Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1968-10-16 PZC MINUTESI I I Page 1099 MEMORANDUM TO THE ENGLEWOOD CITY COUNCIL REGARDING ACTION OR RECOMMENDATION OF THE CITY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION. DATE: October 9, 1968 SUBJECT: Easement Vacation -Tract A, Bellewood Subdivision. RECOMMENDATION: Parkinson moved : Lone seconded: The Planning Commission recommend to City Council that the easement on the south side of Tract A , Bellewood, be vacated, inasmuch as the utility companies and departments have stated that they have no need to maintain the easement .and are willing to relinquish it with no reservations. The motion carried unanimously. 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: October 9, 1968 SUBJECT: Projects for Aid from State Highway Department RECOMMENDATION: Touchton moved: Carlson seconded: The Planning Commission recommend to City Council that the following projects be listed as the City's request for State Highway assistance: 1) The completion of the interchange at South Broadway and Highway 70; 2) The improvement of the intersections at Dartmouth and Santa Fe; Floyd and Santa Fe; Union and Santa Fe; and Clarkson and Highway 70; 3) The addition of South Clarkson to the State Highway System from Highway 70 south to Littleton Boulevard; and the addition of West Quincy to the State Highway System west from Santa Fe to Irving; 4) The continuation of the Columbine Freeway. alignment study, and the provision of funds for the acquisition of right-of-way. The motion carried unanimously. Respectfully submitted, By Order of the City Planning and Zoning Commission. Gertrude G. Welty Recording Secretary * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** I. CALL TO ORDER. CITY OF ENGLEWOOD PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION October 16, 1968 The Special Meeting of the City Planning and Zoning Commission was called to order by Chairman Woods at 7:50 P.M. Members present: Members absent: Carlson; Lentsch; Lone; Parkin~on; Touchton; Woods ; Romans, Ex-officio None Mr. Woods welcomed our guests and asked that they be introduced. Mr. Kelley, Chairman of the Denver Planning Board, introduced Board members Milstein, Davis, Hook, Moor, Mcintosh, and Denver Planning staff members Giltner, Grove, and Damerau. Also introduced were Mr. Ed Haase , District 6 Engineer, State Highway Department; 4nd Messrs. Gingery, Kellogg, Beardsley and Morey, from the firms of Harmon, O'Donnel and Heninger, and Meurer, Serafini and Meurer. Page 1100 Mr. Woods offered his congratulations to the City of Denver for the award from the American Institute of Planners which they recently received. Mrs. Romans stated that she and Mr. Giltner had attempted to provide one or two topics that are of mutual interest to both cities for the agenda this evening; therefore, the discussion will be concerned with the proposed Columbine Freeway location through Denver and Englewoo~ and the Model Cities Target #2 area in College View, and the adjacent Northwest Englewood area. II. COLUMBINE FREEWAY Mr. Haase of the Highway Department, stated he appreciated the opportunity to give a briefing of the program to both Planning Commissions; he stated the area of the Columbine Freeway they were presently concerned with started at the Valley Highway on the north, and extended south to the Douglas-Arapahoe County Line. The main purpose of the study is to determine the most feasible route for the highway to carry the projected traffic in the area; for this reason, more than one route is being studied. Mr. Haase stated that consideration cannot be given only to the highway itself, but joint usage and complimentary facilities must also be con- sidered. Architectural and planning aspects of the study area are also being taken into consideration, and mass transit has been briefly studied as a use on this freeway. Mr. Haase stated that the Highway Department has been making an effort to keep in contact with the public agencies that have an interest in this freeway. He stated that representatives of the Highway Department and representatives of the two consulting firms have met with the various agencies on several occasions, and have asked for their comments. Mr. Haase emphasized that the Highway Department wants to design a facility that will be desired by these communities and that the Highway Department does not want to be "pushy" about the location of the highway. Mr. Gingery, from the firm of Meurer, Serafini, and Meurer, stated that his firm had first considered the route along Santa Fe for the Columbine Freeway, inasmuch as it was an existing highway and much of the cost of obtaining right-of-way would therefore be eliminated. Santa fe on the north has a right-of-way of 74 ft., which widens into a 100 