Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1974-12-03 PZC MINUTESl • • • • • CITY OF ENGLEWOOD PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION DECEMBER 3, 1974 I . CALL TO ORDER. The regula r meeting of the City Planning and Zoning Commission was called to order at 8:00 P.M. by Chairman Martin. Members pres ent: Martin; Jorgenson; Smith; Jones; Brown Supinger, Ex-officio Members absent: Wade; Weist; Lentsch; Tanguma Also present: Assistant Director Romans; Assistant City Attorney Lee; Planning Assistant House. II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES. Mr. Martin stated that Minutes of the Regular Meeting of November 19, 1974, were to be considered for approval. Jones moved: Jorgenson seconded: The Minutes of November 19, 1974, be approved as written • Mr. Lentsch entered and took his place with the Commission. AYES: Brown; Jones; Jorgenson; Lentsch; Martin; Smith NAYS: None ABSENT: Weist; Tanguma; Wade The motion carried. III. STREET VACATION South Lipan St. CASE #32-74 Mr. Supinger stated that this request for street vacation involves a portion of South Lipan Street north of West Dartmouth Avenue. This street has never been opened to public travel, even though it has been dedicated. Mr. Supinger stated that the portion proposed for vacation will be used in the land area for the Bi-city Waste Water Treatment Plant. Mr. Weist ent ered and took his place with the Commission. Mr. Martin asked if there were any questions from the Commission, or if there were any one in the audience who wished to speak in favor or opposition to the proposal? There was no member of the audience who spoke to this matter . Mr. Martin noted a discrepancy in figures 975' vs. 988.15' to be vacated. He asked for clarification. • • -2- Mr . Jones asked if there was need for a turn-around at the end of the street that is not to be vacated? Mr. Supinger noted that the properties on either side of the open street, are paved right to the property lines; there are no curbs and gutters. Persons wanting to turn could do so, even though they would make use of private property in making the turn~ Mrs. Romans noted the vacation is for 975 1 on the east side of the present street, and for 988.15' on the west side of the street. Mr. Martin stated he had noted in the paper that the cost of the proposed Bi-city Waste Water Treatment Plant had increased by $6,000,000. He asked what affect this would have on the development? Mr. Jones stated that Utilities Director Carroll had indicated it might require further consideration on the bond issue. Also, they would investigate further grants from the Federal Government. Mr. Jones noted that the develop- ment was to be financed 80% grants, 10% Littleton, and 10% Englewood. Brief discussion followed. Jorgenson moved: Brown seconded: The Planning Commission recommend to City Council that South Lipan Street, as hereinafter described, be vacated: Beginning at the NE corner of the SE 1/4 of the NE 1/4 of Section 33, T 4 S, R 68 W of the 6th Principal Meridian in the City of Englewood, Colorado, thence N. 89°50 1 W. 30 feet along the North line of said SW 1/4; thence s. 0°7 1 E. 988.15 feet parallel to the east line of said SW 1/4; thence s. 89°52 1 E. 30 feet; thence No 0°7 1 w. 13.6 feet; thence S. 89°52 1 37" E. 30 feet; thence N. 0°7 1 W. 200 feet; thence N. 89°52'37" W. 30 feet; thence N. 0°07 1 W. 744.55 feet along the east line of said SW 1/4 to the point of beginning. Reasons for the recommended vacation are as follows: 1. The street right-of-way for which the vacation is sought no longer serves a public purpose. 2. The original dedication of South Lipan Street north of West Dartmouth Avenue, was made in order to allow the development of property which had no other access to a public right-of-way. The property lying north of a point 300 feet north of West Dartmouth Avenue has now been purchased by the City of Englewood for the location of the Bi-city waste Water Treatment Plant, and public access within the area is not needed. 3. The property which lies north of West Dartmouth Avenue and south of the City of Englewood land will continue to have access off of the portion of South Lipan Street for which a vacation is not sought. • • • 4. The land included in the vacation is needed for the construction of the new Bi-City Waste Water Treatment Plant. r • • • -3- AYES: Weist~ Brown; Jones; Jorgenson; Lentsch; Martin; Smi th NAYS: None AB SENT: Wade; Tanguma The moti on carried. IV. OFF-STREET PARKING LOT New Englewood, Ltd. CASE #33-74 Mr . Mar t in asked Mr. Supinger to summarize the application. Mr. Martin noted that this would not be a Public Hearing, but those persons in the audience who wished to speak would be allowed to do so. Mr. Supinge r stated that the application involves a proposed off-street parking lot just to the west of Dartmouth Park. New Englewood, Ltd. is the applicant; the proposed lot would accommodate 350 automobiles. The parking lot is proposed as an empl o ye e parking lot. Mr. Supinger noted that the Compre- hensive Zo ning Ordinance requires approval by the Planning Commission f o r any parking lot which has 50+ spaces. Mr. Supinger stated he would remind the Commission that even though there are p ersons interested in the purchase of the property for a park, the application is limited to the consideration of the property as a parking area. Mr. Supinger stated the applicatio n does meet the design standards of the Comprehensive Zoning Ordi nance. The staff does have some recommendations to be included if it is the Commission's determination to approve the parki n g lot, and the staff does recommend approval. Slides of t he immediate and surrounding area were shown the Commission a nd audience. It was noted there are 450 parking spaces in t he existing employee parking lot. Mr. House sta t ed that the s lides were taken on a Tuesday at approximately 11:30 A.M.; there were 25 cars in the employee parking lot at that time. Mr. Bernardoni, of New Englewood, Ltd., stated they are trying to set up em ployee parking areas, and provide a tram service from tie parki ng lot to the shopping center. Mr. Bernardoni stated it was f elt this would elimina te congestion on the Center site, and free more parking spaces for customer parking. Mr. Bernardoni estimated possibly 1,000 employees in the Shopping Center. Mr. Lentsch a sked how this would be policed? Mr. Bernardoni suggested a numbering system