Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1991-11-19 PZC MINUTESI. CALL TO ORDER. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION November 19, 1991 The regular meeting of the City Planning and Zoning Commission was called to order by Chairman Schultz at 7:00 P.M. Members Present: Daviet, Draper, Dummer, Gerlick, Glynn, Schultz, Shoop, Tobin Wanush, Ex-officio Members Absent: Covens Also Present Harold Stitt, Neighborhood Services Administrator II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES October 22, 1991 Chairman Schultz stated that the Minutes of October 22, 1991, were to be con- sidered for approval. Gerlick moved: Daviet seconded: The Minutes of October 22, 1991 be approved as written. AYES: Daviet, Dummer, Gerlick, Glynn, Schultz, Tobin NAYS: None ABSENT: Covens ABSTAIN: Dummer, Draper The motion carried. III. PUBLIC HEARING Amendment of R-2, R-2-C, and R-4 Zone Districts CASE #7-91 Mr . Schultz stated that the pur pose of the Public Hea ring is to consider pro- posed amendments to the R-2 , R-2-C, and R-4 Zon e Districts to facilitate development of off-street parking areas adjacent to Broadway. Mr. Schultz asked for a motion to open the Public Hearing. Shoop moved: Tobin seconded: The Public~·Hearing on Case #7-91 be opened. AYES: NAY S: Daviet, Draper, Dummer, Gerlick, Glynn, Schultz, Shoop, Tobin None ABSENT: Cov ens ABSTAIN: None The mot ion carried . Mr. Schultz outlined the procedure that will be followed in the conduct of the Public Hearing; those wishing to testify before the Commission will have to be -1 - sworn in. Staff will present the issue, proponents will be heard, and then opponents will be heard. Commission members will have an opportunity to ask questions after each presentation, with the option to recall anyone for fur-~ ther testimony if they so choose. There will also be an opportunity for any-..,. one to rebut previous testimony. Mr. Schultz stated that Mr. Harold Stitt will make the staff presentation. Harold J. Stitt was sworn in, and testified that the matter before the Commis- sion in Case #7-91 is the proposed amendment of S16.4-5N(5), S16.4-5M(5), and Sl6.4-9C. The proposed amendment is the addition of new sections to facili- tate the development of off-street parking areas in the R-2, R-2-C, and R-4 Zone Districts. The proposed amendments to the R-2 and R-2-C Zone Districts will allow resi- dents abutting a B-2, Business District, the right to lease or rent the rear 25 feet of their residential property to an abutting business for employee or customer parking purposes. Anyone wishing to use the rear 25 foot portion of residential properties for parking, however, will have to comply with specific conditions: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. The parking area must be screened from the residential portion of the lot by a six foot opaque fence. Side yard fences must also be provided to screen adjacent property. These fences shall also be six feet in height, except that within ten feet of the rear property line the fences cannot exceed 42 inches in height. The parking area must be of a hard surface to prevent the movement of dirt and debris from the parking area onto the public right-of-way . Parking stops must be placed in the parking area to prevent damage to the fence by vehicles. Provisions must be made for the collection of trash as per City Ordinance. The final design of the parking area must be approved by the Director of Community Development or the appropriate designee. No storage of v ehicles is permitted and the lot is to be used so lely for the parking of employees or customers. No vehicles in excess of 7,000 pounds may be parked in the parking area. The minimum width of the parking area shall be 50 feet. C;.. The Director of Community Development may deny the use of any lot as a parking area if the above provisions are not met. The Director's ruling may be appealed to the Board of Adjustment and Appeals. Mr. Stitt stated that for many years, the City has received complaints from residents along South Acoma Street and South Lincoln Street that employees and customers from some business park on the residential streets, a nd thus prev8nt the use of the on-street parking area by residents and/or their gu e sts. Mr . Stitt discussed a number of options that were considered as a way to address the issue, including a two-hour parking restriction (this would apply to -2 - . e everyone) and would allow for issuance of parking violation tickets by Code Enforcement. A residential permitting system for parking was also considered; this has been attempted around the High School, and in some blocks around Swedish Medical Center and has seemed to work reasonably well for the resi- dents but does nothing to assist the businessman who needs the additional parking area. Staff held four meetings to which residents of South Lincoln and South Acoma were invited to discuss the issue, and those residents who did attend the meetings seemed to feel that the proposed lease/rental permission was the most palatable to them. The proposed