he was figur ing on .23 children per rental unit, or approximately 400 children to be s p lit between the t wo districts. Mr. Eason asked if the .23 children per unit was a na t ion al average, and if it applied to all apartment developments ? Mr. Carey stated it was a national average, and it would a pply to all apartment units. Mr. Carey discussed the present development that is taking place in Englewood; he feels that his proposal will also a·nd the City in improved tax base. He also discussed the pro- posed traffic pattern, both within the site and access to and egress from the site. He stated he had contacted the State Highway Department, and they have indicated that the present facilities will be able to handle the traffic his development would generate. He stated the interior street design was developed with the idea that it would serve only the residents of the proposed apartment complex; he felt this would aid in preserving the character of the area as low-density residential, and prevent the traffic from overloading the local residential streets. He pointed out that the heaviest density in the proposed development was on the southern 2/3 o f the site, and it was the opinio n of the State Highway Department that this traffic could be handled on Highway #70. Mr. Raye, 3287 South Humboldt, asked Mr. Carey if he felt that South Downing Street could accommodate traffic that would possibly use it? He pointed out that there are times now when five to seven cars are backed up at the school signal at Downing and Eastmen. Mr. Carey said he was not able to answer this question; he had not studied the situation. Mr. Jim Austin, 3900 South Gilpin , stated he could not see the need for a commercial use in the development; he also felt the high apartment structures would obstruct the view. Mr. Carey stated the higher structures would be located basically through the center of the property; there is a 40 ft. drop from Hampden Avenue north to Floyd Avenue. He stated he did not believe that the structures as proposed to be located would obstruct anyone's view. Mr. Fonda. asked what the minimum and maximum rents would be? Mr. Carey replied the minimum would be $150, and the maximum between $600 and $700 per month. The average rent would be $250 per month. Mr. O'Flaherty , 3715 South Gilpin, s~ated he felt the type of people in a community merited consideration, and that the finest type people were those who owned their own home. Page 962 Mr. Carey stated he felt that possibly everyone present had been a renter at one time or another in their life, and he did not appreciate the idea being put forth that those who rent apartments and homes cannot be considered as equals to the home owners. He pointed out that living in multi-family complexes is coming more and more to be a way of life for millions of people of all ages, and cited the senior citizens who are selling their homes and buying or renting in "condominium" complexes. Mr. Martin Deuth, 2201 East Floyd Avenue, stated he was Chairman of the Northeast Englewood Citizens Committee, which has been active for the past seven years. Mr. Deuth stated that the citizens of the area are not ·"aginners", but do feel it necessary to work for the pro- tection of their property rights as homeowners. He stated that the charscter of the area has not changed to warrant a change in zoning. Mr. Deuth discussed the impact of the proposed complex on this area and on the city as a whole, citing the problems of school children, the density proposed on the site, the height of the proposed apartment structures, the drainage and water facilities, sewer facilities, police protection.. He reviewed the requirements for zoning change~-change in character, need, hardship, etc., and stated he could not see that any of them were applicable. He emphasized that in past court decisions the site has been designated as single-family. Mr. Carey stated that he had checked with the City Engineer, and that sewer and water facilities are available in sufficient capacity. He stated he was aware that there was a drainage problem in the area, and that he has reviewed the engineering study done on the property when Mr. Von Frellick was proposing a shopping center on the site, and is using this study as a guide line. He does not feel that the development will add to the problem. He stated his proposal will cover considerably less than the maximum of 30% permitted lot coverage in the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance. He stated he had discussed his proposal with several major insurance companies, and had been assured that he could obtain financing for the entire tract at once. He pointed out that the area is not surrounded by R-1-A zoning, that in fact, there is only one block to the north and one to the east that is designated as R-1-A. The remaining single- family zoning is R-1-C, which is a higher density than the R-1-A classification. There is R-3-B zoning to the west of his site, and Mr. Reiger has obtained multi-family zoning to the east o f the KLZ property. Mr. Carey pointed out that the property is bounded on the south by a six-lane highway. There were no further statements to the Commission from the floor. Mr. Parkinson moved: Mr. Rice seconded: The Public Hearing be closed. Mr. Eason asked if petitions bearing signatures of 63 persons opposing the request could be submitted at this time? Mr. Carlson accepted the petitions. The vote was called on the motion: The motion carried unanimously. Touch ton moved: . Parkinson seconded: The matter of the rezoning request be tabled for further research and study. The motion carried unanimously. - - --- -- - -~ --- Mr. Carlson called a recess of the meeting. The meeting was called to order at 11:00 P.M. IV. DMATS SYSTEMS 4B Mrs. Romans reminded the Commission that the Arapahoe County Planning Department had referred Denver Metropolitan Area Transportation Study Systems 4B to the Englewood Planning Commission for a recommendation. She pointed out that Systems 4B is concerned with surface streets on~y, and does not take into consideration that any streets will be .classified as freeways. She stated that this is the major conflict between the Englewood Master Str~et Plan and Systems 4B. Discussion followed. Parkinson moved: Rice seconded: That the Englewood Planning Commission has reviewed the DMATS Systems 4B as referred by the Arapahoe County Planning Department, and finds po major con- flict with the Englewood Street Plan other than the fact that the Englewood Master Plan does designate State Highway 70 and South Santa Fe Drive as freeways. The Planning Director shall so notify the Planning Department of Arapahoe County. The motion carried unanimously. V. SWEDISH MEDICAL CENTER. Mrs. Romans stated she had received no further information from the City Engineer on the recommended alley turn radius, therefore, no further action could be taken at this time. VI, NEXT MEETING. The next regular meeting of the Planning Commission is scheduled for May 17, 1967, at which time residents of the area proposed for annexation may be in attendance to discuss zoning designation for the area. Parkinson moved: Woods seconded: The meeting be adjourned. The motion carried and the meeting adjourned at 11:10 P.M. Gertrude G. Welty , Recording Secretary * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * I I I