Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1974-07-16 PZC MINUTES• •• • CITY OF ENGLEWOOD PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION JULY 16, 1974 I . CALL TO ORDER. The Regular Meeting of the City Planning and Zoning Commission was called to order at ·8:25 P.M. by Chairman Martin. Members present: Brown; Wade; Tanguma; Martin; Jones; Supinger, Ex-officio Members absent: Weist; Smith; Lentsch; Jorgenson Also present: Planning Assistants House and Young; Assistant Director Romans; Assistant City Attorney Lee. II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES. Chairman Martin stated that the Minutes of July 2, 1974, were to be considered for approval. Brown moved: Tanguma seconded: The Minutes of July 2, 1974, be approved as written . AYES: Jones; Brown; Wade; Tanguma; Martin NAYS: None ABSENT: Weist; Smith; Lentsch; Jorgenson The motion carried. III. CLIFTON P. COLEMAN Parking Lot Approval CASE #21-74 Mr. Supinger stated that the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance requires that any parking area designed for 50 or more cars is to be approved by the City Planning and Zoning Commission before it can be constructed. The Commission has previously approved a parking lot for this site, located south of East Girard Avenue between South Lincoln and South Sherman Streets, when Offices, Ltd. attempted to develop the property. Mr. Supinger stated that Mr. Coleman on behalf of B & H Joint Venture, is requesting approval of the parking lot proposed for a five-story medical building. Mr. Supinger noted that the area proposed for development has been expanded over the previous application by Offices, Ltd., to include the entire north one-half of the block. Mr. Supinger noted that the staff does not see any problem with the application for approval, and does so recommend • Mr. Martin asked if Mr. Coleman would make his presentation to the Commission? • • • -2- Mr. Coleman stated that B & H Joint Venture has acquired two additional pieces of property besides that previously owned by Offices, Ltd. He stated that in talking to Doctors, one of the first questions they ask is how much parking will be avail- able for the medical building? Mr. Coleman stated that the Englewood Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance requires 120 spaces off-street parking; the plans they have presented will provide 180 to 185 spaces; he stated there is a large blue spruce tree in the area proposed for parking that they would like to save. If the tree can be saved, it would require removal of a few parking spaces. Mr. Coleman stated that B & H Joint Venture plans to landscape the parking lot along the boundaries, and plantings will be in the parking lot itself also. Mr. Coleman stated there would be berms on the boundaries of the parking lot, and they plan to spend up to $2,000 on landscaping. Mr. Coleman stated that the building would be a five-story structure and will have 43,000 sq. ft.; it will house 40 doctors, and there will be a pharmacy and an optometrist on the first floor. Mr. Coleman stated there was a company interested in putting in 1/4 million dollars of equipment in computer and other equipment to service the entire metro area. There will also be a service quartered in the building that will furnish lab reports to doctors throughout the area. Mr. Martin noted that the staff report refers to the 100-year flood plain, and indicates that this property is within the Little Dry Creek Flood Plain. The staff report also indicates the first floor of the proposed structure will be one foot above the flood plain level. Mr. Coleman stated that the majority of the property is in the flood plain; however, one of the reasons for locating the structure in the northeast corner of the site wa~ that this corner is not in the flood plain area. Mr. Coleman stated that they do plan to raise the first floor of the building at least one foot above the flood plain level. Mr. Supinger noted that the regulations do not preclude con- struction in a flood plain, but the structures intended for human occupancy must be at least one foot above the flood plain level, as this building is proposed to be. Mr. Coleman noted that they also plan to raise the elevation of the low areas in the parking lot about three feet. Mr. Martin asked if there would be a storm sewer provided within the parking area to catch the drainage? Mr. Coleman stated there would be two catch basins in the parking lot and will drain to a manhole that is part of the Englewood storm sewer system at Lincoln and Girard. Mr. Coleman noted that the City Engineer has approved the drainage plan. Discussion followed . Mr. Martin asked how soon construction was planned? Mr. Coleman stated that after approval by the Commission and obtaining Building Permits, it would be probably 45 days before develop- ment started. • • • -3- Mr. Jones noted there were four curb cuts on Lincoln Street and two on South Sherman