amendments are a result of these meetings and the opinions expressed by the residents attending. The proposed amendment to the R-4 Zone District would add a new Sl6.4-9C(2) to allow off-street parking lots to be developed on 12, 000 square feet, and a subsequent renumbering of other sections of Sl6.4-9. Hr. Stitt stated that at one time, private off-street parking lots were permitted in the R-4 Zone Dis- trict on 12,000 square feet, but that very few businessmen took advantage of this provision. A series of amendments to the Zoning Ordinance during the early to mid-1980's resulted in the lot area required for development of off- street parking lots in the R-4 District being raised to 24,000 square feet. The increase to 200 foot frontage for development of an off-street parking lot makes it extremely difficult and expensive for a business to provide addition- al off-street parking. The proposed amendment is an attempt to provide the businessmen with a means to provide provide off-street parking areas in the R- 4 Zone District with less frontage and less expense on their part. Hr. Stitt stated that staff recommends the approval of the amendments to the R-2, R-2-C, and R-4 sections of the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance. Hr. Stitt also presented to Chairman Schultz proof of publication of the Notice of Hear- ing in the Englewood Herald. Hr. Shoop asked for clarification of the 12,000 square foot area for the R-4 District. Hr. Stitt stated this would comprise four adjoining 25-foot lots for development of an off-street parking lot. Hs. Tobin asked if two adjoining property owners in the R-2 or R-2-C District could join to develop a parking area. Mr. Stitt stated that the intent of the proposed amendment is that an ''individual" property owner may lease or rent to an adjacent business for parking purposes. Mr . Ger lick asked whether there had be en a ny input from residents in the area on thi s proposal . Mr. Stitt stat ed that he h as talked to four pe ople , and the opinion is split 50/50. Mr. Schultz asked those who wished to speak to come forward and be sworn in. C;.. Darlene Slyter, 4147 South Lincoln, was sworn in. She stated that the alley in back of her property is concrete; she is of the opinion that parking areas along concrete alleys should be covered in mor e than just rock or gravel. Ms. Slyter also inquired about enforcement: if she were to lease and develop the rear of her propert y for parking purposes for one ye ar, and not r enew the lease f or the next year, what would prevent her from storing a junk vehicle on the rear an d keeping it there inasmuch a s it would be her p ro p erty. Mr. Stitt stated that there are provisions which govern the keeping of junk or derelict vehicles, even on private property. Personal operable vehicles could be parked there with no problem. -3 - Connie Fortner, 4542 South Acoma, was s worn in. Ms. Fortner inquired about the possibility of eventual rezoning of their block for commercial purposes, and if that is what the "C" in R-2-C signified. Ms. Fortner also inquired A about any effect the proposal might have on the assessment on the residential ...,. properties. Mr. Stitt responded that the "C" in R-2-C does not have any commercial con- notations, but only signifies a difference in density from the R-2: both dis- tricts are medium density residential. Mr. Stitt pointed out that anyone owning property in any given block may apply for rezoning; the property would have to be posted, and Public Hearings held by the Planning Commission and City Council before any rezoning takes place. Ms. Fortner then stated that the business in back of her owns two houses next to her, and have inquired of her several times if she would be interested in selling her home to them. Ms. Fortner stated that the business is already using the property they own on Acoma for parking purposes; if this proposed amendment were to not be approved, could they continue to do this. Ms. Fortner stated that this area is clearly signed for "employee parking". Mr. Stitt stated that this property cannot be used for any commerc i al purposes at this time. Ms. Fortner stated that she has had no problem with the use of the property for parking, other than the size of the rocks they used to cover the parking area. Mr . Stitt stated that he wanted to enter into the record that Mrs. McGlone, 4572 South Acoma Street, is opposed t o the proposed amendment. Mr. Schultz asked if a n yo ne else wi s h ed to address the Commission. Commissioner Draper asked how the bu siness property o wner could get away wi th using property in the R-2 area f o r pa r king pu r poses. Mr. Stitt r eiterated the fact that no c o mplaints have been registered, and t h at Co d e Enforcement Of- ficers have not ra i sed the is s ue. Ms. Da viet sugges t ed t h at po s sibly a variance from the Board of Adjust me nt had been granted. Mr . S t itt stated t hat he will check into this and t ake app ropriate action. Ms . Tobin inquired a b out the as ses s ment /t a x i mpa ct o f t h e am en dm e nts. Mr. Wanush