Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1971-06-08 PZC MINUTESI I I RECOMMENDATION: Page 1333 The Planning Commission recommend to City Council that §22.5-3(f) of the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance be amended by repealing the following portion of that section: " •.. nor within five hundred (500) feet of an existing filling station property line." Respectfully submitted, By Order of the City Planning and Zoning Commission. Gertrude G. Welty Recording Secretary * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * I. CALL TO ORDER. CITY OF ENGLEWOOD PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION May 18, 1971 The re g ular meeting of the City Planning and Zoning Commission was called to order by Chairman Lentsch at 8:05 P. M. Members present: Weist; Senti; Patrick; Mosbarger; Henning; Carlson; Lentsch Supinger, Ex-officio Members absent: Walsh; Lone Also present: City Attorney Berardini; Assistant Planning Director Romans II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES. May 4, 1971 Chairman Lentsch stated that the Minutes of May 4, 1971, were to be considered for approval. Mosbarger moved: Henning seconded: The Minutes of May 4, 1971, be approved as written. The motion carried unanimously. III. AMENDMENT OF ZONING ORDINANCE §22.5-5a (10) CASE #9-71B May 4 , 1971 April 6, 1971 Re: Parking Standards in Residential Districts. Mr. Supinger stated that this matter was discussed extensively at the last meeting, and noted that members of the Commission have been given additional information on the matter this evening. One part of the information is a study done in a California City in 1968, which has been updated , and the second portion of the additional information is a reprint of information from Rathkopf Law of Zoning. Mr. Supinger stated that he felt higher standards for required parking are needed. Mr. Supinger stated that he felt the City should set parking standards that are felt to be necessary, and do not accept any developments that don't meet the local standards. Mr. Lentsch stated that the Public Hearing had been held on this matter, but discussion of the proposal to raise the parking standards in residential districts has been continued. Mr. Lentsch asked if there were persons in the audience who wished to speak in favor of the proposal? Mr. E. Fishkin 1511 E. Dartmouth -stated that he is an architect, and has done several developments in Aurora, but has not had any projects in Englewood. He stated that he is in favor of increasing the required number of spaces for off-street parking. He stated that the proposal is in line with the requirements of the jurisdictions surrounding Englewood. Mr. Fishkin stated that he felt more people would be driving automobiles until a mass-transit system is a reality, and that provisions must be made for the parking of these cars. Mr. Fishkin asked if parking spaces one behind the other would be approved? Mr. Supinger stated that he felt the City would accept "tandem" parking. · Mr. Fishkin suggested that on-street parking be considered the "guest" parking, and that the tenants all be provided spaces off-street. He stated that development is still going on in Denver, even though the required parking standards have been raised, and he didn't feel the proposal would "kill development" in Englewood as has been suggested. He stated again that he was in favor of the proposal, and felt that it was a "wise proposal". Mr. Berardini asked Mr. Fishkin about the economics of the proposal, and how it would affect development? Page 1334 Mr. Fishkin stated that the proposal will "eliminate" the type of developer who wants to put "17 units on 75 ft. frontage." He stated that if underground parking were required it could well be economically unfeasible, but tha.t. the 1-1/2: 1 isn't; he stated that develop- ments meeting these standards could .be done economically and be "done right." Mr. Al Snyder Almar Company 60 S. Lincoln St. -stated that he has done "research" on the matter in Englewood, driving through the residential areas at night, and he agrees that there is a problem. He stated that the 1-1/2:1 is a must, and that it must be done in an orderly way. Mr. Snyder again questioned the proposed 1:1 for an "efficiency" unit, and stated that he felt it too should be 1-1/2:1. He further stated that he still felt the set-back requirements should be given consideration, particularly on an "inside lot". He suggested 7-1 /2 ft. on each side for such a lot, and a 10 ft. front setback. He suggested that automobile parking be allowed in the setbacks. Mr. Snyder stated that he felt the present 25 ft. rear setback was necessary, and that maneuvering space was needed for the parking provided from the alley. Mr. Snyder stated that he felt the proposal will be a good thing, and will help defer a serious parking problem in the City of Englewood. He urged that something be done "immediately", declaring an emergency ordinance or a moratorium on further development until the parking re- quirements are finalized. Mr. Chalmerse Parker 3996 South Grant St. -suggested that the efficiency units be required to provide 1-1/2:1 parking as the one and two bedroom apartments will be. Mr. Parker stated that he was in favor of a "definite cut-off date", and that all apartments built after that date meet the standards regardless of how long the developer has owned the lot. Mr. Lentsch asked if there were other persons who wished to speak in favor of the proposal? No one indicated they wished to