Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1992-02-04 PZC MINUTES\ \ • • • CITY OF ENGLEWOOD PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 4, 1992 I. CALL TO ORDER The regular meeting of the City Planning and Zoning Commission was called to order at 7:00 P.M. by Vice Chairman Lloyd Covens. Members present: Members absent: Also present: Draper, Glynn, Shoop, Tobin, Covens L. Martin, Acting Director of Community Development/Ex-officio Ger lick H. J. Stitt, Neighborhood Services Administrator II. APPROVAL OF MINUTE.S January 21, 1992 Mr. Covens stated that the Minutes of January 21, 1992 were to be considered for approval. Tobin moved: Shoop seconded: The Minutes of January 21, 1992 be approved as written. The motion carried unanimously. III. WASTE MANAGEMENT DENVER SOUTH CASE #1-92 Mr. Covens stated that the issue before the Commission is a Planned Development on property owned by Waste Management Denver south. He asked for a motion to open the Public Hearing. Tobin moved: Draper seconded: The Public Hearing on Case #1-92 be opened. The motion carried unanimously. Mr. Stitt was sworn in and testified that Waste Management of Denver South acquired the former greenhouse property from the City of Englewood for expansion purposes. Inasmuch as the site size exceeds one acre, Planned Development approval is required. Mr. Stitt stated that the site of the basic Waste Management op- eration was initially developed by Colorado Disposal, Inc. (CDI}, and was developed prior to the Planned Development requirement for parcels in excess of one acre in size; thus, this proposed Planned Development encompasses both the site of the basic opera- tion and the expansion area acquired from the City. The property acquired for expansion is on the west side of the existing facility. Waste Management, Inc. (WMI} plans to convert the existing greenhouse to a shop facility; a driving lane will 1 be improved to provide access to the transfer station and recy- cling center. Mr. Stitt stated that the Planned Development in- dicates compliance with minimum landscaping requirements and off- street parking for employees and customers. Mr. Stitt addressed the issue of stormwater runoff from the sub- ject site into the South Platte River. e noted that the drainage to the South Platte River is upstream of the intake for the water treatment plant, and there is concern about the treatment of the runoff before it gets to the River. At the time the staff report was written, the Utilities Department had not received written verification from WMI regarding a verbal agreement to direct stormwater from the greenhouse site to the existing development, and construct a sediment/grease trap in the stormwater discharge line. Since the staff report was written, WMI has faxed the Utilities Department a copy of a letter which is dated December 27, 1991 committing to construction of an asphalt "V" pan on the eastern property line to direct drainage to a sand and grease trap. The property will be swept on a weekly basis to clear any excess oil residue from their vehicles, and several absorbent booms will be installed along the existing "V" pan to catch ex- cess oil until the time the sandtrap is installed. This letter was misaddressed to 2800 South Platte River Drive, and not re- ceived by the Utilities Department. Mr. Woika, Utilities Man- ager, has stated that the letter of December 27, 1991 does sat- isfy that Department on the drainage concerns. In light of the December 27th letter, and Mr. Woika's statement that this does satisfy the concerns of the Utilities Department, Mr. Stitt stated that the staff would now recommend approval. of the Planned Development. Mr. Stitt asked if members of the Com- mission had any questions. Ms. Tobin stated that she had visited the site today, and had asked one of the gentlemen in the off ice to give her a tour of the area, which he did. Ms. Tobin commented on the muddy condi- tions of the site, and stated that the proposed improvements will be of help. Mr. Draper stated that there were a lot of trees back of the greenhouse, and asked what will happen to those trees. Mr. Stitt suggested that WMI personnel who are present could address Mr. Draper's concerns . Mr. Covens asked if there was any need for bicycle/pedestrian trails on this site. Mr. Stitt stated that there are trails along the Platte River in that area, but not along West Union Av- enue. Centennial Park is north and west of the subject site, but there is no need to provide trails through the subject parcel. Mr. Shoop asked about possible hazardous spills on the site, and what means are proposed to prevent those spills from reaching the south Platte River. Mr. Stitt stated that the hazardous waste spills would be ha.ndled by the hazardous waste response team. 2 , I • • • • • • Mr. Glynn asked about construction standards or guidelines on the sediment/grease trap. Mr. Stitt stated that the installation of such drainage control had been discussed with WMI several years ago, but was not constructed. WMI has stated that they will com- ply with the drainage requirements. Ms. Tobin asked if someone will make sure that the drainage facility is constructed. Mr. Stitt replied in the affirmative. Further brief discussion re- garding the drainage ensued. Mr. Shoop