Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1969-09-16 PZC MINUTESI I I Page 1189 1. That that realty, located within the City of Englewood, .County of Arapahoe and State of Colorado, known as Lots 13 and 14, Block 3, Flood's Addition to the City of Englewood, is hereby approved for use as an o ff-street private parking facility and the parking spaces to be located thereon shall be considered as a part of those parking spaces required by the provisions of §22.5-5(a) of the Municipal Code of the City of Englewood to be maintained so long as that realty described on Attachment A hereof, or any part thereof, shall be used as an office building or banking facility. 2. That, so long as the realty described on Attachment A hereto is used either for an of fice building or for a banking facility, there shall always be maintained upon said Lots 13 and 14, Block 3, Flood's Addition to the City of Englewood, sufficient facilities for the private off-street parking of not less than 40 vehicles and no other use of said realty shall be maintained thereon. 3. That, so long as the real~y described on Attachment A hereto shall be used either as an office building or a banking facility, there shall be maintained upon said realty sufficient facilities for the private off-street parking of not less than 183 vehicles. 4. That nothing herein shall be construed to modify, abrogate or otherwise change or effect the present provisions of §22.5-5(a) of the Municipal Code of the City of Englewood. ENGLEWOOD PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION. ATTEST: Secretary" The motion carried unanimously. V. STREET NAME CHANGE State Highway 285 - West Jefferson Drive .- Hampden Avenue to Hampden Drive. CASE #38-69 Mr. Woods stated that Mr. Peterson, who was to have been present for this discussion, had been unable to attend. Mr. Carlson stated that he did not feel that it was up to the Planning Commission t o initiate the name change. He also felt letters should be sent to every person and business that had an address on this highway notifying them of the consideration and asking f or comments. Discussion followed. It was the determination of t.he Planning ColI\Illission to wait for further action until Mr. Peterson was present to discuss the matter. VI. DENVER REGIONAL COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS. Mr. Woods stated that he had been unable to attend the last Policy Committee meeting, and stated that he would like someone else to attend the meetings, as he frequently cannot do so. Discussion followed. The meeting adjourned at 9:30 P.M. Gertrude G. Welty Recording Secretary * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * I. CALL TO ORDER. CITY OF ENGLEWOOD PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 16, 1969 The regular meeting of the City Planning and Zoning Commission was called to order by Chairman Woods at 8:10 P.M. Members present: Carlson, Lentsch, Parkinson , Touchton, Woods Romans, Ex-officio Members absent: Lone Also present: City Attorney Criswell; Mr. J. Hekkers. Page 1190 II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES. · Mr. Woods stated that Minutes of the September 3, 1969, meeting were to be considered for approval. Touchton moved: Carlson seconded: The Minutes of September 3, 1969, be approved as written. The motion carried unanimously. -.... III. COLUMBINE FREEWAY LOCATION. Mr. Woods stated that at their August 5, 1969 , meeting, the City Council had requested a recommendation from the Commission on the alignment of the Columbine Fre.eway. The Planning Commission considered this referral at their meeting on August 12, 1969, and postponed fur- ther consideration of the alignment until such time as the report of the Chamber Transporta- tion Committee was available, feeling that a decision without the information from .the Englewood Chamber of Commerce Transportation Committee .would be premature. The City Council was advised of this action by a memo dated August 14, 1969, and signed by Chairman Woods. The Transportation Committee was to have met with the Commission at this meeting; however, the Chairman of the Committee could not attend and the Chamber Director and Planning Direcior have been trying to set up another meeting date that will be satisfactory to both the Com- mission and the Committee members. Mr. Woods stated that it is now his understanding that the City Council had proceeded on a decision on the location of the Freeway at their meeting on September 15, 1969, without concern of the Planning Commission determination, and he asked what action the Commission wished to take at this time. Mr. Carlson stated that he felt the time for the Planning Commission to make a recommendation was past, and that he hated to use time for research and study on this type of thing, when it isn't used to anyone's benefit except by reflection in the Minutes that the Commission had done the research, study, etc. Mr. Woods stated that he felt, as a member of the Planning Commission, that the Commission does have an obligation to the people of this community to make .a recommenda t ion after we have received all the information; if other governmental bodies do not feel that obligation and responsibility, this· does not relieve this Commission of this obligation and responsibility. Mr. Parkinson commented that he is of the opinion that this body should "go on record as a Commission". He asked who had spent more time on consideration of this Freeway than the Planning Commission, and cited the meetings the members have attended, the discussion sessions that have been held, the maps and studies that have been considered. Mr. Lentsch asked why the City Council voted on the matter on September 15? Mr. Parkinson stated that the matter was before Council, and that interested parties had apparently in- dicated to the