speak. Mr. Lentsch asked if there were persons who wished to speak in opposition to the proposal? Mr. M. M. Summers 3140 S. Delaware -asked if this applied to both apartment houses and single-family resi- dential uses? Mr. Lentsch replied that the proposal would apply to all residential districts , but only for new construction. Mr. Summers stated that he was opposed to the proposal as it applied to the single-family residential uses; as for the application of the proposal to the apartment houses, he stated that he would leave that up to the Commission and the City Council. Mrs. Henning asked if the proposal, if passed by Council, would become effective immediately, or if there would be a delay until it became effective? Mr. Berardini stated that if an emergency clause is enacted, the ordinance will become final upon publication after second reading. If there is no emergency clause, the ordinance becomes effective 30 days after publication following second reading. Discussion followed. Henning moved: Mosbarger seconded: The Planning Commission recommend to City Council that the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance, §22.5-5a(l0) be amended to require off-street parking spaces be provided in residential districts as follows: FROM: One (1) off-street parking space /dwelling unit. TO: Type o;f Unit Required Off-street Parking Single~family Dwellings •......•......•..•....... Two (2) spaces/unit Two or More Family Dwellings: Efficiency Unit ....•......................... One (1) space/unit One or Two Bedroom Units ...................•• One and one-half (1-1 /2) spaces /unit Three or More Bedroom Units .................. Two (2) spaces /unit. The motion carried unanimously. IV. AMENDMENT OF ZONING ORDINANCE §22.5-3(f) Re: Service Stations Fire Chief William Hamilton was present for the discussion. CASE #8-71B May 4, 1971 April 6, 1971 Chief Hamilton stated that after meeting with Mr. Kramer of the Englewood Public Schools, and Mr. Supinger, it was decided that the restriction should be raised to 600 ft. between a service station and a playground or school. He noted that with Performance Standards, that a service station could be located closer than the 600 ft. Chief Hamilton stated that just to eliminate the Ordinance that might b~ a mistake on the part of the City, and that he felt the present controls did contribute to public safety. Chief Hamilton noted that the City now allows deliveries of 9,000 gallons of gasoline per delivery; he stated that he felt the entire Ordinance should be "strengthened." Mr. Patrick asked if storage of gasoline was considered the same as filling stations? Chief Hamilton replied that it was. Mr. Carlson asked if the "leeway for negotiation" was legal? He noted that a service station that might be closer than the 600 ft. as proposed might have an underground tank that would leak, and might endanger the school by seepage of the gasoline underground. I I I I I I Page 1335 Mr. Berardini stated that he felt the negotiation leeway would be permitted. He asked how the 500 ft. rule came about in the first place? Chief Hamilton replied that he didn't really know. Discussion followed. Chief Hamilton stated that the present method of storage of gas underground presented little or no hazard, except in the case of an underground tank leaking; however, he also pointed out that the LPG storage next to schools could jeopardize the school, in that liquid gases above ground were hazardous, and could travel at ground level in vapor clouds. Mr. Berardini asked if the same standards that would apply to schools in the location of service stations should apply to hospitals, auditoriums, etc? Chief Hamilton stated that the standards could very well apply to these uses, and include churches and other uses which attract large concentrations of people at one time. Discussion followed. Mr. S. R. Andrews Real Estate Representative Continental Oil Company -stated he felt the restriction of service stations .near schools and playgrounds is "emotionally" ba.sed •. He asked what would happen to service stations that are now 500 ft. from a school and play- ground if the suggested 600 ft. distance is approved? Mr. Andrews asked how the distance was measured, and suggested that a definition of the method of measurement be included in the Ordinance. He also suggested that the Ordinance include, in addition to storage mode, the capacity, and the manner in which the product is to be dispensed. He noted that some of the biggest risks are in the way the gas is dispensed to the private automobile. He stated that he questioned whether or not the restriction between service• stations and schools and playgrounds is needed. He stated that they have a service station located on a corner of the school lot in Fort Collins, and they have bad no problems whatsoever. Mr. Chalmerse Parker stated that the 500 ft. rule was devised by the City in an effort to curb the rapid expansion of the service stations; he stated that the service stations were buying up to much of the land that City officials feared it would reduce the ad valorem taxes in the City. Mr. Parker stated that "health, safety, and welfare was used as a gimmick to pass the ordinance." David Clayton 4509 South Acoma - Discussion followed. Henning moved: Senti seconded: The motion carried. stated that there have been cases in the City of Englewood, as well as in Littleton, where underground tanks leaked and three adjoining resi- dences had to be evacuated. The Planning Commission defer action on amending