Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1970-01-06 PZC MINUTESI I I. CALL TO ORDER. CITY OF ENGLEWOOD PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING January 6, 1970 Page 1213 The regular meeting of the City Planning and Zoning Commission was called to order by Chairman Woods at 7:40 P.M. Members present: Carlson, Lentsch, Lone, Senti, Woods Romans, Ex-officio Members absent: Touchton Also present: City Attorney Berardini, Messrs. Barnwell, Nelson, McCoy and Kovacik Mr. Woods welcomed Mr. Senti to our Commission. II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES. --- - - - - - - - ---. Mr. Woods stated that the Minutes of December 17, 1969, were to be considered for approval. Lentsch moved: Carlson seconded: The Minutes of December 17, 1969, be approved as written. AYES: Carlson, Lentsch, Lone, Woods NAYS: None ABSENT: Touchton ABSTAINING: Senti The motion carried. III. MR. RICHARD BARNWELL 3067 S. Santa Fe Dr . CONDITIONAL USE Mobile Home Park CASE #1-70 Mrs. Romans presented Commission members · with a statement from the Building Depar~ment in regard to Mr. Barnwell's property, which statement was dated November 24 , 1969. Statement is as follows: "November 24, 1969 HARTS LODGE -MAEDICK MANOR -3067 SO. SANTA FE. OWNER: RICHARD J. BARNWELL -4915 So. Elati This trailer court had 14 registered spaces in 1958. The, Building Department condemned the motel units August 21, 1968. The motel units were demolished in March of 1969. Mr. Barnwell told Mr. Hamilton he would be in with a plan to add to the trailer court within a couple of weeks. He has added 9 trailers without an approved plan. This trailer court was never brought to the mobile home ordinance. A plot plan has not been submitted. Mr. Barnwell purchased this park April 1, 1961. The access road is not paved. The original 14 spaces have slabs and some utility buildings. There is no wash house or toilets." A small map of the area was then given Commission members, and Mrs. Romans indicated Mr. Barnwell's property on this map. Mrs. Romaps noted that there were some rental units which were removed at the request of the Building Department , but that the Building Department does not have a record of the number of. units which were removed. There are 14 spaces registered with the Building Department. It was reported thax upon conclusion of a tour of this mobile home park, and others in the area, earlier in the day by the Planning Director and the City Attorney, it was noted that this particular Park has at the present time. 21 or 22 trailers on the property. These additional spaces have not been approved, nor has the Mobile Home Park ever been brought into compliance with the Mobile Home Parks Ordinance. Mr. Barnwell stated that he was originally planning to ask for expansion o f the Park to 24 spaces, but has decided that 20 spaces is more nearly what could be accommodated on· the property. Mr. Barnwell displayed a plan of his proposal, and noted that a 30 ft. frontage is indicated on most of the spaces, and that with the elimination of one or two of the existing spaces he can readjust the remaining spaces to meet the frontage requirements. He questioned that he would be able to accommodate the parking requirements, and also questioned whether or not he should be required to . provide "open space". Mrs. Romans noted that the Commission members are concerned about ope n space, and that this will be considered. Mr. Touchton entered and took his place with the Commission. Mr. Barnwell stated that he felt the requirements for a wash house and mop sink are "rather · ridiculous" inasmuch as he has no plans to permit dependent trailers in this mobile home park. Mrs. Romans pointed out that the Planning Commission had no authority to permit a variance from the Mobile Home Parks Ordinance, and inasmuch as a wash house is required in the Ordinance that it should be provided. If Mr. Barnwell felt differently, he would have to appear before ' the Board of Adjustment and Appeals. Page 1214 Mr. Barnwell took exception to the statement that the motel units which were formerly on this property had been ordered torn down by the Building Depar~ment. ~e stated .tha~ they were given an order to bring them up to the Housing .Code, a·nd it was his determination to tear them down. He also stated that there was an agreement between he and former Chief Building Inspector Wallace that there could be additional trailer spaces if the motel units we:e re- moved. He stated that the units "were never condemned", and doesn't know wh~re such informa-: tion would have been picked up. Brief discussion followed, and the memo submitted to the Pla nn i ng Commission by the Building Department was · again reviewed. Mr. Carlson asked what Mr. Bar nwell planned to install under the trailers --ribbons or conc~ete slabs? Mr. Barnwell sta t ed that he had planned on ribbons. Mr. Carlson stated that he felt the Elm Trailer Court is a very nice court, and that they have slabs .under the tr~ilers. ~e stated when he toured the Elm Court, he tried to decide what it was that set it apart from the others, and he felt that the slabs under the trailers, the fences around each space, etc. were some of the things that made it a "nice court." The width of the roadway was qriefly discussed; .Mr. Ba'rnwell stated that it is 24 ft. rather than the required 25 ft. Mr. Lentsch