HomeMy WebLinkAbout1995-04-25 PZC MINUTESe CITY OF ENGLEWOOD PLANNING AND ZONING C01\1MISSION
APRIL 25, 1995
SPECIAL MEETING
I. CALL TO ORDER.
The Special Meeting of the City Planning and Zoning Commission was called to order at 7:00
P .M. by Vice-Chairman Redpath.
Members present: Shoop, Tobin, Weber, Douglas, Garrett, Horner, Redpath
Merkel, Ex-officio
Members absent: Dummer , Mason
Also present: Harold J. Stitt, Planning Administrator
Dan Brotzman, City Attorney
II. KING SOOPERS AT TROLLEY SQUARE
Planned Development
CASE #3-95
Vice-Chairman Redpath stated that the agenda this evening is devoted to continuance of the
Public Hearing on the Planned Development application filed on behalf of King Soopers at
Trolley Square. The Hearing was officially opened at the regular meeting of April 18, 1995,
and continued to this date and time.
Tobin moved:
Weber seconded: The continued Public Hearing on the Planned Development for King
Soopers at Trolley Square be opened.
AYES:
NAYS:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
Tobin, Weber, Douglas, Garrett, Homer, Shoop, Redpath
None
None
Dummer, Mason
The motion carried.
Vice-Chairman Redpath asked for the staff presentation.
Harold J. Stitt was sworn in, and presented Proof of Publication and Certification of Posting to
the Chair for the record.
1
Mr. Stitt testified that the issue before the Commission is a request for Planned Development e
approval for the redevelopment of Trolley Square. The proposal includes demolition of the
Broadway retail frontage and the parking structure, and the eventual expansion of King Soop-
ers to the south. Mr. Stitt stated that this proposal has been reviewed with other city depart-
ments, and their comments were included in the staff report. Water and sewer lines that will
not be used in the redevelopment must be disconnected at the main and capped. The bulk of
the comments pertain to traffic issues, the right-in/right-out movement requested from South
Broadway, parking sufficiency, and the need for additional right-of-way along West Floyd
A venue and Englewood Parkway to accommodate future traffic improvements.
Mr. Stitt stated that a Planned Development is an over-lay district, and applicants must comply
with underlying zoning standards. Mr. Stitt addressed the parking issue as an example; the
required parking must be equal to the gross floor area of businesses 7 ,500 square feet and
over. Mr. Stitt stated that this requirement will be met, even after demolition of the parking
garage and the Broadway retail frontage. Mr. Stitt emphasized that the parking requirement is
for "area", and not a specified number of "spaces". The driving aisles proposed in the redevel-
opment will be a little wider than the minimum requirement of the Zoning Ordinance.
Mr. Stitt addressed the issue of site access, and the requested future dedication of additional
right-of-way along West Floyd Avenue and .Englewood Parkway. The redevelopment of Cin-
derella City makes traffic movements in the downtown area an uncertain quantity, and staff is
suggesting that additional right-of-way along West Floyd Avenue and Englewood Parkway
may well be needed to provide for turning movements and increased capacity. If the RTD
Light Rail station is developed in conjunction with the redevelopment of Cinderella City, the
RTD buses will probably be using Englewood Parkway to get to the station from the Broadway
route. The additional right-of-way on West Floyd Avenue would be used to provide a right-
tum lane from eastbound Floyd to southbound Broadway, and a left-tum on westbound Floyd
to the King Soopers entrance at approximately South Acoma Street.
The right-in/right-out curb cuts on Broadway were then addressed by Mr. Stitt. There will be
points of ingress/egress from West Floyd Avenue and from Englewood Parkway, in addition
to the proposed access from South Broadway. The Public Works Department has indicated
that it is their opinion that, while the Broadway curb cuts may result in an increase of the
number of vehicles at the site, it does provide adequate means of ingress/egress. Mr. Stitt ac-
knowledged that if the additional right-of-way is dedicated, this may result in the loss of some
existing landscaping. If this is the case, there is the "fee-in-lieu" provision in the landscaping
requirements if there is no other location on-site that can accommodate landscaping. The "fee-
in-lieu" may be used to provide landscaping in another location, which will help mitigate the
loss of landscaping on a particular site.
Mr. Stitt stated that some of the Broadway businessmen have expressed concerns relating to
the impact the redevelopment and removal of Broadway retail frontage will have on the
downtown. Kaufman's "Tall and Big Shop" will remain, and the redevelopers propose a 2,500
square foot "pad" at Floyd and Broadway for future development. Mr. Stitt stated that the is-
sue is that of an "acceptable urban frontage"; is what is proposed adequate.
2
J
9 Mr. Garrett asked what kind of documentation would be required to trigger additional right-of-
way dedications along West Floyd. Mr. Stitt stated that the determination will be based on
traffic counts and turning movements. The additional right-of-way on either Floyd or the
Parkway probably will not be required until the redevelopment of Cinderella City and a clearer
determination on traffic patterns emerges.
