Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1972-04-04 PZC MINUTESI I I Page 1411 Mr. Supinger stated that the meeting of the Planning Commission and Parks Commission has been scheduled for March 29th, 7:30 P.M. Mr. Supinger asked if there were members of the Commission who wished to attend the Planning Commissioner Seminar that is sponsored by the Denver Regional Council of Governments. This seminar will be on Thursday, 7:00 to 9:30 p.m., March 30th, thru May 11th. It will be held at the Council of Governments offices, 1776 South Jackson; the cost is $15 per person, and the City will pay this fee. Mr. Supinger stated that at the present time the City does not have adopted standards for the design of a parking lot. Mr. Supinger stated that he has asked Mrs. Romans , Assistant Director o f Community Development, to draft recommended standards to submit to the Com- mission at the next meeting. Mr. Supinger stated he hoped to have a set of design standards adopted by ordinance, and included in the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance. Mr. Lentsch asked if these st~ndards would include the ·type of surfacing required? Mr. Supinger stated that the draft of proposed standards could include specific surfacing and bumpe r stops as requirements. Mr. Robins questioned that the City could specify such items; he felt the City could only ~equire that no cars extend over sidewalks. Discussion foll owed. Mr. Supinger stated that the staff felt such standards were important enough and will be recommended to -the· Commission for consideration. VII. COMMISSION'S CHOICE. Mr. Lentsch asked members of the Commiss.ion if they all received .council Minutes and Agendas? He stated that he had received a letter from City Manager Dial asking if members of the Com- mission felt they benefitted from receiving the minutes and agendas. Mr. Lentsch stated that he for one felt he benefitted from receiving this information. Mr. Robins agreed that it was helpful. Mr. Supinger asked if the Commission felt that the staff reports prepared by the staff on matters to be considered by the Commission were helpful : He stated that the staff attempted to include all the important information that was possible, and asked the Commission's opinion. • I Mrs. Stanley stated that she had found the staff reports to be very helpful to her. Mr. Ross stated that he found the staff reports t o be very useful. Discussion followed. Mr. Lentsch stated that even if a · recommendation was includ·ed by the staff in the staff report, the Commission should be able to "make up their own mind" on any matter. Mr. Robins stated that he felt the staff should give the facts on both sides of an issue, and make their recommendation; the commission may or may not agree with the staff recommendation. · Council- man Brown stated that he felt the staff reports were ~ery helpful, and that he felt the staff did present the facts on both sides of an issue in the staff reports. He stated that he felt the staff recommendations were based on facts, and that after study and consideration of the staff reports the Commission should make their own· decision. Mr. Carlson pointed out that the function of the Planning Commission is considerably different from the function of other boards and commissions;· for instance, the Board o f Adjustment and Appeals decisions can be appealed only to a Court of Law, whereas the Planning Commission is a recommending body to City Council. Mr. Len sch asked if Mr. Supinger had checked on' the expense fees of the Planning Commission? Mr. Supinger stated he would do so. Mr. Lentsch asked when the Traffic Study would be completed? Mr. Supinger stated that a meeting with Mr. Voorhees was scheduled for · March 23rd, and that the final report would be submitted very shortly. Mr. Lentsch stated that he would like to have Mr. Robins review the report by Mr. Voorhees, and keep the Commission up-to-date on it. Discussion f ollowed. Mr. Brown stated that the Planned Development Ordinance is still tabled at the Council level. He stated that he has received sev€ral letters asking that Council act on this Ordinance. Mr. Brown stated that he tried to get it raised fr om the table at the Council meeting of March 20th, but could not do so. Discussion followed. The meeting adjourned at 10 :00 p.m. Gertrude G. Welty Recording Secretary * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * CITY OF ENGLEWOOD PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION April 4, 1972 ' I. CALL TO ORDER. The Regular meeting of the City Planning and Zoning Commission was called to order at 8:00 P.M. by Chairman Lentsch Members present: Carlson; Brown; Lentsch; Stanley; Robins; Henning; Vobejda Members absent: Weist; Ross Also present: D. A. Romans, Assistant Director of Community Development and acting Ex-officio. Page 1412 II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES. Mr. Lentsch stated the Minutes of March 21, 1972, were to be considered for approval. Carlson moved: Brown seconded: The Minutes of March 21, 197~, be approved as written. The motion carried. III. STREET NAME CHANGE