asked about the apartment houses in back of the devel- opment. Mr. Stitt stated that there is a buffer between the de- velopment Mr. Shoop referred to and WMI's property; this is zoned industrial, also, but is not part of WMI's ownership or develop- ment. Mr. Covens asked if City staff members have inspected the green- house to determine whether it can be converted to shop facili- ties. Mr. Stitt stated that this will have to be determined by members of the Building & Safety staff; conversion would have to comply with Building Code, Electrical Code, etc. Mr. Michael Magee, WMI, and Mr. Dan Almond of Randall & Blake, Inc. were sworn in. Mr. Magee stated that he is general manager of Waste Management Denver South, and that Mr. Almond is working with WMI on the Planned Development . Mr. Draper posed his question about the trees that were on the greenhouse site. Mr. Magee stated that they were not able to salvage some of the willows and the Russian Olive trees; the re- maining trees are being stored on the RBI site. Mr. Almond stated that the intent is that the majority of those trees will be replanted on the WMI site. Mr. Magee discussed the plans that WMI has for the existing and expansion site. They need to expand the recycling center and in- stall a conveyor system. Mr. Magee stated that part of their business is the rental and sale of mobile off ices for construc- tion sites, and these are stored on site at WMI. There will be no changes at the paint shop; the new storage area will be used for empty trailers. Mr. Magee discussed the recycling process, and the ultimate disposition of the materials they recycle. Glassware goes to Coors, newspaper is shipped out-of-state, alu- minum is disposed of locally. Ms. Tobin inquired whether there was storage of hazardous waste on-site. Mr. Magee stated there is not. If there is something that is picked up or brought to the transfer station, it is only on-site 48 hours at most. He stated that they do have an emer- gency spill plan, and the entire operation is monitored pretty closely . Mr. Covens asked Mr. Magee if he had any background information regarding the drainage provisions which had been discussed previ- 3 ously, but never constructed. Mr. Magee stated that he came to WMI in 1981, and assumed it was a mis-communication between his predecessor, himself, and the City. Mr. Covens asked Mr. Almond if he was of the opinion the proposed drainage system would be satisfactory. Mr. Almond stated that it will fulfill the purpose for which it is intended. He stated that he would have finalized drawings within one week or so. Ms. Tobin asked if the drainage system for the entire site will be completed when the PD is approved and the on-site improvements and modifications are done. Mr. Almond stated that they hope to have this done in March. Mr. covens asked what was the proximity of the nearest residen- tial development. Ms. Tobin estimated that the apartment devel- opment alluded to earlier is about two blocks away. Mr. Almond estimated at least 1/4 mile, and the intervening land is zoned for industrial purposes. Mr. Covens discussed the issue of the drainage system, and the fact that the staff report and the attached memorandum from Util- ities Manager Woika indicate the drainage plan is not approved; but the letter from WMI is dated December 27, 1991. Mr. Stitt reiterated that the letter was mis-addressed and has been lost en route from the Servicenter to City Hall. Mr. Woika has seen the letter of December 27, and has stated that this satisfies the concerns of his Department. Mr. Covens asked Ms. Martin how she would suggest this issue .be handled. Ms. Martin suggested that the staff could ask Mr. Woika to sign off on approval of the drainage as proposed by WMI in the letter. Brief discussion ensued. Tobin moved: Shoop seconded: The Public Hearing on Case #1-92 be closed. The motion carried unanimously. Mr. covens asked the pleasure of the Commission. Mr. Draper sug- gested a one line amendment to the staff report indicating the approval of the Utilities Manager, or ask him to sign off on the letter indicating his approval. Ms. Tobin asked the date of the next meeting. Mr. Stitt stated that the next meeting of the Commission will be Wednesday, Febru- ary 19. The Findings of Fact will be prepared on this issue for consideration at this time; the Findings will include matters discussed at this meeting, including the letter regarding drainage. Mr. Covens suggested that Mr. Stitt could also include a sign-off from Mr. Woika regarding the drainage. 