asked what size trailers would be permitted in this park? Mr. Barnwell stated that most of the trailers are 12 x 64. Mr ·. Barnwell· a1so stated that there are 1.9 acres in the site. Further discussion followed. It was determined that the plan which had been presented was not adequate, and that a more complete plan should be brought in for consideration by the Commission. Mr. Woods stated that the next regular meeting of the Commission would be on January 20th . Mr. Barnwell stated that he would have the completed plans ready at that time. IV. MR. J. PETTITT 3075 S. Santa Fe Dr. -- - -- ---- -~ CONDITIONAL USE Mobile Home Park CASE #42-69D 12/17/69 12/ 2 /69 ll/18/69 10/28/69 It was reported that Mr. Machol had notified the Planning Director that no one would be at this meeting in regard to their application; but, rather, they would attend the meeting of January 20th. It was then noted that Mr. Steve Kovacik , realtor who .is handling the sale of the subject property was in attendance. Mr. Woods stated that Mr. Machol and Mr. Pettitt have apparently been working on a completed plan of their proposal, and the Commission has . been waiting fo~ this .revised plan to be submitted before they consider 'the request further. Mr. Woods asked if Mr. Kovacik had any information to add? Mr. Kovacik stated that Mr. Pettitt is working on a model of the proposed plan, but that it is not completed. No action was taken. - - - ----- - - - - - ---- - ---- --- -. . V. WAYNE K . NELSON CONDITIONAL VSE Mobile Home Park CASE #2-70 Mrs . Romans indicated the area Mr. Nelson is interested in on the small map that had been used previousl-y, inasmuch as .this land is in the same general area as ·the mobile home parks that were discussed earlier. Mrs. Romans stated that this site is .in the flood plain. This parcel is of an irregular shape and has a small frontage on West Dartmouth Avenue, and is now vacant .. Mr. Nelson introduced Mr. McCoy who has done the layout for him. Mr. Nelson also presented a copy of a survey of the area, and a detailed plan of the proposed park. Discussion followed. Mr. Carlson asked if Mr. Nelson planned slabs or ribbons for the trailers to park on? Mr. Nelson stated that the park i~ designed for ribbons; he pointed out that there is a concrete patio next to each trailer space. Mr. Nelson also stated that most trailer parks do not re- quire slabs and he didn't plan to install them in this park. Mr. Nelson noted that he plans to ~equire each space to enclose the trailer with a skirt anyway, and felt that the slab wouldn't be needed in that case. Mr. Nelson did then state that if the Commission felt slabs were necessary, that he would put them in. The spaces in the proposed park are 39 ft. wide an.d 75 ft. deep. The s,paces hav.e been designed for a concrete patio on one side of the trailer, and the parking space is on the other side, which will. give 25 ft. between trailers themselves. Mr. McCoy noted that this is a larger space between trailers than now exists between houses in the residential djstricts of the City. Mr. Nelson stated that ·the storage spaces as shown are the required 72 cubic ft., but that they will probably actually be larger after they are constructed. He noted that some space will be. sodded, and that they plan to "beautify it as we go". Mr. Nelson noted that there will be an area on the far end of the court for the parking of boats and small trailers. Further discussion followed~ Mr. Lentsch stated that he felt this was the best plan that has been presented for a mobile home park since he has been on the Commission. Mr. Woods stated he would agree that it was a nice plan. Mr. Lone asked· how much property was involved in the proposal? Mr. Nelson stated that he had a li ~tle less than five acres. Mr. Carlson asked about a play area for children who would be living in the . Park? Mr. Nelson stated that he planned to limit the occupancy to adults and families with chi~dren µnder school age. Mr. Carlson stated that in a 46 unit mobile home park, a lot of the occupants could have two cars, and asked where the second cars would be parked? Mr. Nelson said he felt there would be plenty of room to park the second car on the street. Mr. Lentsch asked if this plan were approved, when construction would begin? Mr. Nelson stated that they would like to finish the Oasis Mobile Home Park first, and then would begin Wbrk on this one, hopefully by April 1st, and work on it through the year. Mr. Lentsch asked if they would develop it at one time, or make · a piece-meal project of it? Mr. McCoy stated· t~ey didn't want to develop this Park as they did Oasis; they want to get all the lines in first, then the roadbeds, and develop it from there. Discussion followed. Mr. Nelson stated tha~ he had talked to the City Engineer, and that the site has good drainage. Mrs. Romans again pointed out that it is in the flood plain zone as established by the Corps of Engineers, I I I I I I Page 1215 and as adopted by the State Water Conservation Board and the Denver Regional Council of Governments, and that in addition, the actual flood line of the 1965 ·Flood did cover this property. Mr. McCoy stated that there had been only one .bad flood in 90 years. Mrs •. Romans stated that until the Chatfield Dam .and Mt. Carbon Dam are built·, tha~ this property will be subject to flooding from both these streams, and