stated that h e had called the Co u nt y As s e s sors a nd spo ke with the Deputy Assess o r; he was tol d v er b all y t h at t h e l easi ng of th e rea r 2 5 feet o f re sid e n tial p ro p e r ty fo r pa r ki ng purpo se s would h a v e no i mp act on th e asse s s - me nt or taxes f o r t he r e sident . Mr. Dummer asked why a bus i ness leas ing th e property could not park a v an or delivery truck on the site overnight. Mr. St itt stated that i t is the opinion C;... of staff that delivery vans should be parked on the b usiness site; the intent is to provide protec t ion t o the res ide ntial use a nd cha rac ter of the are a even though the reside nt mi g h t lease th e re ar portion t o th e busine s s. A va n wi ll b e v i sible abo v e t h e six f o ot privacy f e nce and co ul d h a ve a negative v i sual impa ct o n the neig h b orhood. Mr . Pe te Quiri n g , 4524 South Ac o ma Street , wa s swo rn in. He ag r ee d wit h Ms . Fo r tne r's stat eme nt s re g a rdi ng t he b u s i ness u s ing res i dent i a l prope r t i es for p a rki n g purposes. He fu r th e r no te d th a t t hi s busine s s has a comm er c i a l dumpster on the site t hat th ey us e for dumping t r ash f r om the bu si ness itsel f, -4 - and sometimes the trash is t h rown into his yard. Mr. Quiring questioned how a commercial dumpster could be placed on residential property. Mr. Wanush pointed out that frequently dumpsters are placed in resident i al areas, particularly where there is medium to high density residential develop- ment. There is no prohibition against dumpsters in residential areas. The business should not, however, have placed the commercial dumpster in the residential area and use it to collect the trash from the business; nor should the trash end up in Mr. Quiring' s back yard. Mr. Wanush stated that this would be looked into. Mr. Schultz asked if anyone else wished to address the Commission regarding this issue. No one else spoke on this matter. Draper moved: Shoop seconded: The Public Hearing on Case #7-91 be closed. AYES: NAYS: Draper, Dummer, Garlick, Glynn, Schultz, Shoop, Tobin, Daviet None ABSENT: Covens ABSTAIN: None The motion carried. Mr. Schultz asked the pleasure of the Commission. Mr. Ger lick stated that in his opinion t h e 42" fence on the rear 10 feet of leased property should be cha i n-link, or 50% open; he pointed out that a 42" solid fence could still inh i bit visibility for motorists back i ng out of a parking space. Mr . Dummer agreed, point i ng out that dr ivers in small sports vehicles could not see over t he 42" fence. Discussion ensued. Mr. Schultz pointed out that a property owner mid-block might be i nterested in leasing the rear of their property, but the adjoining neighbor may have a six foot sol i d privacy fence to their rear property line. How would this b e addressed? Ms . Daviet stated that this is a safety factor that would have to be taken into considerat ion by the Director in approvi n g o r denying use of the property for parking purposes. Mr. Shoop a l so inquired about vis ibil ity a t alley s and corner lot s. Di scussion ensued. Mr. Wanus h s ugg ested t h a t Co ndition #1 could be expanded to state that th e fencing wi thi n 1 0 fe et of the rear property line shal l be of chain-link or 50% open cons t ruction. Condition #9 could a lso b e modi fi e d to re q u ir e that the a pp roval b e based in part on approved safety s tandards. Draper moved: Glynn seconded: C;... The Planning Commission recommend to City Council that the Englewood Municipal Code (Compre hensive Zoning Ord i nanc e ) be amended by adding two new se ctions, S16 . 4-SN ( 5) and S16.4-6M(5), to read as follows: Parking Are a. Whe n an R-2 Medium-den s ity Res idenc e Di st r i c t a bu t s o r is a d ja- cent to a B-2 Busines s Dist r ict , the portio n of the l ot adjacent . to the Busi- ness District ma y be used a s a parking area by any commercial esta bli shment to a depth of t we nt y-f ive (25) feet i f th e fo l lowing conditions are met: -5 - 1. The parking area must be screened from the residential portion of the lot by a six foot opaque fence. Side yard fences must also be pro- vided to screen adjacent property. These fences shall also be six feet in height except that within ten feet of the rear property line, the fences cannot exceed 42 inches in height, and must be of chain link or 50% open construction. 2. The parking area must be of a hard surface to prevent the movement of dirt and debris from the parking area onto the public right-of-way. 3. Parking stops must be placed in the parking area to prevent damage to the fence by vehicles. 4. Provisions must be made for the collection of trash as per City Ordinance. 5. The final design of the parking area must be approved by the Director of Community Development or the appropriate designee. 6. No storage of vehicles is permitted and the lot is to be used solely for the parking of employees or customers. 