Mr. Garrett inquired whether the widening of Englewood Parkway would require demolition
of the structures on the north side of the Parkway. Mr. Stitt stated that it will; there would not
be sufficient space to widen the Parkway unless the buildings were to be demolished. Mr.
Garrett inquired about taking the right-of-way from the south side of the Parkway, and realign-
ing the· median. Mr. Stitt stated that this would create a "jog" in the Parkway/Girard alignment
on either side of South Broadway.
Mr. Redpath noted that the RTD buses now use West Floyd Avenue; he asked whether use of
the Parkway by RTD has been discussed with them. Mr. Stitt stated that rerouting of buses to
complement the proposed redevelopment pattern for Cinderella City has been discussed for
quite some time. However, until the final design plans for the redevelopment are in place,
determination on traffic routes cannot be finalized.
Mr. Horner inquired whether there were any design guidelines, standards, or visioning state-
ment in effect, or adopted to affect, the redevelopment of the 3300 block of South Broadway
during the 1980's. Mr. Stitt stated that there are "design guidelines" for the South Broadway
Incentive Area, which applied to the rehabilitation of "existing buildings"; these guidelines
were used in conjunction with the Broadway Facade Loan program financed through CDBG
funding, but did not apply to new construction. These guidelines are very general in nature
and address issues of "scale", colors, signage, etc. Mr. Stitt emphasized that these guidelines
apply to a very specific area on Broadway.
Mr. Stitt stated that when the Broadway retail frontage is demolished, the rear of the buildings
fronting on Englewood Parkway will be exposed; the redeveloper has committed to provide
"screening" for this area.
Mr. Horner commented on his review of the landscaping provisions regarding trees, side-
walks, buffers, and that he does not see these provisions applied to the subject site. Mr. Stitt
responded that when Trolley Square was constructed, they were short on the required landscap-
ing, and an agreement was made with the City to allow plantings on city property to count to-
ward the required landscaping. Mr. Horner pointed out that King Soopers would be increasing
their floor area by 40%. Mr. Stitt responded that there will be an over-all loss of floor area
square footage with the demolition of the Broadway retail frontage, even though King Soopers
will be expanding their store to the south, and the King Soopers expansion is not new con-
struction, but into existing construction.
Mr. Weber inquired about the access point on South Broadway. Mr. Stitt stated there will be
a loss of some on-street parking spaces, and estimated possibly six total.
3
Ms. Tobin inquired if the Broadway businesses paid for the signage and lights along Broad-9
way. Mr. Stitt stated that the lights were part of the Englewood Urban Renewal Authority im-
provements. The signs were paid for by the businesses. It appears from the plans that only
one of the identification signs will be lost. Ms. Tobin asked whether the loss of the on-street
parking will adversely impact the Broadway businesses. Mr. Stitt acknowledged there will be
some impact. Mr. Stitt pointed out that most of the downtown businesses don't comply with
the existing off-street parking requirements; there are several public lots which are available to
provide parking for customers and employees , those lots being in the 3400 block of South Lin-
coln, in the 3400 block of South Acoma Street, and a small area at Floyd and Lincoln. Mr.
Stitt further noted that on-street parking isn't for use by any specific business, but by the gen-
eral public. Ms. Tobin commented on the lack of public parking on the east side of Broadway
in the 3300 block.
Jim Sullivan was sworn in and testified he is President of Sullivan-Hayes Company, and is
acting in an advisory capacity for King Soopers. Mr. Sullivan introduced Mr. Russ Despense,
Mr. Bob Letcher, Mr. Mick Mitchell, and Mr. John Aldridge. The King Soopers store was
opened in October, 1985. Efforts to lease the remainder of Trolley Square have not been suc-
cessful, and the area has "become a home for transients, a public bathroom , a place to strip
cars (top level of the parking garage), and the elevator is used for sleeping". The property has
been in limbo for a number of years since Silverado took the property from Brady, sold it to
John Martin of Texas, and the FDIC became involved. Mr. Sullivan stated that King Soopers
was very near a decision to leave the City when the opportunity arose for the parent company
to purchase the property. The property is now under contract, and they anticipate closing in
the next three weeks.
Mr. Sullivan referred to architectural renderings of the site and the proposed redevelopment.
The 26 ,000 square feet of Broadway retail frontage will be razed, as will the parking deck.
This will be accomplished as the "first phase". The parking area will be realigned, restriped,
and cleaned up. The second phase may require the Englewood Parkway frontage to be razed.