the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance §22.5-3(f) restricting the location of service stations closer than 500 ft. to a school or playground. The Commission requests the City Attorney, Planning Director, and Fire Chief to furnish inform~ tion on improvement of "safety" standards in other existing City Codes and Ordinances. V. FIRE/POLICE COMPLEX Mr. Wm. McDivitt and Mr. Larry Bourne were present for this discussion, as were Fire Chief Hamilton and Police Chief Clasby. Mr. McDivitt opened the discussion by reviewing the background on this Complex. Originally, the new site was to be a replacement for Fire Station #1 only, but after considering the proposal, it was determined that the structure at Girard Avenue and South Bannock Street was inadequate for the Police Department. Thus, the Fire/Police Communications Complex came about. Mr. McDivitt stated that trips by City Officials and Mr. Bourne to various points of the country to view similar complexes was helpful in the ultimate design of the Complex. Mr. McDivitt stated that bids were to be let and opened during June, and that con- struction, hopefully, will begin by the end of August, with the completion date set for May of 1972. Mr. Bourne displayed a model of the proposed Complex; he pointed out that there is very little window area to the outside --an attempt to make the building as "secure" as possible. The structure will be masonry and brick. Mr. Bourne stated that the entire complex will have 29,800 sq. ft.; there will be four jail cells, and four interrogation offices which could be used as holding cells. Mr. Lentsch asked what expansion of the two departments could be accommodated by the Building? Chief Clasby stated that this would give the Police Department facilities to accommodate a 50% expansion; he also noted that the jail facilities were only for the investigative process, and would not be used for "long term commitments". Chief Clasby noted that the total communica- tions operations for the City would be housed in this structure, and that it is imperative that proper security be provided for this equipment. Chief Clasby also stated that there have been some fire bombings of police facilities in the Denver area. Chief Hamilton stated that the new facility will accommodate the rescue unit, one pumper and the snorkle, and the new pumper when it arrives. Mr. Bourne stated there would be give "bays", four for pumpers, and one for the snorkle. Parking facilities were discussed. Mr. Mosbarger stated that he felt there should be accommodations for two crews. Discussion followed. Mr. Lentsch extended the appreciation of the Commission to Messrs. Bourne and McDivitt, and to Chief Hamilton and Chief Clasby. Page 1336 VI. DIRECTOR'S CHOICE Mr. Supinger reminded members of the dinner meeting May 20, 1971, of the Planning Commissions from jurisdictions within Arapahoe County. The dinner meeting is 6:30 P. M. at Guespato Cristofolo Chiacchierone. Mr. Dial is the guest speaker. - -- - --- - - - --- --- - -- ---- - - - - - - - - VII. COMMISSION'S CHOICE Mr. Patrick presented maps and information on parking areas in the downtown area, most specifically those available to the 3400 block of Lincoln, Broadway, and Acoma. Mr. Patrick pointed out that these parking lots are privately owned, and could be eliminated at any time the owners so chose. Mr. Patrick stated that the merchants on Broadway are concerned, and that Mr. Holthaus, owner of Lot #1 on South Acoma, has stated his desire to fence that lot and charge $.50 parking fees .. Mr. Patrick stated he has discussed the matter with several of the merchants in the 3400 block, with members of the Planning Department staff, and with members of the Planning Commission, in an effort to find a way to secure these parking lots permanently for the downtown area. Mrs. Henning asked if the City were paying the property owners for the use of their property as parking lots? Mr. Patrick replied that the City is not; there is an association of merchants which collects money from the individual merchants in payment for use of the parking lots. Mr. Patrick stated that property which Mr. Holthaus owns on Acoma required 23,868 sq. ft. of parking area, and the parking lot which Mr. Holthaus is providing is 31,462 sq. ft. Discussion followed. Mr. Patrick stated that the Zoning Ordinance requires that parking be provided, but does not say whether or not the parking lot may be fenced, and a fee charged for parking. Further discussion followed. Mr. Lentsch stated that development or redevelop- ment of the downtown area cannot be expected until permanent parking is sssured. It was suggested that possibly the City should subsidize the parking if the land is to develop. Ways and means of financing the purchase of land for parking in the downtown area were con- sidered. Mrs. Romans pointed out that a "parking district" had been attempted two or three times before, and has failed to gain sufficient support from land-owners and businessmen. Mr. Lentsch suggested that perhaps the "occupational tax" should be reinstated, and the funds from such tax used for parking downtown, covering Little Dry Creek, etc. Mrs. Henning suggested that there were other problems downtown than just the parking. She noted that the access to the stores from the parking lots at the rear is extremely poor, and asked that the businessmen consider improving this access to the stores. Mrs. Henning also suggested that perhaps monies should be allocated in the public improvement budget for the purchase