Street, with no provision for circula- tion of traffic within the parking area. He asked how a motorist would traverse from aisle to aisle? Mr. Supinger stated that circulation would be provided by using Lincoln and Sherman to get from aisle to aisle. Mr. Martin asked if this particular plan was approved whether it would serve as the "site plan"? Mr. Supinger stated that the approved plan must be the site plan. Mr. Coleman noted that the staff report does mention the fact that the developers want to save the Blue Spruce tree on the property. Mr. Supinger suggested that possibly the Commission could give the authority to the staff to vary the parking spaces in order to retain the trees on the site. Mr. Tanguma asked how many spaces would have to be relinquished were traffic circu:ution to be provided on the site rather than using Lincoln and Sherman Streets. Mr. Supinger stated it would be at least 12 spaces. Mr. Coleman cited problems that exist at some other medical office complexes due to the shortage of off-street parking spaces; Mr. Coleman also contrasted the parking requirements of doctors specializing in different fields of medicine • Further discussion on the plan followed. Mr. Martin asked if the aisles were wide enough to permit two way traffic? Mr. Coleman stated they would be 25 ft. aisles, and two-way traffic can be accommodated. Mr. Jones asked how many on-street spaces would be lost on Lincoln and Sherman because of curb-cuts? Mr. Supinger stated that at least 8 spaces would be lost. Mr. Martin asked if this development had been planned to fit in with the surrounding environment? Mr. Coleman discussed t h e development that exists in the subject area. Mr. Brown complimented Mr. Coleman on the plan;he noted that the property has been an eyesore for some time. Mr. Brown stated he was very pleased with the plans for landscaping the site. He asked about the setback on Sherman Street? Mr. Coleman stated he thought the setback from Sherman was 7"; he noted that the entrance must be setback 3 ft. from Girard Avenue. Mr. Martin asked if, on the site plan, certain symbols were to indicate landscaping, and if this plan were approved the landscaping would be installed as shown? Mr. Coleman stated they will provide shrubs, and will also plant the berms • Mr. Tanguma asked if the building had already be.en approved? Mr. Supinger noted that the building itself meets all code requirements, and the only approval needed is of the parking plan. • •• • -4- Mr. Jones asked if a site plan showing the changes could be submitted? Mr. Supinger stated that the staff will ask that such a site plan be submitted. Brown moved: Wade seconded: The Planning Commission approve the 184 space off-street parking plan submitted by B & H Joint Venture, for property in the north one-half of the block bounded by South Sherman Street, South Lincoln Street, East Girard Avenue and East Hampden Avenue, for the following reasons: 1. The parking plan as submitted complies with the off- street parking requirements as set forth in §22.5-5a (8) of the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance. One-hun- dred twenty spaces are required; 172 standard size spaces are to be provided and 12 spaces for compact cars. 2. The layout of the proposed of f -street parking lot conforms with the City Standards as to the size of the spaces and width of aisles and wheel stops will be provided as necessary. Required screening will be provided on the south of the lot where it adjoins a residential use . 3. The proposed drainage plan for the parking lot has been approved by the City Engineer. 4. The parking lot is not a structure, and would not, therefore, be in conflict with §22.4 B-1 of the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance, the Flood Plain District. The building to be served by the pro- posed parking lot will be at a grade one foot above the Little Dry Creek 100-year Flood Plain. 5. The use will not be in conflict with the Comprehensive Plan. 6. The use is permitted within the B-1, Business, Zone District within which the subject property lies. The staff is given the authority to vary the number of spaces provided in order that a Blue Spruce and other trees on the site might be saved. AYES: Jones; Brown; Wade; Tanguma; Martin NAYS: None ABSENT: Jorgenson; Weist; Smith; Lentsch The motion carried . • •• • IV. STATE HIGHWAY WORK PROGRAM 1975 -1976 -5- Mr. Supinger stated that the matter of the State Highway Work Program is an annual consideration by the Planning Commission; priorities are recommended to the City Council, submitted to Arapahoe County and the Council of Governments, and then sub- mitted to the State Highway Department. Mr. Supinger stated that the items included · in the staff memo have been discussed with the Department of Public Works. He stated he would recommend the Commission make a recommendation to Council as to their priorities. Discussion followed. Mr. Martin asked what