Mayor that a decision had to be made by a given date; ther.efore, Council voted, and the Santa Fe alignment was approved , as had been requested, by a vote of four to three. Discussion followed. It was atated that one reason given for voting at that time was that a quadrangle which would show the location of the proposed freeway was to be approved by the CounciL of Governments at their meeting on September 17th, and the City Council did not want the quadrangle approved withou t a position being taken by the City Council, thus the vote. Also, City Council, in making the decision in favor of the Santa Fe alignment, felt that Santa Fe would be more beneficial economically in getting people into the shopping center than would the western alignment be. Discussion followed. Mrs. Romans noted that correspondence had been sent from the Planning . Office to all of the other concerned governmental jur&sdictions asking their action or opinion on the loc.ation of the freeway.· The,., City of Denver Planning Board has sent a written reply st~ting they are in favor of the ~estern route; the Denver Department of Public Works has not taken a formal position on the matter, b ut they do state that "at the moment , I have no reason to belie v e that the consultant's study on the subject should not be the guide which we follow." T he letter is signed by Mr. R. C. Thomas, Chief .Tr.a ffic Engineer. No other r e p l i es have been received to this date. Discussion followed. The mat t e r o f c ondi tions p recedent "imposed" by Mr. Von Frellick prior to the agreement to relo c a te t he s h o pping c om p lex from the KLZ site to the p+esent location was discussed. The . c ond itio n s whic h Mr . Von Fr ellick stipulated should be met before construction of the shopping cent e r we r e se t f o rth in a letter dated December 30, 1963, which was addressed to Honorable Mayo r a n d City Counci l of E ng lewood , Colorado, and was signed by Gerri Von Frellick. The le t te r an d a p p e ndix are a s follows: "VO N FRELLICK ASSOCIATES Lakeside Center Denver 12, Colorado Honorable Mayor an d City Council of Englewood, Colorado Gentlemen: December 30, 1963 I have been asked to g ive consideration to the construction -0f three major department stores and related facilities on Englewood City Park land and adjacent priva ~ely owned property. Such a project would be a complete downtown redevelopment program and could no t be considered a shopping ce nt e r. Such a downtown redevelopment plan is only feasible if very large amounts of pa r king space c an be provided. Shopping center dev~lopers,. su?h as myself, can · normally provide · the · required parking facilities necessary for a regional shopping center because they are able to acquire land at prices ranging from 10¢ to 20¢ per square foot. This is not possible in lands adjacent to the core c en ter of a downtown area such as Englewood. I I I I I I Page 1191 The cost of the acquisition of the privately held property plus the $1,D00,000 committed to be paid the city for the city park lands total in excess of $2,000,000 for raw land costs. A large portion of this land would be required to provide the necessary access and egress to this unsuitably located piece of property. Because of the low level terrain, $1,500,000 of fill costs would be necessary to bring the grade levels of the golf course area up to a suitable level for shopping center use. Substantial sums would be spent by the developer for grade separations and otherwise solve the unsatisfactory access problem. The largest problem is the necessity to provide a municipal parking garage, in addition to the surface parking, to furnish more than 6,000 parking stalls. Such downtown redevelopment costs are so great that any developer would need the assistance .o f the city to solve the high costs of these access and municipal parking garage services. Although done in many major metropolitan cities, Englewood would not be expected to pay the capital costs of land acquisition and construction of municipal parking garage and parking facilities. If the City of Englewood would be willing to commit now to accept a deed of the 60 plus acres of land in addition to a completed municipal parking garage containing more than 2,000 parking stalls, in consideration of a long term contract to operate and maintain these facilities by the developer, then I believe we could continue to give consideration to such a downtown Englewood redevelopment plan. This decision would remove from Englewood's property tax rolls all of the land, parking lot improvements and the municipal garage. Be- cause we would commit to complete more than 750,000 square feet of store buildings (25% more than Cinderella City) the resultant tax income to Englewood would be larger than would be available should we build on the KLZ site. In addition , all of the school tax would accrue to the Englewood school district,. instead of the minor portion which would come to the school district from the KLZ site. In addition, because of the greater number of stores which would be built, a substantial increase in the sales tax revenue would also result from con- structing the downtown redevelopment plan on the City Park lands. There are a number of reasons why the City of Englewood might want to give consideration to working with a developer to accomplish such an urban redevelopment plan: 1. $1,000,000 in cash would be paid the city for the use in the constructing and acquisition of a modern parks and recreation program facilities. 2. Because of inadequate parking and retail facilities, Englewood customers are forced to sho p elsewhere, thus causing a decline in present downtown values and projected loss of future downtown property tax base. New retail facilities will be built somewhere in Arapahoe County to serve this expanding market. This may be the only opportunity to locate these facilities in Englewood and thus be assured of the sales tax income. 