of land for parking. Discussion followed. Mr. Supinger stated that he had dis- cussed the improvement of the core area with a few consultants that have indicated interest in the project after the initial contact. Mr. Supinger stated he would like to know what E happening with the Englewood Square project. Mr. Lentsch stated that he didn't think any progress would be made; that the project seems to be stalemated. Discussion followed. Mr. Supinger stated that he had contacted the Disney Corporation to see if they would be interested in doing a study of the core area, but the Corporation had other commitments and could not undertake this project. Mrs. Romans commented that several consultants have done studies of the core area, among them Dr. Crampon, Larry Smith, and Jim Small, whose study was completed in 1964. There have been numerous staff studies of the area. Discussion followed. Mr. Carlson suggested that the Chamber of Commerce could check into the possibility of con- sulting firms doing a study in the downtown area. Mr. Lentsch asked that Mr. Patrick discuss the matter of the parking lots further with the downtown merchants, and report back to the Commission. Mr. Lentsch asked the Planning Director to report back to the Commission on the Martin- Marietta Company parking lot. The Bus Tour of May 8th was discussed. Mrs. Henning stated that she felt the tour was very educational. Mrs. Henning stated that she understood there was to be a meeting May 24th on Storm Sewers. Discussion followed. Mr. Lentsch asked that the Planning Commission be notified if the meeting on the storm sewers was open to the public. The meeting adjourned at 10:50 P. M. Gertrude G. Welty Recording Secretary ----- -- -- - ---- -- ------- -- - --- -- MEMORANDUM TO THE ENGLEWOOD CITY COUNCIL REGARDING ACTION OR RECOMMENDATION OF THE CITY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION. DATE: SUBJECT: RECOMMENDATION: FROM: TO: May 18, 1971 Amendment of Zoning Ordinance: §22.5-5a(l0) The Planning Commission recommend to City Council that the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance, §22.5-5a(l0) be amended to require off-street parking spaces be provided in residential districts as follows: One (1) off-street parking space /dwelling unit. Type of Unit Requi~ed Off-Street Parking Single-Family Dwellings .•••....•... Two (2) spaces /unit Two or more Family Dwellings: Efficiency Unit •...............• One (1) space/unit I I I I I I Page 1337 One or Two Bedroom Units ..........• One and one-half (1-1 /2) spaces/unit Three or more Bedroom Units ........ Two (2) Spaces /unit The motion carried unanimously. Respectfully submitted, By Order of the City Planning and Zoning Commission. Gertrude G. Welty Recording Secretary * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * I. CALL TO ORDER. CITY OF ENGLEWOOD PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION JUNE 8, 1971 The regular meeting of the City Planning and Zoning Commission was called to order by Chairman Lentsch at 8:15 P. M. Members present: Members Absent: Henning; Lentsch; Mosbarger; Patrick; Senti; Vobejda; Supinger, Ex-officio Carlson; Lone; Weist Also present: City Attorney Berardini; and from the City of Sheridan: Joseph Green, Lee Modrel, Steve Baker, and Norm Ferland. II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES. May 18, 1971 Chairman Lentsch stated that the Minutes of the May 18th meeting were to be considered. Henning moved: Mosbarger seconded: The Minutes of May 18, 1971, be approved as written. AYES: Patrick; Senti; Vobejda; Henning; Lentsch; Mosbarger NAYS: None ABSENT: Weist; Carlson; Lone The Chairman declared the motion carried. III. AMENDMENT OF ZONING MAP Colorado Realty, Inc. Lot 6, except the West 145 ft. thereof, Lot 7, Centennial Industrial Park. Present Zoning: I-1 (Light Industrial) Requested Zoning: R-3-A (Multi-family Residential) CASE #11-71 Mr. Supinger stated that the subject area is located in southwest Englewood and is north of West Union Avenue and on the west side of South Decatur Street. Centennial Park is to the east of the site. The present zoning is I-1, (Light Industrial), and the applicant has requested that the property be zoned R-3-A, a multi-family zone district. The Planning Commission members have in hand the staff report which gives the background of the subject site, comments from other departments, a staff analysis, and a staff recommendation. Mrs. Henning moved: Mosbarger seconded: The Public Hearing on Case #11-71 be opened. AYES: Vobejda; Senti; Patrick; Mosbarger; Lentsch and Henning NAYS: None ABSENT : Weist; Lone; Carlson Mr. Kenneth W. Prater, representing Colorado Realty, Inc., the proposed developers of the property, and George and Edna Adams, the owners of the property, gave a brief history of the property. The land was annexed to the City in 1960 and was subsequently subdivided as an industrial park and zoned I-1. The eastern portion of the subdivision was purchased by the City for park purposes in 1968 and 1969, which action "took away" from the value of the subject site as a part of an industrial park development. At the time that the City purchased the park site, stated Mr. Prater, Mr. Adams was in the process of developing a number of tenants for his industrial park. On the north side of West Union Avenue, there is a strip of R-1-B, Single-family Residential Zoning, within which is the Adams' home. Mr. Prater stated that the proposed multi-family development would be compatible with the adjoining single-family development.