CASE #9-72 West Hampden Place to Carl Norgren Way Mrs. Romans stated that the City has received a request from Mr. Don Carney, Vice-Chairman of the First National Bank of Englewood, to change the name of the street known as West Hampden Place to Carl Norgren Way. This street runs from South Che!okee Street to South El~ti Street. Mrs. Romans stated that this street was designated as West Hampden Place by the City Council in 1971 on the recommendation of the Planning Commission. This designation was recommended after c~nsiderable study and review of the street naming standards by the staff, and it is felt that the designation of West Hampden Place does conform to these standards. Mrs. Romans stated that the staff strongly opposes deviation from these standards which exist throughout the metropolitan area. Mrs. Romans cited past changes of street names in an effort to conform with these standards, and also cited the problems caused for post office officials, taxi drivers, fire, police, etc. when trying to locate an adqress that doesn't conform to the street naming pattern. Mrs. Romans further discussed the preliminary report of the Voorhees Traffic Study, in which the possibility of extending West Hampden Avenue from approximately the Acoma /Bannock bridge to tie into West Hampden ~lace is discussed. This procedure would eliminate one leg of the now very congested Bannock/Hampden/U.S. 285 intersection, and carry the .traffic to less congested dispersing points. Mrs. Romans stated that a copy of the staff report has been sent to Mr. Carney, and a telephone call was made to his office earlier in the day to notify him that this matter would be con- sidered by the Commission at this time ~ Mrs. Romans closed her presentation by urging that the street naming standards be adhe~ed to, and that the name of West Hampden Place be retained. Mr. Brown siated he was at the Council meeting when Mr .. Carne~ first ma~e the proposal. He stated that he felt the staff was correct in recommending the retention of the West Hampden Place name. Mr. Brown stated that he felt Mr. Norgren was deserving of such an honor, but he didn't feel it was feasible or wise to grant this honir in changing a name of a street. Mr. Brown suggested that possibly the First National Bank of Englewo~d could erect some type of monument in honor of Mr. Norgren's contributions to the City. Mr. Robins agreed that it would not be wise to deviate from the street naming patterns in order to grant an honor to one individual. Mrs. Vobejda stated that she felt a building named in honor of Mr. Norgren would be more fitting. Mrs. Henning suggested that perhaps the Board of Directors of the First National Bank of Englewood would like to consider dedicating land for a park to be named in honor of Mr. Norgren. Mr. Carlson pointed out that changes were made on many streets in Englewood several years ago, and more recently on South Pecos ·street and South Santa Fe Lane, changing the names of the streets to conform to the street naming pattern. Mr. Carlson stated that he didn't feel the City should deviate from the str~et naming pattern. Henning moved: Vobejda seconded: The motion carried. The Planning Commission recommend to City Council that the name for the street extending from South Cherokee Street to South Elati Street, now known as West Hampden Place, be retained. Mr. Brown asked that the First National Bank be contacted and the reasons for the decision be explained to them. IV. SUBDIVISION WAIVER CASE #11-72 Glenn H. Kooi and Everett Mellema Mrs. Romans stated that Mr. Mellema, agent for Mr. Kooi and Denver Dry Wall Company, has applied for a subdivision waiver on property on the northeast corner of West Floyd Avenue and South Zuni Street. This property is zoned I-2, Heavy Industrial, and the Denver Dry Wall Company proposes to purchase a major portion of the Kooi property and develop it for their warehouse, storage and office facilities. The property to the South of West Floyd Avenue is in the City of Sheridan, and is zoned for industrial use. To the West of the subject site, across South Zuni Street, is a five acre tract that was annexed to Sheridan in September, 1971, and which is zoned commercial. A portion of this five-acre tract is being developed for a marble factory. Mrs. Romans stated that in 1969, Mr. Kooi and Mr. Mellema applied for a waiver to the Sub- division Regulations, and at that time, Mr. Kooi was planning to build a warehouse on the southeast corner of the site and lease it to Carey Salt Company. The Planning Commission granted Mr. Kooi's request for a waiver conditioned upon the dedication of the north 30 ft. right-of-~ay f~r West Floyd Avenue. Mr. Kooi did dedicate this land for West Floyd ~venue, and did build the war~house. Mr. Kooi t~en requested a second waiver on the property in the later part of 1969, which request was denied by the Commission. M~s. Romans stated that Mr. Mellema has informed her that the Denver Dry Wall Company would like to pu~chase all of the property except that portion on which the Carey Sale Company rWarteQouse is lhqcatefd, and will use the