4 • • • • • • Glynn moved: Draper seconded: The Planning Commission recommend approval of the Planned Development requested by Waste Management Denver South, subject to signed approval by the Utilities Manager of the City of Englewood on the surface drainage system. This recommendation shall be referred to City Council for their consideration. AYES: NAYS: Tobin, Covens, Draper, Glynn, Shoop None ABSENT: Ger lick ABSTAIN: None The motion carried. SECRETARY'S NOTE: The Certification of Posting and Notice of Public Hearing which was published in the En- glewood Herald were entered into the record of the Hec,iring by Mr. Stitt later in the meeting. IV. PUBLIC FORUM Mr. Covens introduced Deputy City Manager Linda Martin; Ms. Mar- tin has been designated the Acting Director of Community Develop- ment. Mr. Covens asked Ms. Martin if there was anything she would like to bring before the Commission. Ms. Martin discussed her goals during this interim period before a new Community Development Director is hired. Ms. Martin stated that a nation-wide recruiting effort will be conducted for the Director, and anticipated the search would require approximately six months. Ms. Martin stated that in the interim, she will rely heavily on staff assistance for issues before the Commission. Ms. Martin stated that she views her tenure as Acting Director as an opportunity to learn more about the functions of the Community Development Department, the Planning Commission, and to meet more people from Englewood. Mr. Covens discussed projects which the Commission has been work- ing on, such as sections of the Comprehensive Plan that need to be completed: Transportation, Parks & Recreation, etc. The Housing Section is completed and published. Mr. Stitt stated that the Parks Section needs a rewrite; there are other compo- nents that need to be developed for incorporation in the Compre- hensive Plan such as the Solid Waste section, and the Economic Development section. Mr. Stitt stated that the Economic Develop- ment Coalition has developed the Strategic Plan, which probably can be reworked with minimal effort for inclusion in the Compre- hensive Plan. Mr. Shoop suggested that the Downtown Development Plan become part of the Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Stitt pointed out that the current Comprehensive Plan contains the goals and 5 policies for Downtown development/redevelopment, and agreed that • it might be well to reference the existing Downtown Development Plan. Mr. Covens reviewed the meeting with Public Works Director Es- terly on traff~c on U.S. 285. Mr. Stitt stated that the Commis- sion may want 1 to consider the Master street Plan and possible amendments as a result of the traffic studies that are being done by Public Works. Mr. Covens asked of Ms. Mqrtin and Mr. Stitt where they put the completion of the Comprehensive Plan on their agenda. Mr. Stitt pointed out that some philosophies are that Comprehensive Plans need to be updated every ten years; others hold with updating ev- ery five years. Mr. Stitt stated that the Plan should have enough flexibility to allow updating of sections when circum- stances affecting a particular section so warrant. Mr. Stitt pointed out that the industrial section may be in need of updat- ing because of significant change; he did not see that similar significant changes have occurred in the commercial and residen- tial sectors of the community .. Mr. Covens inquired regarding the status of the nuisance ordi- nance. Mr. Stitt stated that his Division of the Department will be involved in enforcing Title 15, including the provisions ap- plicable to derelict vehicles. Mr. Stitt stated that in December, staff and Commission had an • informal work session at which time various amendments to the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance were discussed. Mr. Stitt stated that the initial suggestion had been to bring these proposals to the Commission for Public Hearing in late Spring; the majority of those proposals were geared to provide flexibility for new and redeveloped residential properties. Mr. Stitt suggested that if a new Director has not been hired within six months, perhaps the Commission would want to proceed with these proposals and not wait for input from the new Director. v. DIRECTOR'S CHOICE Ms. Martin stated that City Council had discussed the issue of storage of cedar shake shingles at a site on South Windermere Street. All members of City Council indicate they have received several telephone calls from citizens who are concerned about the operation of this business, and want the business abated. Ms. Martin stated that the issue has been discussed with staff; it is a legal, permitted use in the I-1, Light Industrial Zone Dis- trict. The owner of the business has complied with every request that the City has made of him: installation of a fire plug, fire lanes through the site, the separation of the shingles into sev- eral stacks, and sweeping the street several times per week with a magnetized device to clean up nails that may have dropped from the shingles being brought in. The purpose of the business is to recycle the cedar . shake shingles by chipping them up for land- 6 • • • scaping or composting purposes. The owner has ordered more chip- ping machines to attempt to reduce the on-site stock, but the new equipment has not arrived, and the business is taking in more shingles than they can process and ship out. Ms. Martin stated that the business owner is very actively marketing the repro- cessed product and is pursuing contracts for the bagged cedar chips and bulk sales. The citizens do not appreciate the appear- ance of the business, and "not in my backyard". City Council has requested that the Planning Commission discuss whether this type of use should be permitted in the I-1 Zone Dis- trict, and to also consider what might be done regarding the cur- rent business. Ms. Martin stated that Council would appreciate a "timely" response, but realize that staff and Commission will need time to properly