7. No vehicles in excess of 7,000 pounds may be parked in the parking area. 8. The minimum width of the parking area shall be 50 feet. 9. The Director of Community Development may deny the use of any lot as a parking area if t h e above provisions are not met. Accepted safety standards are to be used in considering the approval or denial of any proposed parking plan. The Director's ruling may be appealed to the Board of Adjustment and Appeals. The Planning Commission also recommends that the Englewood Municipal Code (Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance) be further amended as follows: Amend Section 16.4-9C of th e EM C by changing §16.4-9C(2) to §16.4-9C(3) and adding a new § 16.4 -9(2) as follows : ( 2) P rivate o ff-str ee t p a rk· .g lo s ................... 12, 0 0 0 square fee t AYES: Dummer, Ge r l i ck, Glynn , Sc hu l t z, S hoo p, Tobin, Daviet, Draper NAYS: None ABSENT: Covens ABSTAIN: None The motion carried. IV. PUBLIC HEARING B-1 to B-2 c... Chairman S chult z asked for a rno t'on to open the Pu bl i c Heari n g . Gerlick move d : Draper seconded: The Public He aring on Ca se #8-91 be opened. -6 - CASE #8-91 AYES: NAYS: Gerlick, Glynn, Schultz, Shoop, Tobin, Daviet, Draper, Dummer None ABSENT: Covens ~ ABSTAIN: None The motion carried. Chairman Schultz asked that the staff present the issue before the Commission. Mr. Harold Stitt, duly sworn in the previous Public Hearing, presented proof of publication and certification of posting for the Public Hearing. Mr. Stitt stated that the rezoning from B-1, Business to B-2, Business, encom- passes an area bounded by Eastman Avenue on the north, Acoma street on the west, Floyd Avenue on the south, and Lincoln Street on the east. Mr. Stitt described the subject area, and pointed out that the 3200 block of South Broadway has four non-conforming uses: two service stations, and two used car dealerships. The remaining development is a mix of commercial and office use. Staff has received several inquiries from persons wanting to explore the pos- sibility of additional automotive-related uses in the 3200 block on South Broadway, which uses are not permitted in the B-1 Business District. The is- sue was also discussed with the Governmental Affairs Committee of the Greater Englewood Chamber of Conunerce, which committee is in favor of the rezoning, and recommended that the rezoning extend from South Acoma on the west to South Lincoln Street on the east. Mr. Stitt emphasized that in determining the appropriateness of a proposed zone change, the Planning Commission must find: 1. That the proposed rezoning promotes the health, safety, or welfare of the inhabitants of the City of Englewood and the purpose of this Ordinance; and 2. That the proposed rezoning is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan; and 3. That there has been a material change in the character of the neighborhood or in the City generally, such that the proposed rezoning would be in the public interest and consistent with the change; or 4. That the property to be rezoned was previously zon e d in er r or ; or 5. That the property cannot be developed under the existing zoning ; or 6. Such other conditions as .are expressly permitted by law. Mr. Stitt stated that staff h~·s discussed the nature, condition and extent of the downtown area for a number of months, and the question of "where does downtown begin" has arisen many times. The Comprehensive Plan and the Down- town Development Plan have identified "downtown" as b eginning at the 3200 block of South Broadway. Issues which the Comm issi on must also consider in determining the appropriateness of the rezoning are: 1. Wh at defin e s the downtow n or Ce ntral Busine s s District? 2. Have there been changes in the nature or character of the downtown and adjacent B-2 area that substantiate the proposed zone change? -7 - 3. If this rez on ing is app roved, wh at im pacts will it have on the downtown area and adjacent residential area? Hr. Stitt di spl a y e d an aerial photog raph of t h e subject area, on which photo-~ graph was o ut l i n e d t h e o rig i nal p ro p o sal to rezone only t he 3200 block of South Broadway, the expanded area as a d ve rt ised and recommended by the Chamber of Commerce, and an overlay depicting the area staff recommends be rezoned, which begins at the centerlines of So u th Broadway and Eastman Avenue; then west along the centerlin e of West Eastman Avenue to the centerline of South Acoma Street; then south along the centerline of South Acoma Street a distance of 452.43 feet, more or less; then east to the centerline of South Broadway; then south along the centerline of So u th Broadway to the centerline of Floyd Avenue, then east along the centerline of East Floyd Avenue to the centerline of the South Broadway/South Lincoln Street Alley; then north along the center- line of the South Broadway /South Lincoln Street alley to the centerline of East Eastman Avenue; then west along the centerline of East Eastman Avenue to the centerline of South Broadway. Hr. Stitt discussed an informal meeting staff had held with property owners in the subject area of November 7. Hr. Stitt stated that quite a few of the