entire parcel for their development Mr. Kooi will e ain owners ip o the warehouse site. · I I I I I I Page 1413 Mrs. Romans stated that there is no need for additional street dedication; utilities are available to the site, and there would be no public benef~t served were a subdivision plat to be required. The staff recommends granting of the waiver to Mr. Kooi. Mr. E. Mellema stated he was acting as agent for both Mr. Kooi and the Denver Dry Wall Company. He stated there will be no further division of the property, as Denver Dry Wall will need the entire parcel for their development. Discussion followed. Mr. Robins asked for explanation of the 50' x 50' easement indicated to be given to Mr. Kooi by the Denver Dry Wall Company? Mr. Mellema stated that an agree- ment has been worked out between Mr. Kooi and the officials at Denver Dry Wall for reciprocal private easements. One agreement gives Denver Dry Wall an easement across Mr. Kooi's property for a rail spur extension, and another gives Mr. Kooi right of access on Denver Dry Wall's property for maneuvering space. Discussion followed ~ Mrs. Henning asked if she was correct in assuming the recourse for enforcement of these easements would not be through the City? Mr. Mell.ema stated that it would not be; that this would be a private matter between the property owners. Further discussion follQwed., Brown moved: Henning seconded: The motion carried. The Planning Commission grant ~waiver to the Subdivision Regulations to applicants Everett Mellema and Glenn Kooi, as such request is set forth in Case #11-72, such waive~ to b~ conditioned upon the following: 1. The house, identified as 3296 South Zuni Street, and all accessory buildings and structures are t~ be razed pursuant to Mr~ Kooi's discussion with the representative o~ the Building Division of the Department of Community Development. 2. There is to b~ no further division of Parcel A and Parcel B by any act which would have the effect of causing a separation of either of these ~arcels into two or more tracts, parcels or sites, whether by sale, conveyance, lease or otherwise. This shall not preclude the construction of one or mor~ acc~ssory buildings or structures on Parcel A and on Parce.l B which buildings or structures are per- mitted under t .he provisions of the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance and which are necessary to the operation of one principal use on Parc~J ·A and one principal use on Parcel B. Mrs. Romans noted that the applicants would be required to pay a $10 fee as set forth on the application, and will a.lso be required to pay the recording fees. Mr. Carlson discusse~ t~e ~evelopment of Mr. Kooi'~ property with the warehouse for Carey Salt Company. He noted that this warehouse has no water supplied to it, and that there is a restriction on .the ~ooks in the Building Division s~ating that this warehouse may be used only for the storage of salt. Mr. Carlspn questioned the validity of this restriction, and asked if it would be enforced better than correction of violations on property at 3296 South Zuni, noting violations set forth in a letter to Mr. Kooi da te,d August . 14, 1969. There is no record in the file of any of the corrections having been made .. Discussion followed. Mrs. Romans noted that a change of use in the warehouse structure would require the issuance of an Occupancy Permit, and that this would not be issued until the requirements of the various City Ordinances are met. Mrs. Romans further noted that Building Inspector Pyeatt,. deceased, had discussed the matter of the house at 3296 South Zuni on at least three occasions w~th Mr. Kooi earlier this year, and was told that the house would be razed, and the property would be cleaned up. Discussion followed. Mr. Lentsch asked for a report on the matter of the restriction placed on the use of the warehouse at the next meeting. v. D0IRECTOR' s CHOICE. l Mrs. Romans stated that she had nothing to bring before the Commission. VI. COMMISSION'S CHOICE. Mr. Brown reported on action of the City Council at the meeting of April 3, 1972. A Bill for Ordinance was passed on first reading vacat~ng the 16' easement on the north property line of 4005 South Jason Street. A Bill for Ordinance was also passed on first reading vacating the 16 ft. easement on the north property line of 4000 South Jason Street. Mrs. Henning noted that Mr. Aldretti, 4005 South J~son Street, did dedicate the north 30 ft .. of the 8 ft. easement on the west of his property to the City. Mr. Brown stated that the Planned Development Ordinance was taken off the Table at the City Council meeting, and the City Attorney was instrµcted to incorporate prop0sals suggested by the City Manager into the proposed Ordinance. He stated that he hoped the Ordinance would be approved, and that he felt it would be of benefit to the City if it were approved. Dis- cussion followed. Mr. Lentsch stated that the Chamber of Commerce has a copy of the Voorhees Traffic Study, and that copies should be available in the City Hall. He asked Mr. Robins to obtain a copy and give a report at th~ next meeting. Mr. Lentsch