3. Present market studies indicate mininum sales projection available to the additional stores to be located in the downtown . project at $50,000,000 producing $500,000 per year which Englewood would receive from sales taxes, the City of Englewood's portion of the ad valorem taxes on the buildings, improvements, fixtures, and inventory would be sub- stantially in excess of $60,000 per year. The projected loss of $20,000 per year in City of Englewood property taxes is extremely modest in view of the tremendous expenses and debt service with which other cities are burdened in order to provide adequate municipal parking facilities. In addition to the approval of the voters to sell the existing park land for $1,000,000 worth of better park facilities and the voters' approval of bond issu~ necessary for acquisi~ tion of the Norgren property for a new municipal ci~y hall, there [are] many other legal, financial and mechanical details which must be resolved in order for us to give further consideration of this downtown Englewood project. I will continue to work with the City of Englewood towards acco~plishing this project so long as .it appears .that progress continues to be made on an orderly schedule which woul d enable us to meet our commitments and obligations to provide store facilities for the merchants to serve the South D~nver trade area. We will al s o need assurance that our present property at the KLZ tract can be promptly zoned to permit us to construct low level luxury type garden apartments, or other use which would permit us to recover our substantial investment in this land. Since .you can not assure us that all problems on the downtown site will be resolved ~n a schedule which would permit us to complete the project, we must continue with our plans and litigation to determine our right to construct Cinderella City on the KLZ site. I have asked our attorneys to work with the City Attorney and representatives of the City of Englewood towards accomplishing a mutually acceptable contract which would spell out in detail the necessary considerations and commitments which might permit the C~ty Council to submit such a proposal to the voters of Englewood. If there is any further information needed, or if there is any other way in which we can work that will be helpful, please do not hesitate to advise us. GVF:am" Respec~fully submitted, /s / Gerri Von Frellick Gerri Von Frellick "APPENDIX DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED TRANSACTION 1. Premises. The project would be built on a tract of land ~omprising approximately 63 acres which is bounded by the railroad right-of-way on the west, Hampden on the south, and Floyd on the north, the easterly boundary being irregular. About .23 acres of this land is in private hands. The remaining 40 acres are owned by the City of Englewood, a part being subject to a lease at nominal rents for a very long term of years •. We propose to acquire all of the City land excepting the parcel which is actually covered by the present City Hall. 2. Price. We would pay $1,000,000 to the City for its land. An absolute condition of the purchase is that this money be segregated from other City funds and used exclusively for the acquisition of new park lands and for the development of park lands already owned by the City. As you know, interested citizens' groups have already obtained options to acquire Page 1192 lands for park purposes. I understand .your parks department is enthusiastic over the prospect. 3. Terms. The entire price would be paid in cash at the closing. 4. Purchaser. A corporation which would be controlled by private investors, including myffi lf. 5. Description of project. There is a large difference in grade between the easterly and westerly portions of the site. A retail development cannot be built upon such widely di f fering levels. Therefore, it is essential that a flat plane be created from which the buildings can rise. This could of course be done by leveling the . site, taking earth from the easterly part and placing it at the westerly part. The final grade would be considerably below Hampden and the surrounding streets unless huge tonnages of earth are brought in from other areas. This would raise the total land costs to levels at which retail development becomes completely unfeasible. The only alternative which presently occurs to us is that part of the easterly portion of the site be excavated and the earth placed on the westerly side to diminish grade differences. Parking structures would then be built over some of the depressed parts of the site so that a sort of platform would cover the entire area under the store buildings. Part of this would be soil and a part would be the roofs of the parking structures. Its grade would be about equal to that of Hampden. This subsurface structure, along with parking at the Hampden grade level and possible parking structures arising above that level would permit the parking of 6,000 or more automobiles . The exact number of spaces to be provided would depend upon the number of square feet of building space to be constructed. Rising from this platform would be a number of structures housing the retail, commercial and office uses which are typical of downtown areas. Obviously, we cannot give you the exact areas of these buildings but we feel confident of being able to construct at least 750,000 square feet and the figure may be as high as 1,000,000. Upon completion of the project the City of Englewood, if requested to do so, would accept a conveyance of the entire land area and all parking structures. The deed would provide that the parking structures shall for a long period of years be used solely for short-term (not over eight hours) parking of