at- tendees were not in favor of a change of zoning, particularly along South Lin- coln Street. As a result of this meeting, staff reviewed the initial area which was advertised f or rezoning, and proposes the reduction in area as pre- viously outlined. Mr. Stitt stated that the r ed uct i on in area recommended by staff i s a recog- nized need to protect the adjacent residential area on South Lincoln Street from any negative i mpact of th e p roposed re z oni n g, but will a l so afford the subject block itsel f add i ti o nal possibi l it i es f o r r ed e v elopment. Mr. Stitt also pointed out t hat thi s wi ll s t i ll provide a buffe r of B-1 along South Lin- coln separating th e h i gher intensity B-2 from the resi d ential district east of South Lincoln Street. The east s ide o f So uth Acom a St r eet in the 3200 block is presently dev el ope d wit h busi n ess uses, a n d the B-2 zo n i ng will not impact that area adversely. Mr. Stitt further ex p la i n ed th at i t is permiss i ble to zon e i n wh ole or in part any area which is adv ertised for rezoning; i t is not p ermissible to expand zoning to encompa ss a n area which h as not been ad v ert ised for rezoning. Therefor e, th e r educ t ion in a r ea r ecomme n ded by st a f f is a l l ow ab le under zoning l a w . Mr. Stitt di s cus sed us es p e rm itted in t he B-1 and B-2 District s, n ot i ng that there are an add i tio n 1 4 u ses permit t ed i n t he B-2 cl as si fication. B-2 also allows condition al u s es wh i ch mu st be a pprov ed b y the P la n ning Commission; these conditional uses are automobile or adult busi n ess oriented. Mr. Stitt ..... reiterated that the majority of inquiries regarding properties in the 3200 block of Sout h Bro a dw a y h a v e b ee n a u to relat ed wh i ch are no t p e rm itte d i n the B-1 District e v en a s a c o nd i tio nal u s e . Mr. St i t t empha s ized t hat the Comm issio n must c onsider t he i mpa ct re z oni n g wi ll have o n exist i ng l a nd use . The z o n ing o n Broadw a y r e fl ec t s th e cont i nua - tion of h istor ic us e. Mr. St itt po inted o ut t h a t t h e activi t y th a t mig ht oc- cur as a res u l t of rezo ning wil l be a re d e v el opment of ma rg i n al propert i e s , o r i n-fil l o f th e f ew va c a nt parcels . Mr . Stit t emp has iz ed that th e ma rket is the determining facto r on dev elopment/redevel opm e nt , a n d th at rez o ning should -8 - not be considered a quick-fix for someone trying to sell, develop, or re- develop his property. Hr. Stitt stated that this block has been very "stable", and while ownerships may have changed, the character of use has not. Hr. Stitt stated that short-term goals may be necessary in terms of economic development, but not in long-term planning. Hr. Stitt stated that staff does recommend rezoning the modified area as recommended in the staff report, and as outlined on the aerial photograph dis- played earlier. Ms. Daviet asked about the former Covert Auto-body property. Hr. Stitt stated that it is B-1, and will remain so under the staff recommendation. Hr. Shoop inquired about breaking zoning lines on alleys vs. mid-block and middle of the street. Hr. Stitt addressed the mid-block rezoning recommended on South Acoma Street, pointing out that the north end of the block of South Acoma Street is developed for business purposes, and the south end is used by U. S. West Communications. The B-2 Zone District would make the uses on the north end of the block uses-by-right rather than non-conforming. Hrs. Tobin inquired about the possibility of an adult business use proximity to residential uses. Hr. Stitt cited the 500 foot rule on of adult businesses in proximity to schools, residential areas, etc. one small area where an adult business might be able to locate and in close location He cited meet the 500 foot rule restrict, but the area is so small that it would be practically impossible to use. If the staff recommendation is followed, however, no part of the recommended area would permit adult businesses. Hr. Schultz asked if anyone wishing to address the Commission was represented by counsel. Hearing no response regarding legal counsel, Hr. Schultz stated that the Commission would hear from individuals wishing to address the Commission. Michael Cullifer, 3225-29 South Lincoln Street, was sworn in. Hr. Cullifer stated that he understood the rezoning was to include the west side of South Lincoln Street, but staff is not recommending it do so. Hr. Stitt stated that this is correct. Hr. Cullifer testified that he operates an auto repair garage at 3229-1/2 South Lincoln , which specializes in the repair of Br iti s h imports . Hr . Cul- lifer testified that he had operated his business for several ye ars under a variance granted by the Board of Adjustment, which variance was revoked this year. The reduction in the .rezoning area will mean that his business cannot continue and will not become legal at the present location. Hr. Cullifer asked why the entire block c~uld not be zoned B-2. He pointed out that there is vacant land on