study and address the issue. Mr. Stitt stated that the business initially began in April or May of 1991; the lady who began the business indicated it was for a six month period, and inasmuch as it was a "temporary" permit- ted use, staff approved it without the Planned Development re- quired for all sites exceeding .one acre in size in the Industrial area. Mr. Stitt emphasized that a "temporary use" is for six months, and may be granted one six month extension. Mr. Stitt stated that Mr. Villareal acquired the business, and initially indicated that he anticipated the shingle processing to cease in November, then it was December, then January, at which point he had planned to have the stock reduced, the site cleaned, and re- locate to another site; now he has determined that this is a money-making proposition, and wants to continue as a permanent business. Mr. Stitt emphasized that the temporary aspect of the use will expire in April or May of 1992, at which time Mr. Vil- lareal will be required to file an application for approval of a Planned Development with the Commission. Mr. Stitt stated that when the Commission considers the Planned Development, they may consider issues such as landscaping, parking, etc. on the site. Mr. sti tt stated that the business requires timely chipping of the shingles, or they begin deteriorating into compost. Mr. Vil- lareal has told staff that additional chipping machines have been ordered but are not delivered yet. Mr. Stitt stated that it is his understanding that Mr. Villareal is planning to purchase the property, in addition to the business. Mr. Glynn stated that he sees the operation on his way to and from work every day; it is his estimate that the height of the stock piles is decreasing. He stated that he is sure the traffic in the area has increased with the advent of this business, but pointed out that it is an industrial district, and this is an in- dustrial use. Ms. Martin stated that City Council wants to get back to the cit- izens who have registered concerns in a reasonable time. They would appreciate staff and the Commission looking into this issue as soon as possible, so that when the issue of the Planned Devel- opment comes before Council they will be better able to respond 7 to the Commission's recommendation regarding the site. Ms. Mar-• tin emphasized that there are a lot of concerned citizens who just want the business "out of there." Mr. Covens asked for clarification of the "temporary" status of the use, and whether citizens who might have called in regard to this use were ever given a date when the use was supposed to cease. Mr. Stitt acknowledged that citizens probably were given a cited date on the closure of the business based on what staff was told by the business owner. Mr. Stitt reiterated that this is a permitted use in the I-1 Zone District, and even though the initial start-up was based on the understanding it would be "temporary", there is nothing to prevent the business owner from continuing as a permanent business following filing for and re- ceiving approval of a Planned Development for the site. Mr. Stitt stated that the Planning Commission may determine, fol- lowing further deliberation on the issue, that this is not a use that should be allowed in the I-1 District, but should be in the I-2, Heavy Industrial sector; or that such a use could be permit- ted only as a "conditional use" at which time the Commission could impose specific conditions on the operation of the use -- height of stacks, landscaping, setback from street, etc. How- ever, whatever is determined cannot be made retroactive, and will not affect the existing operation by Mr. Villareal. Mr. Covens stated that he did not want to see restrictions • changed that could affect the entire City because of just one business . Ms. Martin reiterated what City Council is looking for from the Commission: consideration of whether this use is something that should be allowed in the I-1 District throughout the City; and secondly, the perspective of the Commission on the realities they feel could or could not be accomplished in working with the ex- isting business. Discussion ensued. Mr. Stitt clarified the Planned Development process, emphasizing that a Planned Development is an overlay that may be applied to any zone district. The purpose of the PD is to provide flexibil- ity for developments, and applies to such things as setbacks, lo- cation of structures, etc. The Planned Development does not af- fect the "use" per se --that is, it must be a permitted use in that zone district. Mr. Covens suggested that the PD process would be another "stall" tactic in this instance, and asked if the property owners would be amenable to beginning the process --applying for the PD -- prior to the expiration of the year's temporary time period. He stated that in his opinion, if the Commission is to be responsive to the citizenry, the process should be begun as soon as possi- ble. Mr. Covens suggested that staff could report back to the Commission on the property owner's response regarding beginning • the PD process earlier than April or May. 8 • •• • Mr. Draper and Ms. Tobin both indicated they wanted to view the operation. Ms. Tobin also asked if staff could obtain informa- tion on how other communities handle