automobiles by the public without charge. During this period we would agree to repair, stripe, light, sweep and otherwise supervise and manage these parking structures, at our cost. In other words, we will have no ownership interest in these structures as a tenant or otherwise, but we will pay the cost of operating them. Let me emphasize that the parking would be available free to all users and would not be restricted to our tenants or their customers. We would retain the right to own and use that part of the entire project lying above certain datum levels. Such ownership is permitted by a Colorado Statute. We would of course require some right~ with respect to the lower portion of the project, most of which will be owned by the City. These would include for example the right to maintain supporting columns, utility lines, fire stairs, elevators, escalators and ramps through the lower portions. Otherwise it would not be possible to operate the upper portions. In addition it would be necessary for us to retain the right to use about ten percent of the lower areas for uses which are ancillary to upper-level occupancies. While I cannot guarantee that we have anticipated all of these, I am sure that off-street loading facilities would have to be provided in these areas, along with certain drive-in and drive-through uses for upper-floor tenants, package- delivery facilities for customers, a service station and allied uses normally incident to such a large parking garage. We would retain easements and in .some cases fee interests for these purposes. 6. Conditions precedent. We all understand that the project cannot be feasible until a gre at deal of preliminary work takes place. The principal conditions which will have to exist at the closing are these: (a) Contract. A contract must be prepared and agreed on. (b) Election. An election should be held promptly for the purpose of authorizing the sale of the City lands pursuant to the contract and other features of the transaction which may require voter approval. (c) Zoning. The entire project area (not merely the part now owned by the City) must be zoned B-1, and if such zoning does not permit construction and operation of the project outlined below, appropriate variances must be obtained for that purpose. This zoning would not apply to the northerly 100 feet of the project, which can be zoned in any manner permitting its use for parking. We are willing to consider a covenant in the deed which will require us to construct and maintain a screen of planting along the northerly 20 feet of this strip. (d) Vacation of streets, etc. All streets, alleys and avenues, not only in the area now owned by the City but in the entire project, must be vacated. (e) Access. The means of vehicular and pedestrian access to the entire area must be drastically improved. You are familiar with our general ideas on this subject. We will shortly deliver to you more definitive plans showing what we have in mind. (f) National Guard Lease. The land now occupied by the National Guard must be made available. We will pay for the construction of comparable improvements on other City-owned property. (g) Lions Club Lease. The Lions Club must consent to a termination of their lease for swimming pool and other recreational uses. (h) Norgren Plant. We must have reasonable assurances that the Norgren Plant · will be operated for purposes compatible with the retail center for a long period of time. Your suggestion that it be purchased or rented by the City and used as a new City Hall and office building is ideal, and there are other possibilities.· We must know what will happen before going ahead, because it is not hard to imagine developments there which would completely destroy any possibility of our making desirable retail leases. We should also have some reasonable assurance that the part of the Norgren site at the c orner of Hampden and Elati will be maintained for parking. I I I I I I Page 1193 (i) Drainage Plan. We must have the City's cooperation in developing and implementing a reasonable drainage plau, and in moving the line of Little Dry Creek. (j) Utility Services. Construction of the project will obviously require substantial increases in the capacity of water, sewer, electrical and telephone lines. Most existing facilities would have to be altered and moved~ (k) KLZ Site. If we are to abandon our proposals to use the KLZ site as a shopping center, it must be zoned in a manner giving us a reasonable .probabibility of recovering our large investment in that site. We think the site should be zoned to permit medium to high density multiple dwelling with a limited .area for commercial uses in the southerly part of the parcel. A major portion of the site would probably be devoted to condominium development, which might take the form of a rather expensive row-house development. (1) Miscellaneous. Undoubtedly other questions will become apparent as we study this project in more detail. Our willingness to proceed is of course conditional on the probability of success within a reasonable time. Serious litigation, failure of title to the privately-owned lands, or other equally serious circumstances would .probably terminate our interest." It was noted that the points of access that Mr. Von Frellick mentions in additional correspondence and agreements are: "A • B. c. D. E. F. Hampden Interchange and stop lights. Dartmouth and Santa Fe interchange. \ Floyd, Girard, Hampden one-way streets. Acoma and Bannock one-way streets. Broadway-Hampden interchange left hand turns across traffic. Other access problems." It was noted that in none of the correspondence from Mr. Von Frellick prior to the con- struction of the shopping complex was there any reference to the fact that the Freeway must be on the Santa Fe alignment. The concern in relation to South Santa Fe