Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1991-12-03 PZC MINUTES• • • PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION Deceaber 3, 1991 I. CALL TO ORDER The regular meeting of the City Planning and Zoning Commission was called to order at 7:00 P.M. by Chairman J. c. Schultz in Conference Room A of Englewood City Hall. Members present: Members absent: Also present: Tobin, Daviet, Gerlick, Glynn, Schultz, Shoop Wanush, Ex-officio Covens, Draper, Dummer Stitt, Neighborhood Services Administrator I I • APPROVAL OF MINUTES November 19, 1991 Chairman Schultz stated that the Minutes for the meeting of November 19, 1991 are being distributed at this meeting; inasmuch as they are quite voluminous he would suggest members peruse them, and hold to consider for approval at the next meeting • III. THE ROLE OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Members of the Commission and staff continued discussion which had begun during the meeting of the Commission with City Council on November 25th regarding the role of the Planning Commission. Mr. Wanush pointed out that there are responsibilities delegated to the Commission via the City Charter, such as consideration and recommendation of a five-year Capital Improvement Program. In addition, all zoning, rezoning, planned developments, platting of property, etc. must be considered by the Planning Commission before City Coun- cil can act on these issues. Analysis of Service Levels by the Planning Commission, which had been raised by Councilman Waggoner, was discussed. Mr. Wanush stated that every year during the budget development process, staff reviews what service levels are desired, and what can or should be provided. Mr. Wanush stated that he sur- mised Mr. Waggoner's opinion is that the Planning Commission could serve as an independent body to review the service levels desired vs. provided. Discus- sion ensued. Mr. Wanush stated that the Department and staff are trying to be more pro- active in dealing with neighborhoods, and address livability issues. The Planning Commission can certainly be more involved in this. Mr. Wanush sug- gested that members of the Commission identify proposals they feel would im- prove the livability/quality of life in the City; these proposals will then be analyzed to determine importance and communicated to City Council • Ms. Daviet commented that she has attended several educational seminars since being on the Commission, and found it disappointing and frustrating that the -1 - ' majority of these seminars are geared to communities that are still develop- ing, and not for a "built-out" community such as Englewood. She expressed the opinion that the Commission must look at revenues and what "drives" the City. Ms. Daviet recounted her recent experience in working with Commerce City on the pre-parole facility which was defeated by voters, and noted that this facility would bring in $9,500,000 per year in revenue. Ms. Daviet stated that the old Buyer's Club structure had been considered as a pre-parole facility, also. Ms. Daviet pointed out that sales tax revenues are dropping, and the pre-parole facility would be a "constant" source of revenue. Ms. Daviet stated that the Planning Commission and City government needs to think about survival strategies for the community. Ms. Daviet pointed out that the new housing programs are very successful, and have garnered positive press for the City. There is a need to do more "futuristic thinking" to revitalize the City. • Mr. Schultz stated that a couple of Council members had indicated to him after the meeting that they would like to attend some of the Commission meetings. Mr. Schultz stated that he would welcome their attendance. Mr. Wanush raised the issue of where the Planning Commission should be head- ing. He suggested the possibility of bringing a consultant for a brainstorm- ing session, and maybe devoting one Saturday to such a session. Discussion ensued. Ms. Daviet discussed the strong foundation that has formed Englewood which has enabled the community to survive the rough economic times as well as we have. Ms. Daviet stressed the need to have a strong instinct for survival, and dis- cussed her frustration with the facilities and opportunities that are avail- able but that we do not capitalize on. Ms. Daviet expressed concern that businesses, such as British Imports which had the variance to operate revoked, are being closed by City actions, and cutting off sources of revenues. Con- siderable discussion ensued regarding the British Imports issue and the rea- sons for the Board of Adjustment action. Mr. Wanush pointed out that the owner of British Imports does have the right to reapply to the Board of Adjustment one year after the revocation of the variance. Mr. Wanush pointed out that it is the responsibility of the Plan- ning Commission to look at the broad picture, and what is best for the com- munity in any issue, not specifically one individual. The Board of Adjustment and Appeals considers issues that are out of the ordinary, and tries to deal with issues wherever an application of a general rule may not be appropriate to an individual situation. Mr. Glynn discussed the