The King Soopers building is now 51,000 square feet, and they propose to expand into the
20,000 square feet abutting directly on the south. Kaufman's store will remain on the corner
of Broadway and the Parkway; King Soopers assures the City and the Messrs. Kaufman of
their willingness to work with the Messrs. Kaufman to provide up to 10 unspecified parking
spaces and provision of an area for business expansion if the Messrs. Kaufman wish to pur-
chase it. Mr. Sullivan stated they are now negotiating termination of the leases in the Broad-
way frontage. Phase IT of the redevelopment was discussed. Mr. Sullivan stated that King
Soopers has agreed to the nine foot set-aside for future right-of-way dedication along West
Floyd A venue, and to the ten foot set-aside for future right-of-way along the Parkway. The
redevelopment plan is to keep an integrated street scape along Broadway; there will be the
curb cut to provide right-in/right-out movements to the parking lot, but the exact location of
the cut hasn't been determined at this time. A bus stop is currently on the north end of the
block, and the curb cut will result in only three parking spaces being lost. A pad of 2,500
square feet for a future tenant is proposed for the north end of the site. Mr. Sullivan stated
that they hope to keep the King Soopers store open and operating during the redevelopment
phase.
4
e Mr. Garrett inquired what impact the redevelopment would have on Broadway traffic. Mr.
Sullivan stated that every effort will be made to keep the impact and disruption to a minimum,
and a large part of the work will be accomplished during off-peak hours. After City Council
considers and approves the Planned Development, a demolition permit would be sought and
they hope to be underway by mid-June or July. The parking structure is pre-cast, and can be
"disassembled". The plan is to salvage as much as possible from the Broadway frontage, and
to make use of the bricks in the "wall" they propose along the front of the parking area. Mr.
Sullivan estimated the demolition of the Broadway frontage could be accomplished in three
weeks. Improvements in the parking area were further addressed by Mr. Sullivan, as were
street-scape treatments along Broadway.
Mr. Redpath asked whether the structures on the southwest comer of the King Soopers store
would be razed, or is it only to be remodeled. Mr. Sullivan stated this will be remodeled for
the expansion of King Soopers.
Mr. Shoop inquired about the main entrance to the building; will there still be only one en-
trance, and will it be relocated, or would there be two entrances. Mr. Sullivan stated that
there will be only one entrance, which may be relocated once the expansion plans are firm.
Mr. Sullivan discussed the treatment of the sidewalk/curb cut intersection; there will be raised
median to discourage left-turning movements into or from the parking lot; a "ribbon of con-
crete" will extend through the asphalt covering of the curb-cut area for pedestrian movement.
Mr. Homer noted that the conceptual rendering indicates lighting standards . exceeding the
height of the buildings; he inquired about control of glare from these lights.
Mr. Mitchell was sworn in, and testified he is the architect for the project. Mr. Mitchell
stated that the lighting standards do not have to be as high as indicated, and probably will not
be.
Mr. Homer asked what is in back of the "wall". Mr. Sullivan stated the parking area in back
of the wall may have painted rather than raised medians to be of assistance in clearing snow
from the site. Ms. Tobin asked about the height of the wall. Mr. ·sullivan indicated it would
be not higher than 3'6", and probably 3', and will be constructed of concrete and brick.
Mr. Shoop asked what the screening back of Kaufman's will be. Mr. Sullivan stated that they
don't know what they will find when the buildings are removed along Broadway, but antici-
pate meters and electrical panels; there will be screening for this area , and all dumpsters will
be screened, also.
Street-scape enhancement was addressed. Mr. Sullivan stated the desire of the redeveloper to
create some "continuity" from Kaufman's store north to Floyd Avenue. Mr. Homer inquired
about planters and benches along Broadway. Mr. Sullivan stated that Englewood Downtown
Development Authority expressed a preference for the wall over planters which had initially
been proposed.
5
Mr. Redpath asked if anyone else wished to speak on behalf of King Soopers. Mr. Sullivan e
stated that this concluded their presentation.
Harold Celva, Executive Director of the Downtown Development Authority, was sworn in.
He testified that with the imminent redevelopment of Cinderella City, and knowing that
something will be occurring on Trolley Square, the Board felt it necessary to look ·at the entire
Downtown Development Authority district, which extends from Santa Fe Drive to Logan, and
from just south of Hampden Avenue to Eastman Avenue. The redevelopment of the Mall and
of Trolley Square will have a sizable impact on the downtown area, and the Board recognized
the need to have everything in the "downtown" work well together. They have hired an urban
planner, Ron Straka, to work with the Board to identify positives and negatives of the down-
town and the proposed redevelopments, and to assist in mitigating whatever problems are de-
termined. Mr. Celva stated that interviews with people who live and work in the downtown
area have been conducted to gain input, and several issues have been identified.