Drive was with an improved .intersection or interchange at Dartmouth and South Santa Fe Drive. Dis- cussion followed. Mr. Touchton commented that it might well be more feasible to have the freeway /railroad com- bination from the economic view point in obtaining right-of-way. Discussion followed. It was noted that at the meeting the Commission had with Mr. Kelley and Mr. Gingery, a letter was presented which stated that the railroads would be willing to relocate, provided equal property was obtained --equal as far as square footage was concerned, and equal in valuation also , the property would have to be industrially zoned, and all uti~itie~ would have to be in. The matter of what agency would pay for this land was discussed. Mr.Peterson of the Englewood Chamber of Commerce entered during the aforementioned discussion. Mr . Woods suggested that perhaps the Commission should hear Mr. Peter~on's report from the Chamber of Commerce. Mr. Peterson stated that the Transportation Committee of the Chamber of Commerce had studied this matter for most of the year. They also had conferences with Mr. Shumate, Mr.Haase, and Mr. Burton of the State Highway Department, and with Mr. Von Frellick and some of his representatives. Mr. Peterson stated that Mr. Haase was not optomistic on the financial status of the proposed freeway. After a conferenGe with County Commissioner John Christensen, it was determined that if a "unified" front could be presented to the Governor, that possibly "carryover funds" could be appropriated for this project, and at least make a start on the freeway. Mr. Peterson stated that the Transportation Com- mittee, after considerable study, had recommended to the Chamber of Commerce Board of Directors that the State Highway Department be asked to: (1) improve Santa Fe Drive to a six lane major arterial, and (2) to construct the Freeway on the recommended western alignment as soon as possible. However, at a meeting .on September 12, 1969, the Chamber of Commerce Board of Directors had considered the matter in terms of "accomplishment" within the City and who was responsible for the accomplishment. Mr. Peterson stated that Mr. Von Frellick has "gotten the job done in the past", and that Mr. Von Frellick apparently took it "::is a personal affront that the Chamber Transportation Committee didn't agree with hi~.'' Mr. Von Frellick had stated that he could get th~ freeway constructed in five Y.ears, and have it in operation by the time of the '76 Olympics. Therefore, the Chamber Board of Directors voted in favor of the Santa Fe alignment. Mr. Lentsch asked whether we would ever get the western route if we approved the Santa Fe improvement now? Mr. Lentsch stated that he felt we had to look at the long-range picture when considering the location of the freeway, and not just which was less .expensive now. Mr. Lentsch also asked about the carrying capacity of the Santa Fe alignment vs. the western alignment? The Meurer-Serafini-Meurer Report was referred to which states: "Traffic carrying capacity provided by the Western Route compared with the Santa Fe Route shows a substantial difference. A freeway of the ·type proposed in this study would carry approximately 104,000 vehicles per day at a "C" design level. Santa Fe Drive now carries approximately 35,000 vehicles per day. A two lane frontage road, one way, could carry approximately 10,000 vehicles per day. On this basis, the traffic carrying capacity available with . the Western Route would be 104,000 for the Freeway, 35,000 for Santa Fe Dr., 10,000 for each one way frontage road, totaling 150,000 vehicles per day. If the Freeway were located on Santa Fe Dr. with discontinuous frontage roads, the carrying capacity would be approximately 104,000 vehicles per day." It was questioned whether or not Santa Fe, as proposed by the Chamber of Commerce and the City Council, would have limited access, or whether we are talking about a six lane arterial with traffic signals and access much the same as it is now? Mr. Parkinson excused himself from the meeting. Mr. Peterson stated that Mr. Von Frellick considered Santa Fe because it would meet the standards of a freeway; they would have eight lanes with no stop lights and limited access. There would be about the same number and location of interchanges as are proposed on the western route. Mr. Lone entered the meeting. Mr. Lentsch asked if we would still have the Dartmouth and Santa Fe interchange? Page 1194 Mrs. Romans stated that according to accepted Highway standards, interchanges are constructed one mile apart, thus putting interchanges at Evans, Yale and U.S. 285. Discussion followed It was recalled that when Mr. Kelley and Mr. Gingery had presented the plans on behalf of Mr. Von Frellick, they did not show "interchanges" as they are normally thought of, but rather "grade separations". Mr. Criswell pointed out tbat the City has attempted for approximately 12 years to have an interchange build at U.S . 285 and South Broadway, and funds are just now being appropriated for the acquisition of right-of-way. Discussion of funding followed. Mr. Lone commented that the State Highway Department is be- ginning to improve Santa Fe in Denver. Mr. Lone also discussed the traffic "jams" that are occurring on Santa Fe at the present time. He stated that he felt it would be best to have Santa Fe improved to a six lane arterial and to have the Freeway constructed on the western route. The letter from Mr. Von Frellick to the Mayor and City Council dated December 30, 1963, was again discussed. Mr. Lone stated that he did not feel that placing the .freeway one-half mile or even one mile to the west would be removing it from the area completely. Mr. Lone stated that he felt the City would be hurting itself to completely abandon the western alignment for the freeway. Discussion followed. Right-of-way