changes he has seen in the City during the 12 years he has lived here, and stressed that economy dictates what can or cannot be done. Mr. Shoop asked that "pro-active" as working aggressively towards knowledge about an issue. be defined. Mr. Schultz defined pro-active a goal, to make things happen, to seek • The proposal to meet with planning commissions from other communities was dis- cussed. Ms. Daviet suggested that it might be helpful to meet with other com- munities that are "built out" such as Englewood, and face the need to re- develop rather than develop. She stated that in her opinion, the Englewood • Planning Commission could be unique and set guidelines for other commissions who are dealing with built out communities. Ms. Daviet expressed the opinion -2 - ' • • • that the challenge facing the Planning Conunission in Englewood is more criti- cal than that facing a conununity still developing. Ms. Daviet again empha- sized the positive aspects of the housing redevelopment programs, and urged that the Conunission come up with other positive projects that can improve the City. The Enterprise Zone designation was discussed. Ms. Daviet expressed an inter- est in learning the benefits and ramifications of the Enterprise Zone designa- tion. Mr. Wanush stated that we could schedule Pam Pepper to discuss this with the Conunission at a meeting. IV. COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE Mr. Stitt distributed copies of the residential sections of the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance (CZO), as well as sections pertaining to landscaping provi- sions and general regulations. Mr. Stitt stated that staff has reviewed the ordinance with an eye to what changes could be made to make the ordinance easier for citizens to deal/live with, as well as make the ordinance easier to administer. Mr. Stitt started the discussion with a review of the R-1-A District. Pro- posals include elimination of SE, Maximum Percentage of Lot Coverage; modification of the front yard setback; reduction of the side yard setback; change of SL to "Minimum Landscaping" rather than the existing "Usable Open Space"; change the title of SM to "Accessory Structures"; change SM2 to "ac- cessory structures" rather than "storage shed"; and incorporate the statement with SM2d "No setback is required if the wall adjacent to the property line is constructed of one-hour fire-resistive material" in section SMl, Garages and Carports. Mr. Stitt stated that Conditional Uses, such as a child care facility, are allowed in R-1-B, and R-1-C Districts, but are not allowed in R- 1-A. He stated that he personally sees no reason a child care facility should not be permitted in R-1-A, also. Mr. Stitt also stated that home occupations have never been allowed in the R-1-A District, but are permitted in the other districts. Staff is proposing that home occupations be permitted in the R-1- A. Mr. Stitt noted that the State of Colorado no longer prohibits barbers, beauticians, hair dressers, and cosmetologists from operating from a private home; the staff has received several inquiries from persons wishing to do this type of work in a private home, and staff now suggests that this prohibition be removed from the czo. Mr. Stitt demonstrated on the board the possible results of the proposed change in side yard setbacks, and the modification of front yard setbacks. This could provide someone interested in redevelopment of a lot a larger space to work with, or allow additions to existing homes without the necessity of seeking a variance from the Board of Adjustment. Ms. Tobin stated that she did not see any problem with the provision of day care capabilities in the R-1-A District. Ms. Tobin did point out that allow- ing beauty shops, etc. in residential area could lead to considerable traffic and congestion. Ms. Daviet questioned the rationale for the limit of 300 sq. ft. floor area for the home occupation. Mr. Stitt addressed the need for Conunission and staff to keep in mind that the primary use of the property must be residential --not business. New home occupations in an area might impact adjoining residential properties or the entire neighborhood, and this must be taken into -3 - consideration. Ms. Daviet stated that we also need to keep in mind the change in attitude toward home businesses, and that some large businesses are allow- ing persons to work at home with computers and modems. She questioned the need for any floor area limitation, and stated that we do not want to inhibit the ability of people earning a living by working from their homes. Mr. Wanush discussed the need to state quantative limits, and the need to limit impacts on neighbors and neighborhoods. He stated that it is difficult to devise standards that are "fair" to everybody, but the Commission should con- sider what standards they feel are most appropriate. Mr. Shoop requested clarification of Conditional Uses vs. Home Occupations. Mr. Wanush stated that Home Occupations are permitted uses provided certain standards that are written in the Ordinance are met. Conditional Use may be allowed provided certain standards to be determined for each case are met. A Conditional Use