Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1972-01-18 PZC MINUTESI I I I. CALL TO ORDER. CITY OF ENGLEWOOD PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION January 18, 1972 Page 1389 The regular meeting of the City Planning and Zoning Commission was called to order at 8:00 P.M. by Chairman Kenneth Carlson. Members present: Weist; Henning; Vobejda; Barton; Brown; Lentsch; Robins; Carlson Supinger, Ex-officio Members absent: Mosbarger Also present: D. A. Romans, Assistant Director of Community Development; City Attorney Berardini II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES. Mr. Carlson stated that Minutes of January 4, 1972, were to be considered for approval. Lentsch moved: Henning seconded: The Minutes of January 4, 1972, be approved as written. The motion carried unanimously. III. HEIGHT EXCEPTION Block 6, Premier Add. CASE #2-72A January 4, 1972 Lentsch moved: Henning seconded: The matter of the requested Height Exception for property in Block 6, Premier Addition, be raised from the table. The motion carried unanimously. Mr. Carlson asked Mr. Supinger to review the request. Mr. Supinger stated that the applicants now have an option to purchase property owned by Mr. L. D. Watson, adding four lots to the total area proposed to be developed with an office building and off-street parking area. Mr. Supinger stated that amended plans indicate the height of the structure has been reduced from 80 ft., with a request for 20 ft. height exception, to 65 ft., requesting now only a 5 ft. exception. Mr. Supinger stated that the area of the building has been increased, as has the number of off-street parking spaces the applicants are providing. Mr. Supinger stated that the number of off-street parking spaces provided does meet the minimum require- ments of the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance. Mrs. Henning inquired if the option was for the entire parcel owned by Mr. Watson? Mr. Supinger replied that it did encompass the entire parcel. Mr. ·Barton asked if the building would now be four floors? Mr. Supinger stated it would be four floors, with the mechanical structure on top. Mr. Supinger stated that the applicants are not requesting that additional alley-way be vacated beyond their original request con- sidered by the Planning Commission January 4th. Mrs. Henning asked if an exception, if granted, would go with tlie land or with the owner? Mr. Supinger stated it would go with the land. Mr. Brown referred to the following statement from Public Works Department: "The description of the tract listed under (2) of your memo includes 19 feet +/-of Sherman Street although the plot plan of the proposed office building does not. Since there is some question as to the status of Sherman we should probably require a quit claim deed for the 19 feet." Mr. Brown asked if this is a problem? Mr. Supinger stated that requiring the quit claim deed would be clearing up ownership of the land in that particular location. Discussion followed. Mr. Supinger suggested that approval, if given by the Commission, should be tied to the plans submitted January 12, 1972. Discussion followed. Mr. Brown stated he was concerned about the drainage on this site. He asked what the additional blacktopped parking area would mean to surrounding property owners in terms of increased runoff? Discussion followed. Mr. Brown was referred to the comments-from the Public Works Department as included in the staff report. Mr. Lentsch stated he felt the storm sewer would take care of the problem. Further discussion followed. Lentsch moved: Vobejda seconded: The City Planning and Zoning Commission recommend to City Council that request for Height Exception for property in Block 6, Premier Addition, under option by Offices, Ltd., be approved; such approval to permit the construction of a 65 ft., four story office building, as shown on plans dated January 11, 1972, in the B-1 Zone District. Criteria set forth for Commission and Council consideration in granting requests for height exception is met by the applicant, with particular reference to the pro- vision of available and suitable off-street parking. The motion carried unanimously. IV. OFF-STREET PARKING PLAN Block 6, Premier Addition CASE #3-72A January 4, 1972 Mr. Carlson stated that consideration of the off-street parking plan, as submitted by Offices, Ltd., has been tabled. Page 1390 Brown moved: Henning seconded: That consideration of the off-street parking plan for Offices, Ltd., be removed from the table. The motion carried unanimously. Mr. Supinger noted that with the increase in the floor area of the proposed building from 20,400 sq. ft. to 24,352 sq. ft., the number of required off-street parking spaces has also been increased. Mr. Su pinger noted that the 82 spaces sh.own on the plans submitted to tbe Department of Community Development on January 12, 1972, do meet the minimum requirements for a building of the proposed size. Mr. Supinger noted that the design and layout of the parking lot, as shown on the plans of January 12th submission, does meet the approval of the staff. Discussion followed. Lentsch moved: Vobejda seconded: The Planning Commission approve the parking lot' design and· layout pro- posed by Offices, Ltd., on plans dated January 11th, which parking lot shows spaces for 82 cars. The motion carried unanimously. ------- - --- --- --- - - V. DENVER REGIONAL COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS. Mr. Carlson stated that a member of the Council of Governments staff has been invited to speak to the members of the Englewood Planning Commission on the functions and purposes of the Council of Governments. Mr. Larry Borger, of the Council of Governments, stated he was a former City Manager of the, City of Littleton. Mr. Borger stated that he would like to give a background summary of the Council of Governments. Mr. Borger pointed out that the Council of Governments is a voluntary association of all cities and counties in the five-county metropolitan area. At present, the membership is 28 cities and all five counties. Mr. Borger stated there are 1.2 million people in the Denver metropolitan region, and the rate of growth is 90 persons per day. Mr. Borger stated that in 1966, the "Inter-County Regional Planning Commission" was reorganized into the Denver Regional Council of Governments, and the representatives of the member cities and counties were changed from "appointed" to "elected officials·". Mr. Borger stated tba t COG is financed from voluntary dues paid by member jurisdictions, and from Federal Grants. Mr. Borger stated that local contributions amounted to $400,000. · Mr. Borger stated the purpose of the Council of Governments is to coordinate efforts of the member jurisdictions on such things as bike routes, sewer systems, drainage systems, etc., and