is the priority on the Federal Aid Urban System? Mr. Supinger stated that in order to get funding from the Federal Aid Urban System, the street must be on the Federal Aid Urban System. Mr. Jones noted that the widening of South Broadway from Yale Avenue to U.S. 285 will cause a great deal of discussion among the merchants of downtown Englewood. He noted that he didn't feel the merchants were opposed to the widening, but they are opposed to the median stripso Mr. Jones stated that the merchants feel the median strips will cause problems in snow removal, and cause problems for persons who have a "drive-in" type business. Mr. Jones stated that he felt the problem to be determined is "are we going to operate businesses on Broadway, or use it for traffic". Mr. Jones stated that he felt a volume of 25,000 cars per day on Broadway "would remove curb parking in short order", and would require some change in business levels. Mr. Jones noted that merchants on Broadway have re- quested that the City assist them in providing off-street parking for the business district. Mr. Jones stated that he understood Littleton ·was considering removal of the median strips in their streets. He questioned whether the Commission could give proper consideration to these matters at this meeting. Mr. Supinger noted that when the widening of Broadway is referred to, it addresses only the provision of left turn pockets; it does not address the problem of median strips. Mr. Brown asked if it was possible to get the projects on the Federal Aid Urban System someday, and could a time be given? Mr. Supinger noted that it is possible, but also noted that it has taken several years to get the widening south of Quincy, for instance. Discussion followed. Mr. Supinger noted that the numerical order given is as the staff has recommended. Mr. Martin sug- gested a study session to go over this matter. Discussion followed. Mr. Brown noted that he felt items concerning the storm drainage should be advanced in priority. Mr. Martin asked if the storm drainage wasn't on the City agenda? Mr. Supinger noted that the City is trying to get funds from the state to aid at these locations. • •• • -6- Mr. Brown stated that he felt the proposed recommendation looked good to him; if Council wanted to make changes, it could be referred back to the Commission. Mr. Jones stated that he felt there were problems with priorities based on the numerical order given. Discussion followed. Mr. Supinger stated that Broadway is not on the State Highway System north of U.S. 285; it is on the Federal Aid System. Further discussion followed. Mrs. Wade questioned the location of I-470? Mr. Supinger stated that it is along the County Line Road between I-25 and Santa Fe, and will tie into I-70 and U.S. 285. Tanguma moved: Brown seconded: The Planning Commission recommend the following State Highway Work Program to City Council: I. Requests to the State Highway Commission for inclusion in the Highway Department Work Program. A. Construction Projects on the State Highway System: 1. South Santa Fe Drive: 2 . a. Widen and improve to a six-lane major arterial, continuing the construction project which is now under way in Denver south to I-470 • . b. Construct a grade separation at the intersec- tion of West Dartmouth Avenue and South Santa Fe Drive. c. Construct a grade separation at the intersection of West Quincy Avenue and South Santa Fe Drive. d. Construct an overpass for West Union Avenue and West Tufts Avenue at their intersection with South Santa Fe Drive. e. Construct a grade separation at the inter- section of West Belleview Avenue and South Santa Fe Drive. f. Signalization of the South Santa Fe -West Union and West Tufts Avenues intersection as an interim measure pending completion of A-4 above. U.S. 285: Construct a grade separation at the intersection of South University Boulevard and U.S. 285. • • • -7- 3. South Federal Boulevard: a. Install a storm sewer at South Federal Boulevard and West Union Avenue. b. Construct South Federal Boulevard to four lanes from West Belleview Avenue to West Bowles Avenue. 4. Belleview Avenue: a. Construct Belleview Avenue to four lanes from South Peoria Street to South Sheridan Boulevard. b. Install storm inlets on the north side of West Belleview Avenue from South Elati Street to Big Dry Creeko II. Requests to the Denver Regional Council of Governments relative to the Urban System. Ao Additions to the Federal Aid Urban System: 1. South Clarkson Street from East Yale Avenue to East Dry Creek Road • 2. South Windermere Street from West Kenyon Avenue to Gates Parkway. 3. Dartmouth Avenue from South University Boulevard to South Federal Boulevard. 4. West Kenyon Avenue from South Broadway to South Santa Fe Drive. 5. Quincy Avenue from South Yosemite Street to South Wadsworth Boulevard. 6. West Union Avenue from South Windermere Street to South Federal Boulevard. 