the south end of the block, and how would this be developed if the zoning were R-3 or B-1. He wanted his shop at 3229-1/2 to be included in the B-2 zone district. Hr. Schultz asked if there were additional proponents who wished to address the Co mmission. No one additional spoke in favor of the rezoning. Hr. Schultz then asked that opponents present their arguments . -9 - Earl Ladewig, 3235 South Lincoln, was sworn in. Mr. Ladewig stated that he did not feel there had been changes in the area which would justify the rezon- ing. The fact there are four non-conforming uses operating in the 3200 block South Broadway is fine with the residents living on South Lincoln Street; they ~ know what the businesses are and what to expect from them. If the rezoning to B-2 were to be approved there could be an additional 14 uses which might be developed arid could impact the residential quality of their neighborhood. Mr. Ladewig stated that Mr. Cullifer had a good business and that in his opinion it was not right that the variance was revoked. Mr. Ladewig emphasized that Mr. Cullifer should have the right to continue his business. Ms. Daviet inquired what reasons were given for revocation of the variance. Mr. Cullifer stated that it pertained to the number of vehicles he was working on and had parked on the property. Ms. Daviet asked if Mr. Cullifer's property could be included in the rezoning. Mr. Stitt stated that this would be "spot zoning", and spot zoning is not an accepted practice. Ms. Daviet asked how long Mr. Cullifer had been in business. He responded he had been in business for seven to eight years. Mr. Ladewig stated that the parking of the vehicles Mr. Cullifer was working on was not bothersome to the adjoining property owners. Mr. Schultz pointed out that variances are granted and revoked by the Board of Adjustment and Appeals; not by the Planning Commission. Mr. Shoop asked if Mr. Cullifer could operate his business if the Commission were to approve the reduction in area recommended by staff. Mr. Stitt stated that auto repair is not an appro ved use in B-1. Mr. Frank Reemes, 3201 South Lincoln Street, was sworn in. Hr. Reemes stated that he has lived at this address for 28 years. Mr. Reemes stated that he felt either the entire block should be rezoned, or none of the block should be rezoned, but don't zone only one property. Mr. Reemes stated that he is con- cerned with the health and welfare of the people living in the area. The Broadway/Lincoln alley is very heavily traveled, and vehicles are "test driven" in the alley, with the spee d limit being exceeded the majority of th e time. Mr. Reemes t estified t h at on occasion th e motor is t racing down t he al- ley doesn 't e ven st op before crossing the street to proceed down the alley in the block north. Hr . Reemes st a ted that the Conoco station at Broadway and Floyd has a race car that is "revved up" and can be heard for three or four blocks around. He stated t~at it is bad enough when the race car is "wound up" at the south end of the block, and he doesn't want it any closer . .... Scott Reynolds, 3244 South Lincoln, was s worn in. Mr . Reynolds commended the Commission for "paring down" the proposed rezoning. He is concerned about the projected use of the former Covert property. Hr. Reynolds also inquired about the minimum ar ea th at would be required fo r an adult business . Mr. Wanush stated that any a dult bu sin e s s wou ld ha v e to provide off-s treet parking, landscaping , etc . in ad dition to the stru ct ur e . The only site that might be available by vi rtue of th e 500 foot limitation is insufficient in size to meet these minimum requirements. -10 - Mr. Reynolds also supported Mr. Cullifer's business operation, and stated that if the Board of Adjustment were to hold another hearing, a number of the resi- dents of the area would support granting a variance. Mr. Reynolds emphasized that Cullifer' a operation was not as noisy as the Conoco operation. Mr. Reynolds does not want the rezoning to extend to South Lincoln Street. Shelly Bedore, 3298 South Broadway, stated that she is co-owner of the Conoco Service station. Ms. Bedore stated that their business is non-conforming, and they cannot expand; 200,000 vehicles are processed through their station every month. The race car is there only three months out of the year, and that their mechanics do not test drive vehicles up and down the alley. Ma. Bedore stated that the rezoning to B-2 would be beneficial to the businesses on Broadway. Ms. Bedore stated that the owners of the station care about the City and the neighborhood, and have tried to upgrade the station and keep it clean. Their business is growing, and they want to be able to expand their operation. A gentleman in the audience took strong exception to Ms. and stated that he would not remain in the meeting statements. Bedore's comments, listening to her Mr. Ladewig again addressed the Commission, pointing out that the approval of the B-2 Zoning would allow the non-conforming businesses to expand. Mr. Wanush pointed out that the