acquisition costs were again discussed. Mr. Lone stated that according to figures cited by Mr. Kelley, the Santa Fe route for the freeway, were it to be extended south to County Line Road, would cost $2,000,000 more than the western route, but that the total figures are never given by the proponents of the Santa Fe alignment. Mr. Criswell commented that he felt the right-of-way costs were a minor factor when building freeways of equal length --that timing is a bigger problem than the right-of-way costs. Discussion followed. Mr. Lone stated that he was disturbed that commissions such as this one and committees like the Chamber's Transportation Committee could go through the great accumulation of information and attend conferences on a particular matter, and then be completely ignored by the persons who make decisions without the benefit of the facts. Mr. Lone .sa~d he felt it would be .rather "anti-climactic" for this Commission to take any action on this matter when the privilege to make a recommendation has been ursurped by the City Council. Mr. Carlson moved: In view of action taken by the City CounGil September 15, 1969, the matter of the location of the Columbine Freeway be tabled. There was no second to the motion to Table and Mr. Woods declared the motion dead. Mr. Woods stated that he still .felt the Commission had a duty to make a recommendation re- gardless of the Council's action. Mr. Touchton agreed that a recommendation might be ineffective at this point, but that we should still make one. Mr. Lo)ne stated that in his opinion, the City Council was remiss in the action it had taken September 15, 1969, but that the Commission should not dodge its responsibilities and thus also be remiss . Mr . Lone then stated that he wasn't sure that he was ready to 'make a1 recommendation at this time, that he felt there would be some s t rong feelings regarding the Council action, and that possibly we should check back with the State Highway Department. Discussion followed. Mr. Carlson stated that he felt that in the future the Council should give a date .as to when the Commission must make a recommendation ; and if there is a deadline the Commission would then try in every way possible t0 meet the suggested date. Further dis- cussion followed. Mr. Woods pointed out that in the communication to City Council dated August 14, 1969, it was clearly stated that the Commission wanted to receive the report of the Transportation Committee of the Chamber of Commerce before making a recommendation, and that the City Council should have been well aware when the Transportation Committee meets, when the Chamber Board of Directors meets, and when our meetings are, and that since the Board of Directors had rendered their action September 12 , 1969, which was Friday, the Com- mission had hardly had an opportunity to go over the matter before this meeting. The recom- mendation of the Transportation Committee was again discussed. Mr. Woods commented that everyone is concerned about the economical status of the City in building the Freeway, but that the primary concern should be about the efficient movement of traffic, and for that .reason, he would have to agree with the report of the Transportation Committee of the Chamber of Commerce. Further discussion followed. Mr. Peterson noted that a tentative meeting date of September 30th had been set between the Planning Commission and the Transportation Committee; if the Commission did not reach a decision this evening, he felt the meeting might still prove profitable. It was noted that Mr. Parkinson had hoped to return to the meeting , and for that reason the matter was dropped at this point. Mr. Woods thanked Mr. Peterson for attending the meeting to discuss the recommendation made by the Chamber of Commerce. IV. ALL METALS, INC. CASE #39-69 3275-1/2 S. Santa Fe Drive Mrs. Romans stated that the following letter has been referred to the Planning Commission by Chief Building Inspector Hamilton: Mr. W. A. Hamilton Chief Building Inspector City of Englewood 3400 South Elati Englewood, Colorado 80110 Dear Mr. Hamilton: "JOHN B. O'MALLEY , JR. Consulting Professional Engineer 902 Geneva Street Aurora , Colorado 80010 September 8, 1969 I I I I I I Page 1195 All Metals, Inc., is a newly formed Colorado Corporation. Business is . being set up at 3275-1/2 South Santa Fe Drive, Englewood, Colorado. The activity of the company is to refine high percentage metal materials into pure elements. The source of the .high percenta g e metal .materials is from water. The process has been de- veloped and perfected over the last twelve years of research and development work. I t con- sists of pumping the water through screening equipment to remove any solid material. The water is then passed a machine , "Electro-Chemical Method for Selected Dissociation", covered by United States Patent Application No. 679-484. The metals thus recovered are prepared using hydro-metallurgical equipment into various high grade groups •. The chemicals used in this work are non-corrosive and non-toxic. The groups requiring melting to produce pure metal , are then processed in high temperature electric induction f urnaces. The hi g h per- centage metal content of these products keeps smoke and contaminates to a minimum. Due to the possible high mineral content of these products of combustion, and also to eliminate any chance of air pollution, electro-static precipitators are being installed in the discharge ducts from the building in all rooms where melting or chemical work is being conducted. If any further information or data is necessary , we will be happy to furnish it. JBOM:b" Very truly yours, ALL METALS , INC. /s / John B. O'Malley, Jr. John B. O'Malley, Jr .