7. West Tufts Avenue from South Broadway to South Windermere Street. Bo Construction Projects on the Federal Aid Urban System: 1. South Broadway from Yale Avenue to U.S. 285: To be widened to the same width as South Broadway is being widened from U.S. 285 to Quincy, providing left-turn pockets • 2. South Clarkson Street: To be constructed to two lanes from U.S. 285 to East Orchard Avenue. 3. Quincy Avenue: To be constructed to two lanes from I-225 to South Wadsworth Boulevard. • •• • -8- 4. South Windermere Street: To be constructed to two lanes from West Oxford Avenue to Gates Parkway. 5. 1-470: To be constructed to six lanes. Mr. Jones noted that there had been difficulty obtaining a quorum at this meeting, and he felt that there should be more members of the Commission present to consider approval of this matter. Mr. Brown noted that there will probably be difficulty obtaining a quorum during the remainder of the summer; he stated we have to be realistic and realize that people will not be attending too many meetings with vacations, etc. coming up. Mr. Martin commented that he hoped the Commission could receive this matter earlier in the future to allow for more detailed review by the Commission. He stated he felt the Commission should indicate they have had very little time to consider the matter prior to making a recanmendation, and that there were only five members present voting on the matter. Mr. Brown pointed out that the members of the Commission have had the materials since Friday evening; if the other members who are absent had strong feelings about the matter they might have been in attendance . Mr. Tanguma stated that he didn't feel there were many items that were objectionable. He stated he would like to see the West Tufts projects moved up, but stated "it's close enough". Mrs. Wade commented that there were a lot of things the Com- mission would like to see done; but dollars and cents wise, this is a good outline. The vote was called: AYES: Brown; Wade; Tanguma; Martin NAYS: Jones ABSENT: Weist; Lentsch; Jorgenson; Smith The motion carried. Mrs. Romans pointed out to Chairman Martin that the Commission has received the request early; in the past we have waited until we have received the request from Arapahoe County. There is usually such a short time for consideration that the Council has on occasion acted on the matter before the Commission has made recommendation. The staff prepared the document early this year in an effort to avoid the past procedures . Mr. Supinger noted that if the Council so desires, they can call a study session on the matter. Further discussion followed. Mr. Martin stated that he felt the request should have been presented earlier to give the Commission time to discuss it thoroughly. Mrs. Wade stated that she felt the staff had done an excellent job in outlining the requests; she noted there • •• • -9- might be one or two things rated differently in priority, but that possibly the Commission feels at a loss in not under- standing the matter fully . V. CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM. Mr. Supinger stated that the Commission has been presented with the charted five-year capital improvement program from each department. Mr . Martin asked what the timing on this matter is? Mr. Supinger stated that the recommendation is late now. Mr. Martin asked if there were new requests or if this was an extension of the previous years'· requests? Mr. Brown stated that he felt two items which should receive top priority would be funds for the river redevelopment, and funds to continue the storm drainage system. Discussion followed. Mr. Martin asked if it would be possible to have a study session on the Capital Improvement Program? Mr. Supinger noted that the City Charter states the requests for the Capital Improvement Program shall be to the City Manager 90 days before the proposed budget is submitted to City Council; but the Capital Improvement Program is now on a six-quarter basis, and the recommendations could fit in any time. Discussion followed. It was determined that a study session should be scheduled for July 30, 7:30 P.M. to review the Capital Improvement Program. VI. DIRECTOR'S CHOICE Mr. Supinger noted that the Housing & Urban Renewal Authority has invited members of the Planning Commission to meet with them on July 23, 1974, 7:30 p.m. to hear a presentation by Dr. Edith Sherman . Mr. Supinger stated that at the City Council meeting of July 15th, City Council received the recommendation of the Planning Commission regarding the zoning on the Santa Fe -Union annexa- tion area, and determined to refer the zoning back to the Planning Commission for rehearing as proposed by the Commission. Mr. Supinger stated that the staff would give publication and post the property for a hearing on August 20th; at the same - time, we would advertise for amendment to the I-3 Zone District Regulations. Mr. Supinger stated that he had seen Mr. Ed Smith the previous evening; Mr. Smith is out of the hospital