expansion of a use such as Conoco, which is automotive-related, would require approval of the Commission through the Con- ditional Use process; this would require a Public Hearing before the Commis- sion and the property would have to be posted giving notice of the Hearing. The Conditional Use provision does provide a means to reduce the impact a given use may have on the surrounding properties. Mr. Wanush also pointed out that if complaints were registered regarding the "revving" of the race car, this could be prohibited through the Conditional Use process. Dave Brock, 7005 South Ash Circle, was sworn in. Mr. Brock stated that he wanted to ask that the B-1 Zone District be amended to include pawn shops. Mr. Brock was advised that this was not the time to address this issue, and advised to wait until Public Forum to speak to the matter. John Parry, 3216 South Lincoln, was swo rn in. He testified he is opposed to th e B-2 ext ensio n to South Lincol n Street. He s t ated that it has come to his a tt ention th at the owners of the Conoc o Station want to exp and and he i s op- posed to the expansion; this wi ll mean mo~e mechanics, and discussed the fact that "Mel" drives a big black truck and takes corners v ery "quickly". He stated that the Police Department has been called many times, but always ar- rive too late to issue citations. of Mr. Cullifer. ._, Mr. Parry commended the business operation Mr. Cullifer stated th a t he is of the opinion that the Conoco station has eliminated the ''hot-rodder", and that he himself had filed a complaint. Mr. Schultz asked if an y one else wished to address the Commi s sion. No one else did so. Mr. Schultz then asked i f there were questi on s from the Conunis- sion of anyone who had spo ken. Glynn moved : Tobin seconded: The Public Heari ng on Case #8-91 be clos ed . -11 - AYES: Glynn, Schultz, Shoop, Tobin, Daviet, Draper, Dummer, Gerlick NAYS: None ABSENT: Covens ABSTAIN: None The motion carried. Ms. Tobin suggested that speed bumps be installed in the alley. Mr. Wanush stated that the Commission cannot require speed bumps as a condition of the rezoning, but it can certainly be recommended. Ms. Tobin stated that she wanted this included as part of the recommendation. Me. Daviet inquired about including Mr. Cullifer' s property ( 3299-1/2 South Lincoln) in the B-2 rezoning. Hr. Wanush pointed out that a rule-of-thumb is you do not "spot zone". Ms. Daviet discussed her concern with the revocation of the variance by the Board of Adjustment, pointing out that this was causing the closure of a revenue source. Mr. Stitt stated that Mr. Cullifer had oper- ated the business for several years under a variance; this variance had several conditions attached to it, including a yearly review. The Board dis- cussed on several occasions revoking the variance because Mr. Cullifer was not in compliance with the other conditions imposed on him, such as the number of vehicles he could work on or have parked on the property. At the last hear- ing, earlier in this year, Mr. Cullifer admitted he was not in compliance with the conditions, and probably would not be; the Board decided that "enough was enough", and revoked the variance. Hr. Stitt stated that if Mr. Cullifer wished to appeal, the course of appeal is to the District Court. Mr. Dummer stated that if the Commission were to zone just Hr. Cullifer's par- cel on Lincoln, would he still have to conform to the provisions of the variance. Mr. Wanush stated that Mr. Cullifer would have to ask for approval of a Conditional Use, which is administered by the Planning Commission and not the Board of Adjustment. Discussion ensued. Ms. Daviet stated that she felt Mr. Cullifer's situation should have the benefit of being heard by City Coun- cil, and that she wanted to include his property in the B-2 zone classification. Mr. Shoop asked the Chamber of Commerce's opinion on the rezoning. Mr. Stitt stated that the Chamber recommended that the rezoning be extended to the cen- terline of South Acoma and South Lincoln. Ms. Tobin s t at e d tha t if o nl y the one proper t y on South Linco ln were t o be included in B-2, this could open the door to pro blems in the future. Mr. Wanush agreed. Daviet moved: Glynn seconded: Discussion ensued. .... The Planning Commission recommend to City Council that the fo llowi ng area be rezoned from B-1, Business , to B-2 Busi- ness, with the property addressed as 3229-1/2 South Lincoln to be included in the B-2 Dist ri c t: Be ginning at the cen- te rlin es of Sou th Broa d wa y an d Eastman Avenue ; then west along the centerline of West Ea stman Avenu e to the center- l ine o f Sou th Acoma S t ree t ; t he n s o ut h al on g the centerline of S o uth Ac o ma Str e et a dis tance cf 452 . 