Parking will be an on-going problem, and King Soopers is not obligated to provide parking for
other businessmen. Mr. Celva cited a letter he had written to Mr. Russ Despence of King
Soopers, in which letter several concerns regarding the redevelopment are set forth. (See at-
tached letter.) Mr. Celva suggested that the Broadway frontage could have a "more creative"
treatment, which would allow visibility but still provide the "illusion" of screening the parking
lot. Mr. Celva also noted that the 50 foot curb cut creates a "barrier" for pedestrian movement
along Broadway. Mr. Celva further stated that the "ambiguity" on design of the future business
pod on the north end of the site is also of concern.
Fred Kaufman was sworn in, and testified that he has been a businessman in Englewood for 37
years, and his business brings people into Englewood from all parts of the country. Mr.
Kaufman stated he purchased the site of his store from Ambrose-Williams a number of years
ago, and he was guaranteed use of 10 parking spaces in the City-owned lot which is now de-
veloped as the King Soopers site. Mr. Kaufman stated that ·he has talked to King Soopers per-
sonriel, and has been assured of their willingness to work with him. Mr. Kaufman stated that
he and his son are considering expansion of their business. When Bud Brady developed Trol-
ley Square, Mr. Kaufman stated he spent approximately $100,000 to modify the frontage of
his store to blend with the facade of the new buildings on Broadway. Again, in working with
Mr. Brady, Mr. Kaufman obtained an agreement assuring him of use of at least 10 spaces in
the parking lot for Trolley Square. Mr. Kaufman recited problems that he has experienced
since the parking structure was constructed, and stated that it must be demolished. Mr. Kauf-
man wants to make sure that the impact on his business during their business hours will not
adversely affect the business. The loading zone to service their business is now on Broadway;
they have united parcel vehicles, vans, and 16 or 18 wheeler vehicles making deliveries to the
store. Mr. Kaufman asked that the loading zone be relocated to Englewood Parkway by de-
velopment of a "cut-out" in the sidewalk along the Parkway businesses. He asked that this is-
sue be resolved, and that he be assured of continued use of at least 10 parking spaces in the
King Soopers lot for his business. Mr. Kaufman stated that there is also concern regarding the
placement of King Soopers signage, which may impact the visibility of his store. He also
asked that the wall be of the same facade material as his building. Mr. Kaufman summarized
6
his primary concerns that 1) impact on his business during business hours be minimal; 2) relo-
cation of the loading zone to the south side of his business on Englewood Parkway, and 3) that
King Soopers negotiate with him for space 30 to 50 feet north of his existing business to en-
able expansion of the business.
Sam Kaufman was sworn in, testified that he is supportive of the project, and is of the opinion
it will have a very positive impact for Englewood. Mr. Kaufman addressed the issue of the
"wall", and the need for realignment of that wall to meet his building line,. not the facade im-
provements in front of the business. Mr. Kaufman aiso expressed concern about the signage
right next to the Kaufman store, which is eight or nine feet in height. ·
Mr. Sullivan stated that this sign will be removed or relocated.
Sam Kaufman discussed the impact on their business during demolition, noting that July is the
third busiest month of the year for them, and asked where their customers will park during the
demolition process; for that matter , where will the King Soopers customers park during
demolition . The loading zone is an issue; they do not want to lose the loading zone, but the
Broadway location is not satisfactory; if it is relocated to Englewood Parkway and the RTD
buses use this route to thelight rail station, there could be conflicts. Mr. Kaufman stressed the
need for a loading zone to allow 18-wheelers to unload in close proximity to the back of the
store. Mr. Kaufman discussed the turning problems associated with 18-wheel vehicles. Mr.
Kaufman stated that the loss of three to six on-street parking spaces isn't of a great concern to
his business. King Soopers has indicated they are willing to negotiate with the Kaufmans for
add itional Broadway frontage to allow the expansion of the Kaufman store. Mr. Kaufman
asked whether the parking requirements in effect for the existing business would be
"grandfathered in", and only parking for the existing building would have to be secured. Mr.
Kaufman inquired whether the parking spaces in the King Soopers lot will be public or private
parking. Will time limitations be imposed on this parking.·
Mr. Horner asked where the 10 parking spaces for Kaufman's store are. Fred Kaufman stated
that they are not designated. He further stated that one of the problems is that a lot of the
merchants who do not have businesses in this block choose to park under the parking deck for
protection from the elements. Also, the general public parks there and ride the bus to down-
town Denver for the day.
The issue of the "parking agreement" was discussed. Mr. Stitt stated that if such an agreement
exists, this would be between Mr. Kaufman and Mr. Brady and now with King Soopers; the
City would not have been, and will not be , a part of this agreement. Mr. Stitt stated that the
needed parking calculations noted in the staff report do include the 10 spaces for Kaufman's.
Ms. Tobin stated that the loading zone is a valid concern, and inquired about the possible relo-
cation . Mr. Stitt stated that at the present time it is not feasible to move the loading zone to
the Parkway. This issue may be revisited at such time as the Parkway retail frontage is demol-
ished, and a possible "pocket" could be developed to accommodate the loading zone. Ms. To-
bin asked about providing loading facilities at the rear of the building in the parking lot. Mr.