and doing well. • •• • -10- VII. COMMISSION'S CHOICE Mr. Martin noted there were several items listed on the agenda for discussion at the request of Mr. Jones. Mr. Jones stated he would like to bring to the attention of the Commission the possible extension of West Hampden Place. He stated that the extension of West Hampden Place has been discussed as a possible solution to the traffic problem adjacent to City Hall. Mr. Jones stated that he felt some thought should be given to obtaining the right-of-way very soon; he noted that some of the land on the west side of South Bannock is in private ownership ; the business properties on the west side of Acoma will be more expensive, but he felt step~ should be taken to assure the land now. Mr. Jones discussed an off-street parking program for the 3300, 3400 and 3500 blocks of South Broadway. He stated that the merchants of the downtown area want assistance from the Com- mission and staff in establishing an improvement district for off-street parking lots. He noted that the merchants want to get the land while it is available and vacant. Mr. Jones discussed the extension of the Little Dry Creek Conduit to Hampden Avenue. Mr. Jones noted that this was not listed as first priority by the Public Works Department, and feels this is very important and should be reviewed in the study session scheduled for July 30th. Mr. Jones stated he felt there should be a seminar on the Little Dry Creek to determine what the flood plain outline of the creek will be. He noted that other jurisdictions are involved, such as Douglas and Arapahoe Counties, Cherry Hills and Greenwood Village. Discussion followed. Mr. Martin stated that he felt it would be good to have a seminar and discuss the ramifications of the flood plain with the other jurisdictions. Mr. Supinger asked if the Commission wanted the staff to proceed with setting up such a seminar? Mr. Martin so directed the staff. Mr. Brown excused himself from the meeting at 10:15 p.m. Mr. Tanguma noted that Mr. Berry Coleman had made some recom- mendations to the City Council at a City Council meeting a few weeks ago. Mr. Jones stated he felt there was information on Mr. Coleman's presentation in the City Council minutes. Mr, Tanguma noted that Mr. Lentsch had presented some suggestions on off-street parking about three years ago. He stated he felt if the off-street parking committee was formed and really got going, it would be one of the biggest issues in the area for some time. Mr. Jones commented that no one in the past has been able to get tenants and landowners together on any parking proposalo He stated that he felt more of the tenants and landowners now realized that if they don't do something now there won't be any place available for parking. • •• • -11- Mr. Tanguma stated that he was a strong advocate of satellite parking and busing into the core area; he noted that the core area is congested enough eithout adding more parking area. Discussion followed. Mr. Jones noted that the RTD proposals are at least 10 years away. Mr. Martin stated that he had received a letter from Donald Roark Associates. The letter is as follows: July 11, 1974 Mr. Arthur Martin, Jr., Chairman Planning Commission City of Englewood 3400 So. Elati Englewood, Colorado re: Larwin Project - Hampden & So. Lafayette Dear Mr. Martin: "Roark Associates Architecture Planning Interiors 311 Detroit Street Denver 80206 A friend of mine was present at a recent Planning Commission hearing for your community at which time I am advised certain statements were made with respect to our firm and these state- ments are incorrect. It is my understanding that we were "credited" with the design for the Larwin project at Hampden and So. Lafayette. Our firm was initially retained to do the design work for this project and we did some preliminary design layouts for the master site plan. These master site plan layouts were modified considerably by the Larwin Company in California and we are not responsible for the master site plan design. In addition, we did certain preliminary work on the garden apartments for this project but again the Larwin Company made certain modifications to them and actually retained a California architectural firm to do the garden apartments. None of the construction at the site at this time has been designed by this office nor have we pro- vided professional services for any of the work which has been constructed. We were retained on this project for the design of the center midrise site and for the design of the midrise structures. As you are aware, no construction has proceeded on this portion of the project. • •• • -12- We would appreciate a public meeting correction of the mis- representation by both the staff of the City of Englewood and by the Larwin Corporation with respect to the work for which we are not responsible at this site. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact meo Sincerely, ROARK ASSOCIATES s/ Donald R. Roark DRR/jg cc: James Supinger Director of Community Development City of Englewood Allan Weinstein No Robert Gluck" Mr. Supinger stated that he had made the statement at the meeting of July 9th that Mr. Roark's Office had done the architectural drawings for the Larwin Development. He stated that he does recall that Mr. Roark's office was involved rather significantly in setting the tone for the architectural style of that development. Mr. Supinger agreed that a California architectural firm did the construction drawings for Phases I and IV. Mr. Supinger stated that Mr. Roark had appeared at several of the meetings on behalf of Larwin and that he did participate in setting the architectural style of the development. Mr. Martin stated that he was sure every member of the Commission had read the packet of minutes pertaining to the Larwin develop- ment which had been sent previously; he stated that the one thing that was clear is there was nothing but absolute con- fusion on the request, and nobody knew what was going on. Mr. Martin noted that a letter mentioned in the November 21, 1972 minutes requests that the subdivision waiver be withdrawn for the south 1/2 of the property. Mr. Martin noted that the letter does not appear in the minutes, and asked what reason it was not made part of the record? He stated he felt if the letter had been quoted in the minutes the question of whether the consideration was for the entire site or only the north 1/2 would have been cleared up. Discussion followed. Mr. Supinger stated that as he recalled, Larwin submitted the letter and withdrew it before it reached the Planning Commission. Further discussion followed • The meeting adjourned at 10:30 p.m" Gertrude ~----~~--~----L --- • •• -13- MEMORANDUM TO THE ENGLEWOOD CITY COUNCIL REGARDING ACTION OR RECOMMENDATION OF THE CITY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION. DATE: July 16, 1974 SUBJECT: 1975-1976 State Highway Work Program RECOMMENDATION: Tanguma moved: Brown seconded: The Planning Commission recommend the following State Highway Work Program to City Council: I. Requests to the State Highway Commission for inclusion in the Highway Department Work Program. A. Construction Projects on the State Highway System: 1. South Santa Fe Drive: a. Widen and improve to a six-lane major arterial, continuing the construction pro- ject which is now under way in Denver south to I-470 • b. Construct a grade separation at the inter- section of West Dartmouth Avenue and South Santa Fe Drive. c. Construct a grade separation at the inter- section of West Quincy Avenue and South Santa Fe Drive. d. Construct an overpass for West Union Avenue and West Tufts Avenue at their intersection with South Santa Fe Drive. e. Construct a grade separation at the inter- section of West Belleview Avenue and South Santa Fe Drive. f. Signalization of the South Santa Fe -West Union and West Tufts Avenues intersection as an interim measure pending completion of A-4 above. 2. U.S. 285: Construct a grade separation at the intersection of South University Boulevard and U.S. 285. 3. South Federal Boulevard: a. Install a storm sewer at South Federal Boulevard and West Union Avenue. • •• • -14- b. Construct South Federal Boulevard to four lanes from West Belleview Avenue to West Bowles Avenue. 4. Belleview Avenue: a. Construct Belleview Avenue to four lanes from South Peoria Street to South Sheridan Boulevard. b. Install storm inlets on the north side of West Belleview Avenue from South Elati Street to Big Dry Creek. II. Requests to the Denver Regional Council of Governments relative to the Urban System: A. Additions to the Federal Aid Urban System: 1. South Clarkson Street from East Yale Avenue to East Dry Creek Road. 2. South Windermere Street from West Kenyon Avenue to Gates Parkway. 3. Dartmouth Avenue from South University Boulevard to South Federal Boulevard • 4. West Kenyon Avenue from South Broadway to South Santa Fe Drive. 5. Quincy Avenue from South Yosemite Street to South Wadsworth Boulevard. 6. West Union Avenue from South Windermere Street to South Federal Boulevard. 7. West Tufts Avenue from South Broadway to South Windermere Street. B. Construction Projects on the Federal Aid Urban System: 1. South Broadway from Yale Avenue to U.S. 285: To be widened to the same width as South Broadway is being widened from U.S. 285 to Quincy, providing left-turn pockets. 2. South Clarkson Street: To be constructed to two lanes from U.S. 285 to East Orchard Avenue. 3. Quincy Avenue: To be constructed to two lanes from I-225 to South Wadsworth Boulevard . • •• • • -15- 4. South Windermere Street: To be constructed to two lanes from West Oxford Avenue to Gates Parkway. 5. I-470: To be constructed to six lanes. AYES: Brown; Wade; Tanguma; Martin NAYS: Jones ABSENT: Weist; Lentsch; Jorgenson; Smith The motion carried. Respectfully submitted, By Order of the City Planning and Zoning Commission. Recording Secretary