43 fe et , mo re o r le ss ; then east to the cent e rli n e of Sou t h Broadway ; then south along the centerline of South Broadway to the center- line of Floyd Avenue, then east along the centerline of -12 - .. East Floyd Avenue to the centerline of the South Broadway/ South Lincoln Street Alley; then north along the centerline of the South Broadway /South Lincoln Street alley to the centerline of East Eastman Avenue; then west along the cen- terline of East Eastman Avenue to the centerline of South Broadway. Discussion ensued on clarification of the address given by Mr. Cullifer. Mr. Cullifer stated that he owns the properties addressed as 3225-3229 South Lin- coln Street, and that the garage is addressed as 3229-1/2; the garage does extend across the rear of both properties. Mr. Wanush emphasized that the rezoning cannot encompass only a portion of the lots. Ms. Daviet amended her motion to encompass properties addressed as 3225-3229- 3229-1/2 South Lincoln in the B-2 rezoning. Ms. Tobin expressed concern that this rezoning of property on South Lincoln will negatively affect those people who stated that they didn't want B-2 zoning. It would appear from this that the auto repair business could expand to the front portions of the ownership under the B-2 District. Ms. Daviet asked if there could not be conditions imposed that would prevent the expan- sion of the auto repair business to the front portion of the lots. Mr. Wanush pointed out that conditions can be placed on a "Conditional Use", but that if the entire property were to be rezoned to B-2, the entire property could be used for the auto repair business. Further discussion followed. The vote on Ms. Daviet's motion, as amended, was called: AYES: Daviet, Dummer, Glynn NAYS: Schultz,Shoop, Tobin, Draper, Gerlick ABSENT: Covens ABSTAIN: None The motion failed. Mr. Gerlick stated that he understood Mr. Cullifer's plight, but that rezoning only that one property is the wrong way to address the issue. Gerlick moved: Tobin seconded: The Planning Commis sion r eco~nend to City Co un cil that the rezoning of the foll ow i ng descri bed area from B-1, Busi- ness , to B-2, Business be approved: Beginning at the cen- terlines of South Broadway and Eastman Avenue; then west along the _centerline of West Eastman Avenue to the ce nter- line of South Acoma Street; then south along the centerline of South ~coma Street a distance of 452.43 feet, more or less; then east to the centerline of South Broadway; then south along the centerline of South Broadway to the center- line of Floyd Avenue, then east along the centerline of East Fl oyd Avenue to the centerline of the South Broadway/ South Lincoln Street Alley; then nor th along the centerline of the South Broadw ay /Sout h Lincoln Street alley to the centerline of East Ea stman Avenue ; then west alo ng the ce n- terline of East Eastman Avenue to the centerline of South Broadway. -13 - Commission members expressed their concern for Mr. Cullifer's situation, but emphasized the need to be cognizant of the impact such a rezoning would have had on the neighborhood as a whole. It was further pointed out that if Mr. Cullifer wished to reapply to the Board for a variance, it appeared a number ~ of his neighbors were in support of the business he operated. ~ The vote was called: AYES: Tobin, Draper, Dummer,Gerlick, Glynn, Schultz NAYS: Shoop, Daviet ABSENT: Covens ABSTAIN: None The motion carried. Mr. Schultz thanked all members of the audience for their attendance, and stated that the matter will be referred . to the City Council for consideration. City Council will also have to hold a Public Hearing, which will require the property to again be posted and public notice placed in the official City newspaper. Ms. Daviet asked to be excused from the meeting. v. PUBLIC FORUM Mr. Dav i d Brock, 7005 South Ash Circle, Littleton 80122, addressed the Commis- sion, and requested that consideration be given to amending the B-1 Zone Dis- trict to allow Pawn Shops as a p ermi tt e d principal use. Mr. Brock likened p awn shops to financ i al inst itutions, stores that sell cameras, music instru- me n ts, jewel r y, ant iques, e t c. Pawn shops are all ow ed i n the B-2 Zone Dis- trict, and Mr. Brock asked that t h e y be allowed i n the B-1 District in addition. Mr. Schultz stated that the Commission would direct staff to do background research and get back to the Commission with a re p ort. Mr. Brock asked when ·he could expect a public hearing on his request. Mr. Schultz stated that when t he Commission determines a date on the issue, Mr. Brock would be not i fied. No one e lse addresse d the Commi ss ion un d e r Public Foru m. VI . DIRECTOR'S CH OICE. Mr. Wanush reminded Commission members of the study session with City Council on November 25 at 6:00 P.M. , This meeting will be in the Community Room. The meeting of December 3rdc:..will be on "housekeeping" issues in the Zoning Ordinance. V II . CO MM ISSIONER'S CHOICE. Mr. Draper agai n di scu s se d hi s fr u s t ration with the s i gnal timing at Dartmo u t h an d Broadwa y, and the need f o r l eft -tur n ing arr o ws at t h is i n tersect io n. Hr . Gerli c k briefl y disc u s s ed the rezoning issue heard previously this ev e - ni ng, and expre ssed h i s b elief that it wa s h an dl ed i n t he b est p o s s i b l e way. -14 - , . The meeting adjourned at 9:10 p.m. Recording Secretary C;.. -15 -