· President The Zoning Ordinance prohibits the extraction or smelting of metals, but at the time the Ordinance was written, it was done with the idea that "mining" the metals from the earth would be prohibited. Extracting the metals f rom t he water in the proposed manner had not been considered. Mrs. Romans stated that she did not feel this specific use wa s mentioned in the Zoning Ordinance. Tri-County Health Department has verbally stated to acting Chief Building Inspector Hamilton that there would be no air or wat er pollution from this use, and had indicated t hat a letter would be submitted stating this fact. The letter has not arrived, however, in time for submission at this meeting. There will be no excavating of earth, but just pumping water from the river. Discussion on mining rights and water rights ensued. Mrs. Romans stated that the matter before the Commission is that of determining whether or not the use should be permitted in the I-1 District. Discussion followed. Touchton moved: Carlson seconded: The Planning Director be directed to advise Mr. Hamilton that this appears to be a use that is not mentioned in the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance, but one that would be compatible to the I-1 Zoning, in that no obnoxious odors, noises, gas, dust, fumes, heat , glare is emitted, and it does not appear to be hazardous to the health and property of the surrounding areas ; therefore, under the provisions of §22.5-19 o f the Municipal Code, it is approved by the Commission. There is to be compliance with all other applicable codes and ordinances of the City of Englewood, and approval from the Tri-County Health Department. The motion carried unanimously. V . LITTLETON REZONING Mrs. Evelyn Grimm CASE #36-69B Sept. 3, 1969 August 12 , 1969 Mrs. Romans stated that the information was obtained from the City o f Littleton that the Commission requested, and had been delivered to the members of the Englewood Planning Com- mission several days ago. As they had requested , a telephone poll was taken, and as a result of this poll of all of the members .of the Commission, a letter was written to Mr. Larry Borg.er, Littleton City Manager, which did not register objection to the rezoning ap- plication but which stated the concern of the Englewood Planning Commission over the traffic situation existing on West Belleview Avenue. It was also suggested in this letter to Mr. Borger that the traffic engineers for the City of Littleton, Englewood, and the State Highway Department get together to work on a program of traffic control for the area. Mrs. Romans stated that a copy of the letter was sent to Public Works Director Waggoner, and to Mr. Shepherd of the State Highway Department. - - ---- - -- - -- --- - ------ - --~ VI. WORK PROGRAM OF PLANNING DEPARTMENT . Mrs. Romans briefly discussed the program ·of the Department. was being made on the revision of the Zoning Ordinance. Mr. hope that it would be completed by the committee assigned to of the year. Discussion followed. VII . COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS. Mr . Lone asked what progress Criswell stated that he would draft the revision by the first Mrs. Romans noted that the regular meeting of the Council of Governments is scheduled for September 17th. She also noted that it is extremely important to have an Englewood representative at both the Council meetings and at the Policy Advisory Committee meetings. Discussion followed. Mr. Woods stated tba 1 be t s n @t abLe to attend the Policy Advisory meetings and asked Mr. Lentsch to attend the Policy Advisory Committee meetings in October and November. Mr. Lentsch stated be would try to attend the meetings for the next couple of months, but that it was doubtful he could do so. Mr. Carlson volunteered to attend the meetings after November. ---- - - - -~ - - ----- - - --- - Page 1196 VIII. COMMISSION ACTION. Mr. Carlson stated that the Commission bas tried not to approve rezonings on a "speculative basis", but that streets and alleys have been vacated by the Commission and it seems that a few of these requests have been ."speculative" in nature. Discussion followed. No action was taken. III (B). COLUMBINE FREEWAY .. This matter was a g ain considered. Mr . Lone moved: Touchton seconded: The following resolution be approved by the City Planning and Zoning Commission and referred to the City Council: RESOLUTION WHEREAS", for some months the Planning Commission has carried on an extensive investigation and review of the matter of the alignment of the proposed Columbine Freeway (Englewood Ex- pressway), and WHEREAS , to this end, this Commission bas reviewed the Meurer, Serafini and Meurer report thereupon; bas reviewed the Gingery report tbereupon;.bas conferred with represent atives of the State Highway Department and representatives of Von Frellick Associates, Inc.; bas at- tended conferences and panel discussions thereupon and bas solicited the views of surrounding governmental entities, and WHEREAS, as noted in this Commission's report to Council .of August 14, 1969, it was the in- tent of this Commission to have met with the Transportation Committee of the Englewood Chamber of Commerce, which has also carried on extensive studies of the problem, prior to rendering its recommendation thereon; and WHEREAS, the Transportation Committee of the Englewood Chamber of Commerce has, on September 12, 1969, made its recommendation to the Englewood Chamber of Commerce wherein it recommended that: "The State Highway Department be requested to: 1. Improve Santa Fe Drive by increasing it to a six lane arterial with a center turn lane, for the prime purpose of serving local area traffic, and 2. Construct the Englewood Freeway (Columbine Freeway) on the recommended western alignment absolutely as soon as possible." WHEREAS, these steps solve not only the immediate, but the long-range future traffic needs of the area; NOW, THEREFORE , BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Commission of the City of Englewood, whose responsibility as set forth in the City Charter is to recommend to the City Council of the City of Englewood a comprehensive plan for the physical development of the City of Englewocd, supports and endorses the recommendation of the Englewood Chamber of Commerce Transportatiai Committee, and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Planning and Zoning Commission recommends to the Englewood City Council th~t inasmuch as the aforementioned two-step recommendation of the Chamber .of Commerce Transportation Committee coincides with the findings of the Commission, that it be the official position of the City of Englewood in the matter of the alignment of the Columbine Freeway." Discussion on the resolution followed. Mr. Lentsch asked if this resolution would unite tlE City stand, or if it would pull us farther apart. Mr. Lone stated that the Resolution would state that the Commission supports and endo r ses the determination of the Transportation Com- mittee of the Chamber of Commerce, and that it would not unite the Commission determination and the Council determination. Mr. Touchton stated .that this is a very technical decision that bas to be made, and .that it is a difficult decision even with all of the information that the Commissiou has received and studied. Mr. Woods stated that he felt the City Council should have taken the same "direction" and not made a decision until after the reports and decisions from the various committees and commissions were in. Mr. Lentsch stated be agreed that the Council should have waited, but just wasn't sure what the resolution, if adopted 1.::y the Commission, would do. Mr. Lone stated he didn't feel the Commission should back a pro- posal if it didn't feel that it would be the best plan for the area. He stated that he thinks the improvement of Santa Fe is fine, but that keeping in mind the long range plans which the Planning Commission is charged with considering, he is of the opinion that the City should have Santa Fe improved immediately and the western route for the Freeway as soon as possible. It was stated that this Commission should not let their feelings on the best traffic movement and access be changed by one person, but should instead consider the interests of the "community". The vote was called on the Resolution: AYES: Carlson; Lone; Touchton; Woods NAYS: Lentsch ABSENT: Parkinson The motion carried. The meeting was declared adjourned at 10:45 P. M. Gertrude G. Welty Recording Secretary ---------- ----- - - I I I I I I Page 1197 MEMORANDUM TO THE ENGLEWOOD CITY COUNCIL REGARDING ACTION OR RECOMMENDATION OF THE CITY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION. DATE: September 16, 1969 SUBJECT: Location of Columbine Freeway COMMISSION ACTION: Mr. Lone moved: Touchton seconded: The following resolution be approved by the City Planning and Zoning Commission and referred to the City Council: RESOLUTION WHEREAS, for some months the Planning Commission has carried on an extensive investigation and review of the matter of the alignment of the proposed Columbine Freeway (Englewood Express- way), and WHEREAS, to this end, this Commission has reviewed the Meurer, Serafini and Meurer report thereupon; has reviewed the Gingery report thereupon; has conferred with representatives of the State Highway Department and representatives of Von Frellick Associates, Inc.; has attended conferences and panel discussions thereupon and has solicited the views of surrounding governmenta 1 entities, .and WHEREAS , as noted in this Commission's report to Council of August 14, 1969, it was the in- tent of this Commission to have met with the Transportation Committee of the Englewood Chamber of Commerce, which has also carried on extensive studies of the problem, prior to rendering its recommendation thereon; and WHEREAS, the Transportation Committee of the Englewood Chamber of Commerce has, on September 12, 1969, made its recommendation to the Englewood Chamber of Commerce wherein it recommended that: "The State Highway Department be requested to: 1. Improve Santa Fe Drive by increasing it to a six lane arterial with a center turn lane, for the prime purpose of serving local area traffic, and 2. Construct the· Englewood Freeway (Columbine Freeway) on the recommended western alignment absolutely as soon as possible." WHEREAS, these steps solve not only the immediate, but the long-range, future traffic needs of the area, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Commission of the City of Englewood, whose responsibility as set forth in the City Charter is to recommend to the City Council of the City of Englewood a comprehensive plan for the physical development of the City of Englewood, supports and endorses the recommendation of the Englewood Chamber of Commerce Transportation Committee, and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Planning and Zoning Commission recommends to the Engle- wood City Council that inasmuch as the aforementioned two-step recommendation of the Chamber of Commerce Transportation Committee coincides with .the findings of the Commission, that it be the official position of the City of Englewood in the matte~ of the alignment of the Columbine Freeway." AYES: Carlsonl;:Lone; Touchton; Woods NAYS: Lentsch ABSENT: Parkinson The motion carried. 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 SPECIAL SESSION September 30, 1969 The special meeting of the City Planning and Zoning Commission was called to order by Chairman Woods at 8:00 P.M. The members present acknowledged receiving notice of the meeting and the items to be dis- cussed on the agenda. Members present: Carlson; Lentsch; Touchton; Woods Romans, Ex-officio Members absent: Lone; Parkinson Also present: Messrs. Burt, Armstrong, Anderson