that she did not feel it was logical to put trailer houses in this area. She recalled that the problems in the 1965 Flood were caused by trailer homes, .auto bodies, and lumber yards which had been permitted in the South Platte River Flood Plain. She noted that . until these dams were constructed, the City would be remiss in permitting additional uses as this in the .Flood Plain. Mrs. Romans stated that tQe flood lines of the 1965 Flood were a matter of recqrd in the Planning Depart~ent for those who are interested. It was further pointed out by ~rs. Romans that use of this land would not be denied should this proposed mobile home park plan not receive the approval of the Commission. There are uses which can be permitted in .flpod plains, and structures which can be built to withstand the flood. Discussion followed. Mr. Nelson stated that it was a legitimate reason to deny the use of the land as a trailer court, but that if someone purchased land on higher ground for a mobile home court, they couldn't get permission to put it there either. Mr. Carlson noted that Adams County is reported to have land for 6,000 trailer spaces available, but no one has developed them yet. Mr. Woods asked what price the spaces would rent for? Mr. Nelson stated he was thinking about $50 per space, which would include water and possibly electricity. Mr. Lone noted that we are considering three or four small courts in the same area, and commented that if they could be combined, we could have enough land to work with and come up with a very nice Park. Further discussion followed. Mr. Touchton commented that the one problem he felt was "insurmountable" was .the fact that the land is in a flood plain. The progress on the funding for Chatfield Dam was discussed. Mrs. Romans noted that Congress had not appropriated the necessary funds that were needed to keep the construction on schedule, so it will be delayed by a year or so. And there has been nothing done toward tlE construction of Mt. Carbon Dam except the very preliminary studies. Mr. Woods asked Mr. Nelson if there was a time schedule to be met? Mr. Nelson stated that he had the property under option until the last of February or first of March. Further dis- cussion followed. No action was taken. VI. COLUMBINE FREEWAY Mrs. Romans gave members a copy of a letter which she had received frqm Mr. Giltner, Denver Planning Director; a copy of a letter from Mr. Von Frellick to Mr. Giltner, and a copy of a letter from Mr. Giltner to Mr. Von Frellick. There was also a petition which was to be signed by various agencies which Mr. Von Frellick had sent to Mr. Giltner stating that it would eventually be presented to Governor John A. Love. Discussion followed. VII. DENVER REGIONAL COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS. Mr. Lone stated that the next meeting of the Council of Governments would be January 21st. Mr. Carlson reported on the Policy Advisory Committee meeting of Dec~mber~ A req~est for matching funds for further development of Belleview Park had been approved. Mr. Carlson then discussed a report which was given on the mobile home parks by a representative of Adams County. There are 6,000 spaces which are not developed in Adams County. Ratios of children per mobile home were also brought out at this meeting, and Mr. Carlson stated that it is evident that children are not a problem when considering trailer parks and apartment zoning. Discussion on mobile home P.arks followed. Mr. Lone stated that he ~ad read an article in which it stated that numerous executives were adopting the .mobile home as a place of residence. Mr. Lone discussed a recent visit to California and some of the .mobile home parks he had seen there. Mr. Lone stated that they permit 10 un~ts per acre; and that . even though the trail~rs are close together, beca.use of the landscaping and the V{ay the parks were developed, that it results in a nice looking park. He noted that the streets look about 15 ft. wide, and the price per .space in one mobile home park was $117 per month. ' Mr. Car~son stated that he felt some guidelines on features we feel are desirable in .a mooile home park should be ,drawn up. Mrs. Romans noted that the Mobile Home Parks Ord~nance should be the guideline by which we can work. She pointed out that the only mobi~e home park in the City which meets the standards of th~ Ordinance is the Elm Trailer Court at 3141 South Santa Fe Drive, so that it is really not fair to say that the Ordinance is not adequate. Mrs. Romans stated that th~ problem appears to be one of enforcement. Discussion followed. Mr. Berardini asked if the mobile ~ome park~ were uses-by-right in the Industrial District? Mrs. Romans stated they were Conditional Uses. Mr. Berardini questioned Conditional Uses and asked "conditioned upon wha.t?" Further discussion followed. Mrs. Romans stated that the office does have copies of mobile home ordinances from throughout the metro area, and that in ·her opinion, the one we are operating under is better than most of them. She noted that the Ordinance from Adams County and from the Cit~ of Littleton are . both good, but that Adams County requires a minimum of 10 acres for a mob.ile home park. The City of Littlet'on permits eight units per acre in a mobile home park. Mr. Lone stated that he felt some minimum area for a mobile ho~e park might be a point to