7
Stitt stated that 18-wheel vehicles require a lot of turning and maneuvering space, and this e
probably would not be feasible either.
Sam Kaufman asked, if he were to get an agreement with King Soopers on the 10 parking
spaces, would this accommodate · the building enlargement, or would he have to negotiate for
additional parking spaces. Mr. Stitt stated that at such time as space is "relinquished" to Mr.
Kaufman to allow the expansion, it falls outside the parameters of the Planned Development,
and Mr. Kaufman would be responsible for securing the additional parking. Mr. Stitt also
pointed out that if the business expands tO the north, it may result in a loss of parking spaces,
plus increase the demand for parking spaces to serve the expansion. Mr. Kaufman asked if
any agreement entered into privately between King Soopers and the Kaufmans satisfy the
City's parking requirements. Mr. Stitt stated that, solong as the parking spaces provided for
the King Soopers business is not reduced by any agreement with Kaufmans, it would suffice.
Mr. Stitt emphasized that the agreement with Kaufman could not decrease the parking King
Soopers is providing below the minimum requirement.
Mr. Sullivan addressed the Commission regarding the "parking agreement" alluded to by the
Messrs. Kaufman. Mr. Sullivan emphasized there is no record of an agreement, deed, or lease
pertaining to 10 parking spaces for Kaufman's store. However, King Soopers does recognize
the existence of Kaufmans business and does agree to provide · "up to 10 parking spaces" for the
use of the Kaufman Store; it is understood that the Messrs. Kaufman will have to "pay their
own way" so far as maintenance, etc. is concerned.
Mr. Douglas inquired where Kaufman customers parked at the present time. Fred Kaufman
responded that a number of them park in the paved lot on South Acoma. Street in the 3400
block south, or on-street. Sam Kaufman expressed doubt that customers at his store would
park at Floyd and Lincoln and walk that distance to the store.
Further discussion ensued regarding the parking "agreement" Kaufmans allegedly have for 10
parking spaces. Fred Kaufman stated that this "agreement" goes back to the date he purchased
the property from Ambrose-Williams, through the ownership of Marty Herzog, and then to the
latest agreement with Bud Brady. ·
Mr. Redpath declared a brief recess of the meeting. The meeting reconvened at 8:50 P.M.
Mr. Sullivan addressed concerns voiced by the Messrs. Kaufman. The "wall" can be con-
structed to abut the facade or the building; they will work with Sam Kaufman to satisfy his
concerns. The intent of the "wall" is the screen the visual impact of the parking lot from
Broadway. The sign will be relocated so that it does not impact the Kaufman store: The
loading zone issue is not something that can be addressed by this redevelopment; this issue
needs to be resolved between the Kaufmans and the City. Mr. Sullivan reiterated there is no
legal document that has been found to indicate any type of agreement for 10 parking spaces;
however, King Soopers will enter into an agreement with the Messrs. Kaufman to provide "up
to 10 spaces" on a non-exclusive basis. The parking in the King Soopers lot will be private
8
parking for use by King Soopers customers and · employees. King Soopers has further ex-
pressed a willingness to work with the Messrs. Kaufman on their expansion plans.
Mr. Sullivan cautioned that there will be noise, dust, and all the inconveniences associated
with demolition and redevelopment, and that King Soopers does not want to close their busi-
ness for any period of time; every effort will be made to .keep construction impacts to a mini-
mum for all businesses in the area.
Sam Kaufman asked if signage on the north side of their store would be allowed. Mr. Stitt
stated that it would.
Steve Collins, PIP Printing, was sworn in. Mr. Collins stated he is in favor of the proposed
redevelopment; however, he does have some concern about the ingress/egress points on South
Broadway. He is concerned about the number of vehicles using this point of ingress/egress,
and concerned about the "fabric" of downtown. There is no median on South Broadway, and
people will try to make left turns into and out of this curb cut. Mr. Collins stated that he
wanted to "encourage" something other than the three. foot "fence" proposed along South
Broadway. He stated that he does not have any suggestions on what other treatment might be
given the Broadway frontage, but wants to see something other than a three foot "fence".
Mr. Sullivan stated that the right-in/right-out movement from South Broadway is very impor-
tant to King Soopers, and commented that the "Traffic Division is in favor of" the right-
in/right-out cut. Mr. Stitt clarified that Traffic "doesn't object to it".
Mr. Shoop asked about sriow disposal in the event of heavy snowfall. Mr. Sullivan stated that
a heavy snowfall would require the use of front-end loaders and hauling the snow to a dump
site.
Mr. Redpath asked if anyone else wished to speak.