discussed the meeting of the Planning Commission with the Parks and Recreation Commission. He stated that he felt it was a v~ry good meeting, and very worthwhile. Mrs. Henning agreed that it was a very valuable meeting. Mrs. Stanley and Mrs. Vobejda stated that the meeting was very informative and worthwhile. Mr. Carlson stated that he felt it was good for the Planning Commission to meet with the other boards and commissions of the city government. Page 1414 Mr. Robins expressed interest in the Swedish Medical Center plans and discussion of the Center's proposed development ensued. Mrs. Romans noted that Mr. Palmquist, the Hospital Administrator, has arr.anged a meeting with previous Commissions to review the plans for the Center. She asked if the Commission would like to see if such a meeting could be set up? Mr. Robins stated that he would like to have such a meeting. Mr. Lentsch noted that the Traffic Study should be available to the Commission very shortly, and that he thought maybe the Commission would like to meet with Mr. Waggoner and the Traffic Engineer at the same time. Mr. Lentsch stated that a study session on the Sign Code has been scheduled for April 11th. He asked if the proposed amendments on off-street parking lots will be ready for discussion at that time? Mrs. Romans noted that she has the prelimina~y draft out to other members of the staff for their review now. She stated that the Department will try to get the informa- tion to the Commission before the meeting on the 11th of April. Mrs. Romans briefly reviewed the proposed amendment, noting that it covers surfacing of the parking lot, minimum size of parking stalls, bumper stops, .etc. Mrs. Romans noted that some requirements will be changed, as the parking for hospitals is being changed from one off-street space per every three beds, to two spaces per bed. She stated that she has called the State on requirements for several uses, such as hospitals, nursing homes, etc. The sign code was briefly discussed. Mrs. Romans stated that the proposed Code will pretty much follow the model code as developed by the DRCOG. Mrs. Romans stated that members of the staff are conducting a sign inventory; every business in the City will have a card in the file with a picture showing the signs at that location. Information will also be obtained on which signs are non-conforming, which signs were erected without a permit, etc. Mr. Lentsch stated that the JC's had done a survey three or four months ago, and he felt the Commission members should have a copy of this survey. He asked the staff to obtain copies of the results of the survey for the Commission members. Mr. Lentsch discussed the storage shed that has been erected in back of the Fish & Chips restaurant at Broadway and Hampden. Mr. Lentsch stated that the storage shed is located on the parking area. Further discussion followed. Mr. Lentsch stated that he would like to have a report on this matter at the next regular meeting. Mr. Lentsch asked Mrs. Henni-ng to look into the matter of a community center for the City, and report back to the Commission, He indicated he would like the report to cover such things as location, size, etc. Mr. Lentsch discussed the proposed field trip and asked if it could possibly be worked in with the meeting with the officials of Swedish Medical Center? Mrs. Romans stated that she felt it would be wise to plan at least four hours for the tour alone. Mr. Lentsch suggested that the tour be planned for sometime in May, preferably on a Saturday. Mr. Brown discussed the Seminar for Planning Commission members which he, Mrs. Vobejda and Mrs. Sta.nley are attending. He stated that he felt Mr. Supinger, who was a member of the panel at the first meeting on March 30th, had done a very fine job, and he felt the Seminar was going to be very interesting. He stated that the panel members advised reviewing the Comprehensive Plan frequently. VII. FLOYD-ELATI INTERSECTION Traffic Island CASE #10-72A March 21, 1972 Mrs. Romans stated that Mr. Waggoner ha~ submitted some alternate plans for the Floyd Avenue - Elati Street intersection earlier in the day. Mrs. Romans stated that residents living north of Floyd on Elati Street have not been notified of these alternate plans. She briefly reviewed the five plans submitted. 1. This plan shows the intersection as it is presently constructed. Mrs. Romans noted that the intersection wasn't designed to carry north to west movements, only north to east. 2. This plan shows the island removed, and the intersection open to traffic. This is Mr. Waggoner's recommended plan. 3. The third proposal is an increase in the size of the island, designing the island to preclude the possibility of persons going "thru" on Elati in either direction. This plan is Mr. Waggoner's second choice. It was noted that on the northeast corner of the intersection, the right-of-way comes very close to the house. 