ft. right-of-way on the southern portion of Santa Fe Drive. He stated the freeway would be designed for six lanes initially, with eight lanes the ultimate design; he stated that they would recommend that bridges be built to the eight-lane width at the start of construction. He stated the right-of-way for most freeways is between 200 ft. to 300 ft. Mr. Gingery stated that most of the strip commercial use along Santa Fe would have to be removed to accommodate the right-of-way and the interchanges needed for the freeway. He stated that because of some of these problems, another route was needed for consideration, and their firm had retained Harman, O'Donnel and Henninger to develop an alternate route to Santa Fe. Mr. Morey, of Harman, O'Donnel and Henninger, stated that to have a true "alternative", they felt that the route must be some distance to the west of Santa Fe, and preferably west of the river; he felt that the freeway west of the river could serve as a buffer between the residential area and the industrial area which lies in the Platte River Valley. Santa Fe Drive and the railroad tracks serve as a buffer to this valley on the east at the present time. Denver Councilman Hook asked how far north the Freeway would start? Mr. Morey stated that they would start approximately at Gates and the Valley Highway. He stated that a second consideration was the matter of cost. The vacant land is very critical in the plan to locate the freeway to the west of the river, but with Chatfield Dam and th~ knowledge that a freeway is planned in the area, the land may not remain vacant very long. He stated that his firm had tried to place the freeway between diverse land uses, rather than through them. Mr. Morey then presented several slides of their proposed routes, and commented qn the slides. He stated that the engineering phase isn't worked out at the present time, and that they are trying to get an approval of the alignment. He discussed the routes proposed in the area of Overland Golf Course and Ruby Hills Park in Denver. He stated that he felt by using the Santa Fe Route, some firms which are located along Santa Fe would be put out of business, and, because of the nature of their businesses, they could not relocate. On the other hand,' he felt the western route for the freeway had the big advantage of giving two routes for the traffic, the freeway itself, plus Santa Fe, which would continue to carry heavy traffic. Mr. Gingery stated that Sheridan and Federal Boulevards do carry a heavy volume of traffic, but that they "don't really go anywhere to the south". He compared this to the one-way street system in Denver east of Broadway, which do have access to the Valley Highway on the south. He stated that in his opinion, an eight lane facility located on Santa Fe would be overloaded on the north end before the 20 year period would be at an end. The western alignment, however, would carry traffic through 1990 with the continuation of South Santa Fe Drive as a major arterial. Further discussion followed. Mr. Hook asked how Evans Avenue would be extended across the railroad tracks? Mr. Gingery replied that at the present time, they are considering going under the tracks, that it seems cheaper than elevating the crossing, provided there is adequate drainage. He stated that Yale would also go under the tracks, but that Dartmouth would be a grade crossing. He stated that there would be a diamond interchange at Quincy Avenue; pointing out that Quincy has more potential to carry traffic than Oxford Avenue. He stated that the report being prepared by his firm must be to the State Highway Department by February 1, 1969, and that the Highway Department will then make the final decision as to where the freeway will be located. Mr. Davis asked about the mass transit proposal; he stated that he had seen nothing in the presentation which concerned mass transit. Mr. Gingery replied that the matter had been considered, but that it was difficult to justify devoting one lane to mass transit (rubber- tired) in this area .at this ti~e. ~estated that, in his opinion, when the population density reaches.the proporti~n t~at exists in New York, that it then will be feasible, and further, that rail mass transit will also undoubtedly be considered at that time. He stated that ~hey will r~commend a design for the freeway so that mass transit can be incorporated into it at any time. Further discussion followed. Mr. K~lley a~ked if he had understood correctly that there is no requirement that the freeway be built to i~terstate s~andards? Mr. Haase stated that it would probably be considered a matter of policy, but pointed out that we are talking about similar volumes of traffic. --- ----- -- -- - ---- I I I I I I Page 110.l A short recess was called. The meeting was recalled