also must go through the Public Hearing procedure before the Planning Commission, giving the neighbors an opportunity to voice their opinion; no such requirement is in place for the Home Occupations. Ms. Daviet stated that there are a lot of "non-conforming" uses going on in the City. Mr. Glynn inquired if taxes are realized from the home occupations and/or conditional uses. Mr. Wanush stated that if the use is registered, and generates taxes, we should be receiving taxes. Mr. Stitt stated that staff would research surrounding communities to deter- mine what standards they apply to home occupations, as well as request infor- mation from the American Society of Planning Officials. Mr. Stitt stated that basically the same changes that he cited in the R-1-A District would be carried out through the R-1-B, R-1-C, R-2, R-2-C, R-3, and R-4 Districts, with some possible rewording on side yards for adjoining units in the R-2/R-2-C Districts. The General Regulations were briefly discussed, with Mr. Stitt pointing out sections that are of particular concern, such as Height Extension, Yard Excep- tions, Projection into Yards, and Corner Lots. Ms. Tobin asked if there were any restrictions against a property owner pur- chasing property next door, and joining the two houses together for one large home. Mr. Stitt stated there are no restrictions against doing this. Mr. Stitt pointed out that another option is to "raise the roof" by installing a second story on existing homes. Another option is to purchase two run down properties, raze the structures, and construct one nice, large, house. Mr. Wanush stated that the proposed changes in the Ordinance are the result of staff "brainstorming"; he has asked Englewood Housing Authority staff and Housing Division staff to also review the CZO to note standards that restrict or inhibit development of new housing or redevelopment of existing housing. Mr. Wanush stated that he will ask Economic Development Administrator Pepper to review the business and industrial segments of the czo for impacts on business/industrial development. Mr. Wanush also urged every member of the Commission to also review the czo and to recall any problems they have experi- enced with regard to restrictions contained in the czo. ., • • Mr. Wanush suggested that perhaps the Commission would want to form an ad hoc • committee to work on the changes to the czo, which committee would report back to the Commission as a whole. -4 - • • • •• Mr. Garlick commented that it appears the changes outlined by Mr. Stitt are very much in keeping with the goals set forth in the Housing Section of the Comprehensive Plan. Ms. Tobin asked if there are any plans for Cinderella City; she noted that more and more stores are empty and not being re-leased. She asked if there is anything that can be done to turn this Center around. Mr. Wanush stated that the physical facility is a problem, and that superficial rehabilitation alone won't be enough to improve the Center. The needed significant overhaul is very costly. Mr. Wanush stated that one suggestion that has been discussed is that possibly we need to look at another "type" of center --not fashion retail, but something that could draw people back to Englewood. Ms. Tobin inquired about the possibility of using part of the Mall for the pre-parole facility discussed earlier by Ms. Daviet. Ms. Daviet discussed the possibili- ty of a day-care facility located at Cinderella City. Mr. Wanush stated that City Manager Fraser had been interviewed by Channel 9 regarding rumors that major tenants at Cinderella City would be leaving after the first of the year. V. PUBLIC FORUM There was no one present to address the Commission. VI. DIRECTOR'S CHOICE Mr. Wanush noted that terms of office for Ms. Daviet, Mr. Dummer, and Mr • Schultz expire on February 1, 1992. He distributed applications for appoint- ment to Boards and Commissions to Ms. Daviet and Mr. Schultz, and noted that if they are interested in applying for reappointment to the Commission, the forms should be completed and returned to the City Manager's Office as soon as possible. Mr. Wanush stated that some time ago, the Tri-City Planning Group was briefly discussed with the Commission, and the Commission was asked to consider ap- pointment of one of their members to this group. No appointment has been made to this time. The next meeting of the Tri-City Group will be in January, and an appointment should be made prior to that time. VII. COMMISSIONER'S CHOICE Mr. Shoop suggested that the Comprehensive Plan contain a section on the Down- town area, and incorporate a report that was done by the Downtown Development Authority. Mr. Schultz discussed the voting procedures that have been followed by the Commission. Mr. Schultz stated that according to Roberts Rules of Order, the Chairman of a commission would not vote in the normal course of proceedings, and then only in the event of a tie. Discussion ensued. It was the consensus of the Commission that the Chairman should vote on every issue, but that he should vote last. The next meeting of the Commission will be January 7, 1992 . -5 - • The meeting adjourned at 9:00 P.M. • Recording Secretary • • -6 -