4. This plan shows a cul-de-sac, 40 ft. radius. Again, the corner properties on both sides of South Elati Street lose a great portion of the front yard to accommodate this cul-de- sac. 5. This plan shows a cul-de-sac, 30 ° radius. This plan takes very little of the yard on the corner properties. Mrs. Romans stated that these plans were not received in time to send them to other depart- ments for their comments prior to this meeting. Mr. Lentscp asked that the residents on Elati north of Floyd be notified that this will be discussed at the meeting of May 2nd. Mrs. Stanley asked about the possible signalization of the intersection? Mrs. Romans stated that she understood these plans were concerned primarily with the "physical layout" of the intersection, and not whether or not a signal -was warranted. Discussion followed. It was determined that there would be a study session on April 11th, and t~e next regular meeting would be on May 2nd. The meeting adjourned. Gertrude G. Welty, Recording Secretary --------- -- ------ - - -- I I I I I I Page 1415 MEMORANDUM TO THE ENGLEWOOD CITY COUNCIL REGARDING ACTION OR RECOMMENDATION OF THE CITY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION. DATE: April 4, 1972 SUBJECT: Street Name Change \ RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Commission recommend to City Council that the name for the street extending from South Cherokee Street to South Elati Street, now known as West Hampden Place, be retained. 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 Special Meeting April 11, 1972 " The Special Meeting of the City Planning and Zoning Commission was called to order by Chairman Lentsch at 8:00 P.M. Members present: Stanley ; Vobejda; Lentsch; Carlson; Ross; Weist; Brown; Supinger, Ex~officio Members abs~nt: Henning; Robins '. Also present:. Roma:Qs, Young I • ' . II. PROPOSED SIGN CODE 'J CASE #12-72 Assistant Director of Community Development Romans discussed attempts to restrict signs and billboards. Efforts to restrict the use of signs and billboards solely for aesthetic purposes has been found to be unconstitutional and limiting the use of land to achieve aesthetic pur- poses has been found to be be~ond the police powers of the cities. Restrictions on signs and billboards have been approved, so long as they have served the health, welfare, etc. of the public, and aesthetic considerations, if any, were secondary. In 1930, the Supreme Court of Indiana stated that there may be reasonable control over the construction and maintenance of billboards, and that it was also proper for the City to limit the size, height, location, etc. of such billboards. Mrs. Romans stated that the trend now is toward restricting matters which would off.end the sight, as well as thos.e which have sounds or odors which are offensive. . ' Mrs. Romans then discussed summarizations of the present Sign Ordinance of the City of Englewood; regulations contained within the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance and an analysis of sign ordinances of Denver, Littleton, and the Cou~cil o~ Governments Model Code. . . . Mrs. Romans presented several slides of different sign types existing in the City of Englewood. Mrs. Romans then noted that Mrs. Barbara Young, Planning Assi~tant, has been working on a sign inventory. This inventory will consist of a card for every business that has a sign, and will contain the address, name of business, owner, type of sign, location and size of sign, with space for comments and a picture of the subject sign on the back of the card. Mrs. Romans noted that with the adoption of the proposed sign code, some signs will be made non-conforming, and that this inventory will be of aid in determining such non-conformity. A land use map of the area south of Belleview Avenue along South Broadway was discussed. Mrs. Young pointed out symbols indicating ground, wall, roof, billboard, sandwich-board or arcade signs on the businesses. Mrs. Young commented that there are "almost as many signs non-conforming now as we would have if the Model Sign Code were adopted." Mrs. Romans further qiscussed th~ analysis of ordinances in Denver, Littleton, and the Council of Governments. She pointed out that conformance on restrictions in the sign code within the metropolitan area has many advantages. Mrs. Romans stated that it is proposed that the Sign Code for Englewood follow the Model Code, with adjustments written in where needed. I Mr. Carlson stated that he felt the Commission should meet with the Board of Adjustment and Appeals on this matter. Mr. Carlson also asked if the sign inventory card would in- dicate on it "how a sign became non-conforming?" The period of "amortization" was discussed. Mr. Carlson pointed out that a small business may install a sign which is, according to the schedule contained .in the analysis, to be amortized within two years. However, a large business may install a sign costing $15,000 or more, and would be amortized within five years by this schedule; he noted that these two signs might be able to be amqrtized at the same time by the fact that the larger business could more quickly recover the cost of the sign. Discussion followed. Mr. Supinger suggested setting a date, maybe 10 years hence, when all signs would have to be in conformance with the standards.