to promote voluntary cooperation between the governmental agencies in the metro area. Mr. Borger stated that some of the projects currently being undertaken by the Council of Governments include Transportation Planning; Housing; Health Planning; and others. Mr. Borger noted that all applications for Federal Aid in the Denver Metro Area must go throug~ the Council of Governments. Mrs. Henning asked if the counties had been as agressive in cooperation as the cities? Mr. Borger stated that as far as the financial situation was concerned, that the counties were paying more than the cities. He stated he di'dn't know how the situation was as far as participation in the programs of the Council of Governments. Mr. Berardini asked if the water and sanitation districts, for instance, were considered a form of local government? Mr. Borger stated that the special districts, as water, sewer, fire, etc., have been downgraded to associate members; this does give the right of attendance to the Board members of the special districts at the Council of Governments meetings, but they cannot vote. Mr. Borger pointed out that there are 200+/-special districts in the metro area. Mr. Bo'rger s ·tated that the member cities and counties are allowed one vote each. Mr. Barton asked how much influence the Federal Government exerted over the Council of Governments? Mr. Borger acknowledged there was some influence exerted by the Federal Govern- ment. He stated that the Council of Governments does work with the Federal Government and along the Federa 1 Government guide-1ines. Mr. Borger cited in.stances where an "environment a 1 impact statement'' is now required on some developments. He noted that local governments should have been requiring these statements 10 years ago. Discussion followed. Mr. Borger stated that if the Regional Service Authority became a reality, the Council of Governments would be absorbed into this body, as would the Urban Flood and Drainage Control District, and other similar bodies. Mr. Robins asked if a majority vote ruled, and if there was a veto power. Mr. Borger stated the majority vote does rule, and there is no veto power. Mr. Borger stated the Council of Governments now has 46 employees, and stated that the Council of Governments has doubled in size in 2-1 /2 years. Mr. Supinger discussed the Northwest E~glewood /College View area and the redevelopment pro- gram now going on in College View and proposed for Northwest Englewood. Mr. Supinger poin~ed out that this should have been considered as "one area", and stated he would hope the Council of Governments would develop into an agency that would urge that' the "whole problem" should be considered and not just part of it. Mr. Barton asked if the Council of Governments bad information available on goals a City could work toward? Mr. Borger stated the Council of Governments had a library of COG publica- tions plus publications from other sources. He invited members who were interested to come to the offices of COG and look through the lib~ary. Discussion followed. I I I I I I Page 1391 Mr. Borger discussed the proposed channelization of_ the South Platte River by the Corps of Engineers. Mr. Borger stated this channelization will go to Hampden Avenue and will cost $760,000 for a two mile long project. After channelization, the land next to the river will be suitable for development; but, there will have been damage to the ecological situation. Mr. Borger stated that the City of Littleton has decided to add local funds to the projected $760,000 cost, and purchase the land next to the river that is subject to flooding. The City would then develop this land as park and open s .pace , and would still be mee,ting the flood control criteria. Mr. Borger suggested that the City of Englewood consider the same procedure for the small portion of the Platte River that runs through the City. Mr. Borger discussed a proposed seminar the Council of Governments is attempting to set up for Planning Commission members. The seminar will deal with "what it means to be a Planning Commission member", and will, hopefully, start on March 6th and run six weeks. This will be in conjunction with the University of Colorado. Mr. Borger urged the Englewood Commission members to attend this seminar if it does indeed become a reality. Mr. Brown congratulated Mr. Borger on his new position with the Council of Governments, and asked if Mr. Borger felt the City of Englewood was putting enough into the Council o f Govern- ments, and if the Ci t y was g etting many benefits from their membership? Mr. Borger indicated that the City had ver y good representation to the Council of Governments. He noted that Mr. Senti attends the Co unc il mee t ings regularly. He stated he felt the City of Englewood was making a good impact o n th e Council of Governments. Mr. Carlson thanked Mr. Borger for his presentation. V. DIRECTOR'S CHOICE. Mr. Supinger stated he had nothing to bring before the Commission. VI. COMMISSION'S CHOICE. Mr. Carlson noted that the annual dinner meeting of the Council of Governments is scheduled for February 23, 1972 , which would also be the evening of the regular Planning Commission meeting. Mr . Carlson noted that it has been customary for . members of the Commission and staff to attend the Annual Dinner meeting. Mr. Borger's presentation was discussed. Members of the Commission felt the presentation was very informative. The meeting adjourned at 9:25 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: January 18, 1972 SUBJECT: Height Exception, Block 6, Premier Addition RECOMMENDATION: The City Planning and Zoning Commission recommend to Ci,ty Council that · request for Height Exception for property in Block 6, Premier Addition, under option by Offices, Ltd., be approved; such approval to permit the construction of a 65 ft., four story office building, as shown on plans dated January 11, 1972, in the B-1 Zone District. Criteria set forth for Commission and Council consideration in granting requests for height exception is met by the applicant,' with particular reference to the pro- vision of available and suitable off-street parking. Respectfull y submitted, By Order o f the City Planning and Zo ning Commission. Gert r ude G . Welty Reco r ding Secre t a ry t • -------- - - --. - - - --- - - MEMORA NDUM TO THE ENG LEWOOD CITY COUNCIL REGARDING ACTION OR RECOMMENDATION OF THE CITY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION. DATE : J a nu a ry 4, 1972 SUBJECT : Alley Va c atio n -Block 6, Premier Addition RECOM MENDATIO N : The P lanning Commission recommend to City Council that the southerly 72.5 feet of the alley in Block 6, Premier Addition, be vacated. Utility easeme nt s a r e to be retained. Res p e ct f u ll y s ubmitted , B y Or de r of th e C ity Pla nni ng a n d Zo ni ng Commission.