Dave Paschal was sworn in, and testified that he and his wife have businesses on Englewood
Parkway. Mr. Paschal stated that King .Soopers will become a "member of the community" by
the purchase of Trolley Square, and this is a good idea; it will bring stability to the downtown
area. Mr. Paschal stated that as far as parking is concerned, people will park where they will.
He noted that the majority of his patrons park in .the parking lots on the south side of the
Parkway and walk across the street --they do not use the King Soopers lot. Removal of the
parking structure wiff eliminate a lot of the "nuisance" parking. Mr. Paschal urged that the
"City lot" across the Parkway to the squth be "kep( forever"; that this will only enhance and
help the Englewood Downtown area; employees and customers of a number of businesses use
this lot. The business impact of the King Soopers proposal will be positive for everyone.
Mr. Shoop asked if Mr. Paschal was referencing the vacant, unimproved land to the south of
Englewood Parkway, or the improved lots on South Acoma Street. Mr. Paschal suggested that
the unimproved lot be improved for parking use, as well as keep the Acoma lots for parking.
9
Ron Straka was sworn in. Mr. Straka testified that he is an Urban Design Consultant em-
ployed by the Englewood Downtown Development Authority. Mr. Straka stated that he is in
agreement with comments made by Mr. Sullivan on the current conditions of Trolley Square
and the parking structure. Mr. Straka stated that his biggest concern is the issue of
"downtown" Englewood. This is basically a two to two and one-half block area along Broad-
way, with customer parking either on-street or at the rear; and within walking distance of a
number of residents. Downtown is destination oriented, and people from outside the City lim-
its come to a particular store. Attempts to improve the downtown area include the facade im-
provement program, new lighting, and signage. Mr. Straka stated that the "anchor" for the
downtown area is the Broadway/Englewood Parkway corner.
Mr. Straka pointed out that the property used for parking along South Acoma Street in the
3400 block south is owned by the Englewood Urban Renewal Authority, not the City, and may
not always be available for parking use.
Mr. Straka addressed the population composition of Englewood, noting that there are a num-
ber of elderly citizens residing in the immediate neighborhood who like to walk to the store.
He stressed the necessity to keep the downtown area as pedestrian-oriented as possible. Mr.
Straka reiterated his agreement with the necessity to remove the parking structure and the retail
frontage on Broadway. He emphasized his concern regarding the pedestrian sidewalk between
West Floyd Avenue and Englewood Parkway and its point' of intersection with the vehicular
access from Broadway to the King Soopers parking lot. Mr. Straka further pointed out that it
is difficult for elderly or handicapped people to cross Broadway. Mr. Straka then addressed
the "intent of the wall", which is to screen the vehicles and headlights from the Broadway traf-
fic and pedestrians. Mr. Straka stressed the need to make sure that pedestrians are not afraid
that vehicles will be "coming at them". Mr. Straka noted that the structure to be removed is
large, and suggested that something be done to the wall to give better definition, and there
must be "integration" between the proposed 2,500 square foot pad on the north end of the site
and the Kaufman's store on the south end. Mr. Straka stated that the "wall" appears very stark
in the conceptual renderings. Mr. Straka suggested that there might be "pedestrian openings"
in the wall to allow foot-traffic access from Broadway at points other than the vehicular access
point.
Mr. Straka discussed the mid-block vehicular access. He suggested that the right-in movement
could work if a · deceleration lane is provided, and that exiting movements from the site be
prohibited at this location.
The proposed "pad" on the north end of the site was then addressed. Mr. Straka stressed the
importance of "continuity" in this block --use of same materials, design, colors, etc. Mr.
Straka also discussed the impact the traffic movements on Floyd Avenue will have on the "pad"
development. Mr. Straka suggested that the "treatment of Floyd" be considered. from Broad-
way west to Bannock Street.
10
Mr. Straka stated that the redevelopment of Cinderella City will impact everything that is done
on South Broadway. The City needs to consider how much impact it will have on any new
development and improvements t~at are proposed.
Mr. Straka cautioned the Commission that they are facing a very important decision, and
urged that it be made wisely. Consider the impact, not only now, but in the future of the de-
cisions that are made. Mr. Straka suggested that King Soopers may no longer be at this loca-
tion within five years, but any decision made that affects Broadway will be in effect long-term.
Mr. Horner stated that with all the faults Trolley Square has, it does create "character" by way
of color, design details, signage, and lighting. If this structure is razed, could Mr. Straka sug-
gest anything that would "bring back the spirit of what was attempted when the building was
constructed." .Mr. Straka displayed photographs of "wall" treatments in other locations
throughout the country, notably Portland. He stressed the need to "make it unique in Engle-
wood", maybe use the cupola design . of Trolley Square at the point of entry into King Soopers
wh ich would provide character to the store.
Mr. Garrett asked Mr. Sullivan if the Broadway access to the site 'has to be ingress and egress.