to order at 9:20 P.M. III. MODEL CITIES PROGRAM. Mrs. Romans stated that the Model Cities program really concerns both the College View area in Denver, and the Scenic View area in Englewood. She stated that Mr. Grove had been working on the program quite extensively, and the presentation will be made by Mr. Grove. Mr. Giltner pointed out that Denver has two areas in the Model Cities Program, which comprise probably a tenth of the total population of the City. ' Mr. Grove outlined the boundaries of the Model Cities area in Denver, which are roughly South Federal Boulevard on the west, West Jewell Avenue on the north, South Pecos Street and South Zuni Street on the east, and West Dartmouth Avenue on the south. He stated that the Denver administration is aware that the residential area to the east of Zuni is in the City of Englewood, and that it is not included in the application, but they felt that the entire residential area was a "neighborhood".and should be considered as such. He stated he felt there were three "neighborhoods" within this one "neighborhood" --one for the area north of Evans Avenue, the second between Evans and Yale Avenue, and the third .between Yale Avenue and Hampden Avenue. He stated that in his opinion it would be a logical approach to the school .problem in the area if there could be a school located centrally within each of these "neighborhoods". Mr. Grove also mentioned the gulch that extends through both the area in Denver and the area in Englewood. He felt there could possibly be some sort of cooperation between the two governmental agencies on this point also. Discussion followed. Mrs. Romans stated she felt there were three points on which cooperation between Denver, Englewood and Sheridan could be effective: the matter of schools, the gulch, and fire protection. It was pointed out the fire stations that are now in the area are not by themselves ,adequate and possibly if there could be one well-manned, well-equipped, station to serve the area, it could result in a savings for the three communities. Mrs. Romans pointed out that the residents of Northwest Englewood are now circulating petitions to open additional streets in the neighborhood, and are also circulating petitions to have the area zoned for two-family residential rather than single-family as it is now. She asked if this would have any affect on the plans that Denver has in the Colleve View Area? She also pointed out that the Northwest Englewood area has water and sewer service, and that there are some of the streets paved. She pointed out that the .City has a commit- ment from Public Service Company and the Telephone Company to move, at company expense, the service poles which would be in the right-of-way at such time as the right-of-way is .secured for a street and the street is opened. She stated that in the fall of 1967, a Mr. Moore from the HUD office in Fort Worth had been in Englewood, and that he had toured the Northwest area of the City. Mr. Moore had been of the opinion that the area is improving, not deteriorating, and did not feel it would qualify for code enforcement. Mr. Grove stated that the people in the College View area were interested in keeping the "interior" area single-family residential, but on the perimeters they had mentioned "buffer zoning". He did not feel the two-family zoning under consideration in Northwest Englewood would be at all wrong --it would serve as a buffer between the industrial to the east, and the single-family residential to the west. Mr. Davis stated he thought that Denver and Englewood had been given a wonderful opportuniiy to demonstrate that two governmental bodies can cooperate on a mutual interest project, and felt it was time that we started working toward that goal. Further brief discussion followed. Mr. Kelley expressed the appreciation of the Denver Planning Board and staff for the in- vitation to meet with the Englewood Planning Commission. Mr. Woods thanked them for attending, and stated he hoped we could meet again in the future. The meeting adjourned at 10:00 P.M. Gertrude G. Welty Recording Secretary * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * I. CALL TO ORDER. CITY OF ENGLEWOOD PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION November 6, 1968 The regular meeting of the City Planning and Zoning C,ommission was called to order by Chairman Woods at 8:15 P.M. Members present: Members absent: Also present: Carlson; Lone; Lentsch; Parkinson; Touchton; Woods Romans, Ex-officio None Messrs. Lyon, Mack, Rhodus, Mock, Birk, Simpson, Gross, and Herbertson. Mr. Woods welcomed our guests to the meeting. II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES. Mr. Woods stated that the minutes of the October 9th and October 16th meetings were to fire considered for approval.