consider. Discussion followed. Mr. Carlson stated that he felt it might oe wise to permit Mr. Pettitt's 17 spaces; Mr. Barnwell's 14 spaces, and to deny Mr. Nelson's application. He stated that if they had space enough to accommodate the extra trailers they wanted, that without the additional spaces, they would have o _pen space enough to landscape it and come up with something fairly nice. They would be required to comply with t .he provision of the Mobile. Home Park Ordinance in every way. He didn't feel it would create a "hardship" on these two mobile home parks, inasmuch as they are permitted 17 and 14 .spaces resp~ctively anyway, and with a nicer park, they could charge a higher fee per space. He stated that they coQld aLways apply at a later time for additional spaces after they evidenced that they were comply~ng with -~he :ordisance. Mr. Lone stated that he felt the suggestion was a good one. Mr. Carlson noted he felt it should be required to "skirt" the trailers,, or install a slab to prevent the weeds growing Page 1216 and the trash from being stowed under the trailers. Mrs. Romans noted that the present Mobile Home Parks Ordinance provides a means to ensure that trash is not allowed on the premises. Mr. Carlson stated that until the Mobile Home Parks Ordinance is enforced on the existing parks, he .is not in favor of allowing any more parks, or enlarging the existing parks. Mrs. Romans discussed the TOPICS program which will be considered at the next Policy Advisory Committee of the Council of Governments meeting. The Planning Commission in 1968 and 1969, approved the TOPICS programs, which is a request for federal aid for traffic programs. In Englewood, this will encompass the installation of traffic signals along South Broadway. Further brief discussion followed. The meeting adjourned at 9:55 P.M. Gertrude G. Welty Recording Secretary * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * I. CALL TO ORDER. CITY OF ENGLEWOOD PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION · January 20, 1970 The regular meeting of the City Planning and Zoning Commission was called to order by Chairman Woods at 7:45 P. M. Members present: Members absent: Carlson; Lentsch; Senti; Touchton; Woods Romans, Ex-officio Lone II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES. Mr. Woods stated that the Minutes of January 6, 1970 were to be considered for approval. Carlson moved: Lentsch seconded: The Minutes of January 6, 1970, be approved as written. The motion carried unanimously. III. MR. JAY PETTITT 3075 S. Santa Fe Dr. CONDITI ONAL USE Mobile Home Park CASE #42-69E 1 / 6 /7 0 12/17 /69 12/ 2 /69 11/18/69 10/28/69 Mr. Machol and Mr. Pettitt were present for nhe discussion. A model of the proposed trailer park was displayed by Mr. Pettitt for the Commission consideration. Mr. Machol stated that this plan, which shows space for 25 mobile homes, does meet the existing Mobile Home Ordinance. Mr. Machol noted that Mr. Pettitt is willing to limit the length of trailers to 60 ft. for the most part, with possibly one or two 70 ft. mobile homes accommodated. Mr. Woods asked how much area was in this mobile home park? Mr. Machol stated that there was just under 1-1/2 acres, and that their proposal will put approximately 18 mobile homes per acre. Mr. Machol noted that the model plan indicated walkways, blacktopping, lighting, and · that the 12 ft. egress to the rear of the property can be w~dened ·to 15 ft. by agreement with the adjoining o wner. The telephone poles that are presently in this roadway will be removed, and the lines put underground at that particular area. Mr. Lentsch asked if all utilities would be placed underground? Mr. Machol stated that they would not be underground except through this 12 ft. roadway, which by putting them underground and with agreement with the adjoining owner ~an be widened to 15 ft. Mr. Woods asked how many spaces were approved for the present mobile home park? Mrs. Romans replied that 17 spaces are registered with the Building Department. Mr. Lentsch asked Mr. Machol if they had researched to see how many units per acre were pe~ mitted elsewhere. Mr. Machol stated that a number of guides permit 18 per acre. Mrs. Romans noted that codes from several jurisdictions in this area as well as model codes such as that put out by the American Society of Planning Officials, recommend eight (8) units per acre, as does the Mobile Home Parks Association. Mr. Lentsch stated that he had talked to a gentleman from California on the matter of mobile home parks, and was told that they permit six to eight units per acre, and rent the spaces for $80 per month. Mr. Machol stated that if Mr. Pettitt had a large piece of ground --· several acres --that he could see where the eight uni ts per acre would be feasibl"e · but that on t~e size.of ground Mr. Pettitt has now, it isn't economically feasible to restri~t him to ei~ht uni ts per acre. Mr. Lentsch commented that i ·f the Commission approved that density on thi.s prope::ty, that they would be setting a precedent to approve like density in the area for .other mobile home parks . Mr. Ma .chol s.tated ·that ·he was of the op.;i.nion that if the other mobil~ home park owners were willing to "do what Mr.· Pettitt is doing" that it would be a benefit to the area, and they should be permitted, but in any case he didn't feel the approval I I I