Mr. Sullivan stated that both movements are needed to provide internal circulation in a "very
tight site". Motorists may try to make left-turns illegally, but the Police Department will have
to be vigilant and enforce such turning prohibitions. Mr. Sullivan stated that Mr. Straka did
make good points regarding elderly pedestrians, and that one consideration may be to move the
wall back to provide a clearer pedestrian view. Mr. Sullivan reiterated his hope that the
Commission and City will support the right-in/right-out traffic movement from Broadway, and
again stressed the importance of this movement to the successful redevelopment of the site.
Mr. Sullivan stated that the depiction of the wall on the architectural renderings is not "final",
and agreed that something will have to be done to provide a more "urban appearance". Mr.
Sullivan stated that Mr. Straka mentioned that King Soopers may not have a long~term com-
mitment to the site; King Soopers is the largest employer in the state of Colorado, and they
will be a presence in the community for a long time. Mr. Sullivan acknowledged there will be
problems with any development, or redevelopment, but that King Soopers wants to continue to
be a business resident of Englewood, and asked for the support and approval of the Commis-
sion .
Mr. Garrett again asked how the redevelopers would feel about a right-in but no right-out
movement from Broadway. Mr. Sullivan stated that both movements are essential to the
overall circulation, and reiterated that it is a "tight site". Mr. Sullivan stated that King Soopers
officials have seen. a "downturn in sales" at the Trolley Square store over the last few years,
and they want to turn this trend around, expand the store, and encourage people to shop this
outlet.
The provision of continuity and cohesiveness between the Kaufman store, King Soopers, the
wall and the proposed new business pad were discussed. Mr. Sullivan stated that in all prob-
ability the pad development will not follow the design of the Kaufman building; they are in
discussions with national retailers , who have their own look and identity.
11
Mr. Redpath asked if there were more comments from the audience. Hearing none, he asked e
for a motion to close the Public Hearing.
Garrett moved:
Tobin seconded: The Public Hearing on Case #3-95 be closed.
AYES:
NAYS:
Weber, Douglas, Garrett, Homer, Redpath, Shoop , Tobin
None .
ABSTAIN: None
ABSENT:. Dummer, Mason
The motion carried.
Mr. Redpath asked the pleasure of the Commission.
Garrett moved:
Tobin seconded: The Planning Commission recommend approval of the Planned Devel-
opment for redevelopment of Trolley Square, with the following condi-
tions:
1. Dedication of nine feet of property along the south side of West
Floyd A venue from the entrance to King Soopers to South
Broadway for purposes of roadway improvements. Dedication of
this property will not be required until warranted by traffic con-
ditions as documented by the D~partment of Public Works.
2. Dedication of ten feet of property along the north side of Engle-
wood Parkway from the entrance to King Soopers to South
Broadway for purposes of roadway improvements. Dedication of
this property will not be required until warranted by traffic con-
ditio[l.s as documented by the _Department of Public Works.
Mr. Horner expressed his concerns regarding the proposed plan. Mr. Horner addressed the
visual impact of the proposed redevelopment, as discussed and depicted at this meeting, and
stated that in his opinion, the grocery needs to provide a better visual environment for its cus-
tomers. The demolition of the Broadway retail frontage and the parking structure will provide
King . Soopers visual exposure to one of the busiest streets in the Denver metro area. In addi-
tion, they are asking for mid-block vehicular access to the site. Mr. Horner stated that it is
very logical for King Soopers to want as much as they can get from the City; he asked the
Commission to consider "what does the City gain" from the proposal. The structure to be
razed does have a scale, a distinctive appearance and helps to create a "fabric" in downtown.
Mr. Horner pointed out that the Messrs. Kaufman have expressed a desire to work on "details"
of the plan with King Soopers; Mr. Collins has expressed concern on the "details", and Mr.
Sullivan has said that the plan under consideration is a "concept". Mr. Horner stated that he
wants to see the applicants return with a "final" design and plan before the Planning Commis-
12
sioil recommends approval to City Council. Mr. Horner stated that as Planning Commission
members, .they are in the position right now to have a voice in what the redevelopment will be
like. Mr.· Horner stated that he could not vote in favor of the motion to recommend approval
to City Council at this point; this proposal needs more work.
Ms. Tobin asked what the Commission has the right to ask for on a Planned Development; can
the Commission ask for further improvements on the proposals along South Broadway. City
Attorney Brotzman stated that the Commission does have the right to ask for a new plan; but
the applicant does not have to provide it. The applicant does have the right to take this plan
forward to City Council, even if the Planning Commission should reject it.
Mr. Horner enumerated some of ·his further concerns: the height of the lighting standards as
shown on the renderings; no trees or landscaping within the parking lot; the landscaping that is
being "counted" is existing landscaping on City right-of-way. He stated "they haven't done
anything at this point".