such problems --is such a use permitted, in what zone district, how can they be abated, etc. Mr. Stitt stated that he would do so; he did point out that Jefferson County had experienced a similar problem, but the busi- ness owner abandoned the site and left it for the County to clean up; it was used as a practice burn site by the Fire Department. Mr. Stitt pointed out that the City could take the position that this business is not wanted in this location; the business owner could "walk", and the. property owner would be stuck with clearing the site. Discussion ensued. Ms. Tobin stated that as she understood the shingle recycling operation, it was to be a "flow-in/flow-out" type of operation. Mr. Glynn agreed, but noted that the metro area has experienced devastating hail storms for the last two years, necessitating the replacement of many roofs. Many people are just now getting the reroofing done, and it may be a while before the in-flow slows down. Mr. Covens asked if it would be possible to commit to the March 3 or March 17 meeting to consider the Planned Development on this business. Ms. Martin stated that staff will contact the business owner, and suggest that he begin the PD process, and will get back to the Commission on his response. Ms. Martin stated that she would also share the Commissions response to this issue with the City Council. In response to a question from Mr. Shoop, both Ms. Martin and Mr. Stitt stated that the "raw product" is the problem --the piles of shingles is the reason for the complaints. Further brief dis- cussion ensued. VI. COMMISSIONER'S CHOICE Mr. Covens and Mr. Shoop attended the Tri-Cities meeting on Jan- uary 30. This is a cooperative effort by representatives of Lit- tleton, Sheridan and Englewood, and are addressing the redevelop- ment of the South Platte River/Santa Fe Drive corridor. Mr. Stitt stated that this group effort began approximately one year ago, and many issues pertaining to improvement of the corri- dor are being considered: economic development, movement of traffic, etc. Areas of common interest have been identified, and the group is now concentrating on development of a strategic plan for the improvement of the corridor. Three goals were identified at the last meeting: Aesthetics, business development, and mar- keting of "image". The goal of the group is to come up with re- alistic, achievable action that the communities can implement in a coordinated manner . 9 Mr. Covens stated that it is evident this is more than "just ,an • exercise"; the group is looking for hard results. Brief discus- sion ensued. Mr. Draper stated that he had talked to Public Works Director Es- terly regarding an area on U.S. 285 between University Boulevard and old Hampden Avenue, at approximately Gilpin, where he feels there is a lack of adequate signage. The right-turn lane is in- adequately signed, and if one does not actually turn the lane ends with no signage indicating that the lane ends, and to merge left. Mr. Stitt pointed out that this is a right turn lane onto Gilpin, and an acceleration lane from Gilpin --not a through lane. Ms. Martin stated that she will be meeting with the District En- gineer of the Highway Department, and will convey Mr. Draper's concern to him. Mr. Shoop discussed the signage of the on-ramp from U.S. 285 to Santa Fe Drive. In his opinion, this requires a stop sign rather than the typical yield sign. Ms. Tobin suggested that a stop sign would impede the flow of traffic onto Santa Fe. Ms. Martin indicated she would also convey Mr. Shoop's concern to the Dis- trict Engineer. Mr. Glynn asked about "cottage industries" --what businesses can people have in their homes. Mr. Stitt stated that there has been • some discussion about home occupations; at the present time, no home occupations are permitted in the R-1-A District. Other dis- tricts do permit home occupations with restrictions on the per- centage of floor area that can be devoted to the business, re- strictions on signage, restrictions on the number of employees, etc. Mr. Stitt stated that this is one of the number of amend- ments to the Zoning Ordinance that were discussed in December. Mr. Stitt stated that a specific amendment being considered is allowing hairdressers and barbers to operate out of their home; this prohibition was based on a State restriction which has since been repealed, necessitating a modification of the Zoning Ordi- nance. Mr. Stitt stated that there are a number of occupations that can be done in the home with no employees such as desk top publishing, word processing, etc. Such businesses would be of- fensive to no one, even in the R-1-A District. Ms. Tobin pointed out that if child care is done in a private home, there can be no floor area restrictions; the entire house must be available to the child. Ms. Tobin inquired about the election of officers. Mr. Stitt stated that three terms expired on February 1; Council has not yet appointed members to fill those vacancies, but it is his un- derstanding that this will be done on February 18th. The new members will also be sworn in at that time by the City Clerk . Election of officers will be placed on the agenda for the Commis- sion meeting of F~bruary 19. 10 • ~ . . • The meeting adjourned at 9:00 P. M. d~~~lµ* Recording Secretary • • 11