Mr. Garrett asked if the Commission has the authority to get into design elements. City At-
torney Brotzman stated that the Commission must consider the compliance of the proposal with
the Comprehensive Plan, compliance with the zoning restrictions, impact on other businesses,
and consider the site plan elements of design, spacing of structures, height, window areas, to-
pography, etc.
Mr. Stitt discussed the "design guidelines" for the South Broadway Incentive Area, and pointed
out that these guidelines apply to the restoration of existing building. He stated that he did
review these guidelines to determine if there was something specific about "urban fabric", and
while this is addressed in generalities there is nothing specific. Further discussion ensued.
Mr. Merkel commented that staff has been working with the redevelopers for several months,
and that changes have been incorporated into the Plan as presented. Mr. Merkel further com-
mented that in his opinion, the wall should be at least three and one-half feet in height, and
that four feet would be better. He suggested that the Commission be very specific on changes
they want made in the Plan.
Ms. Tobin expressed concern that the redevelopment of Trolley Square and Cinderella City
will foster more traffic, and increase air pollution. She stressed the need for more vegetation,
and inquired about placement of planters with greenery along the street and within the parking
site.
Mr. Horner stated that in his opinion, this is a "minimalist plan", which shows no creativity
and has no "flavor"; it is a very bland-appearing plan. He stressed the need for the Planning
Commission to assure something is done to improve this Plan at this level before it goes to
City Council. Mr. Horner again asked that the Commission see a "final" plan before making a
recommendation to City Council. Further discussion ensued.
13
City Attorney Brotzman stated that the Commission · may reopen the Public Hearing to allow e
the applicant to present new material; the Commission can approve the plan as presented; the
Commission can deny approval of the Plan; or the Commission can approve the Plan as pre-
sented, with conditions. Mr. Brotzman emphasized that it is the applicant's choice whether
they want to bring back a new plan for consideration of the Commission. Discussion ensued.
Mr. Douglas stated that he had seen a previous plan of the proposal, and that in his opinion,
the previous plan was better than the plan under consideration.
Mr. Homer asked if he understood correctly that the applicant has the right to ask City
Council to consider this particular plan even if the Planning Commission does not recommend
approval. Mr. Brotzman answered affirmatively ..
Mr. Redpath called for the vote on the motion to recommend approval as presented, with th~
two conditions previously cited:
AYES:
NAYS:
ABSTAIN:
Garrett, Redpath, Shoop
Douglas, Homer, Tobin, Weber
None
ABSENT: Dummer, Mason
The motion was declared defeated.
ill. COMMISSIONER'S CHOICE.
Mr. Homer stated that he has submitted to the Secretary written reports on his conversations
with members of the Arapahoe County Social Services Department for reproduction and in-
clusion in the next packet.
The meeting was declared adjourned.
-
Gertrude G. Welty, Recording Secre
14
ENGLEWOOD DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
First Interstate bwer Build in g
3333 South Bannock Street
Suite #480
Englewood , CO 801 10
Phone 303 1781-788S
Mr. Russ Despence,
Vice President
King Soopers Real Estate
Box 5567 T.A.
Denver, co 80217
Dear Mr. Despence:
April 21, 1995
On behalf of the Board of Directors, of the Englewood Downtown
Development Authority (EDDA) and the downtown business community
I would like to thank you and King Soopers for your willingness
to address our concerns in relation to the redevelopment of
Trolley Square. In surveying the opinions and interests of a
number of business and property owners, as well as, several area
residents we find that a great deal of support exists for the
major element of your proposal, ie., the demolition of Trolley
Square and the parking structure.
As we have discussed, there are several items of concern that
were identified both in the survey process and in the EDDA board
meeting. In reviewing your most recent submission to the city we
acknowledge your efforts to address some of these issues.
However, in representing our constituency, and for the record we
do feel it is necessary to reiterate our concerns. They are as
follows:
A. Negative impact on the urban fabric and pedestrian
experience in the downtown district. The wall is a
good start but the illusion of additional screening
between the parking lot and the sidewalk is needed.
B. Mid block Broadway access point with the potential for
auto/pedestrian conflict, left turn movements and a
negative impact on the pedestrian movements of elderly,
physically impaired and other pedestrians.
c. Physical appearance of the newly exposed rear of
buildings facing Englewood Parkway.
Russ Despence
April 21, 1995
Page 2
D. Parking issues.
E. Future traffic considerations.
E. Definition of size and location for new signage.
F. Design of the building located on pod site at northeast
corner of site.
While these items do remain as issues, EDDA will support the
Planned Development request at the Planning Board hearing. We
look forward to working with you and your architect to seek
additional resolution of these issues prior to the City Council
hearing.
HWC:kad
Sincerely,
~~~.c~---
Harold w. Celva,
Execut i ve Director