might be used; there will be a guard check ing throughout the Center for automobiles belonging o employee s. Discussion of carpooling ensued. Mr. Smith a sked if the Eastman exit was mandatory, or if the proposed l o t could be considered an extension of the existing parking lot . Mr. Bernardoni stated the Eastman exit could be elimi ated, a nd the proposed lot could be part of the existing lot. • -4- Mr. Martin asked about the drainage situation. Mr. Bernardoni noted that erosion has taken place along the Little Dry Creek channel; they propose to erect a railroad tie barricade re- taining wall. They are in the process of getting bids for this now, and the work would be done through Frasier and Gingery, who have been in contact with the Englewood Public Works Department. Mr. Smith asked if use of the employee parking lots would be mandatory for the Center employees? Mr. Bernardoni stated it would be mandatory. Mr. Martin asked if an attempt had been made to require employees to use the employee parking lot that is existing? Mr. Bernardoni pointed out there would be insufficient employee parking spaces. Mr. Martin stated he had driven through the employee parking lot earlier in the day; while there was good usage in the southern end, the northern end of the existing lot had "lots of space". Discussion followed. Mr. Supinger noted that at present the employees are parking for their convenience; it is proposed to have them park for the Center's convenience. Mr. Jones noted that the parking lot has recently been posted for three-hour parking; he asked who enforced this? Mr. Bernardoni stated this is enforced by the Englewood Police Department. Mr. Supinger stated that he felt giving tickets to shoppers is in the same category as parking meters; he felt shoppers should be encouraged rather than discouraged. Mr. Lentsch stated that he agreed with Mr. Supinger; he noted that the City is dependent on the revenues from the shopping center, and that shoppers might not want to come back if they are ticketed. Mr. Lentsch pointed out there are several shopping centers in reasonably close proximity that do not have time restrictions on the parking lots. Mr. Supinger pointed out that there are persons affiliated with other businesses also parking in the Cinderella City parking lot; persons also leave their cars in this parking lot and take the bus to downtown Denver, sometimes leaving the car for the entire day. Mr. Supinger pointed out that the parking at Cinderella City is on publicly owned land, and it must be maintained for "public parking". Mr. Supinger referred to the agreement between the City of Englewood and New Englewood, Ltd., on the parking lot; he noted that the three-hour restriction is as low as the restrictions can go on this particular lot. Mr. Supinger stated it is important to encourage short-term use of the parking area, particularly the "prime" spaces. F\lrt.her discussion on the policing of the main parking lot ensued. Mr. Bernardoni stated they were looki~ into a decal tnat would be applied to the vehicle and could not be removed easily; he stated that for employees parking there as shoppers tll. e fi..rst two or three hours would be permissible. After that time, they would be asked to move their vehicle, or would be given a ticket. • • • . -·---- 'I' • • -5- Mr. Weist asked if the main problem was the fact that employees were taking the prime parking spaces, or the fact there is not enough parking spaces for both employees and customers? Mr. Bernardoni stated that no customers will be permitted ·to park in the proposed parking lot; the employees are, at present, taking the parking spaces convenient to the stores where they are employed. Discussion followed. Mr. Bernardoni noted that on November 29, 1974, there were over 7,500 cars in and out of the Center's parking lot. Mr. Brown asked of Mr. Lee if there is any way Mr. Von Frellick could be forced to reassume responsibility for the parking lot land --could he be forced to take the land back, and the City relinquish their responsibility? Mr. Lee stated there was no way Mr. Von Frellick could be "forced" to take the land for the parking lot back. Mr. Lee stated that there is no provision in the lease between the City and New Englewood, Ltd., for a part of the lot to be set aside for employees. Mr. Brown then asked if the City was responsible for maintenance of the lot. Mr. Lee stated that the Center is responsible for the maintenance. Mr. Brown noted that the Parks & Recreation Department has objected to the use of the subject property for a parking lot • Mr. Jones referred to the perimeter fencing and screening of the property; he asked if the perimeter fencing is for safety from vandalism, etc.? Mr. Supinger stated that the perimeter fencing is proposed by the applicant; the screening is recom- mended by the .staff. He stated that the matter of screening has been discussed with Mr. Bernardoni, but as yet there has been no concurrence. Mr. Weist asked what the appeal route would be in the event the Commission denied the request for the parking lot? Mr. Lee stated the appeal would be to the Courts. Mr.Martin stated he felt there was a certain amount of aesthetic value vs . business value to be considered. He stated that he understood the request for the off-street parking lot is in accordance with the existing zoning; he stated if the Commission were to decide against the request, he felt there should be some very firm reasons for such a decision. Mr . Lee pointed out that the only reason the request is before the Commission is because the parking area is for more than 50 spaces, and the Commission must decide if the traffic design of the proposed parking lot is proper for the safety of the persons using it. Mr. Supinger pointed out that screening is required on the sides where the proposed parking lot abuts residential zoning. This will be along the south end of the property. e . -6- Mr. Bernardoni noted that in the staff report it is recommended • the swale be deeded to the City for a bicycle trail; at this time, New Englewood, Ltd., would like to have this swale remain under their ownership until such time as the bicycle trails are designated, and until they know what will happen to the property to the north. Mrs. Frances Howard 645 East Yale Place -stated she wanted to speak as a member of the Parks and Recreation Commission and as a private citizen. Mrs. Howard stated that the Parks Commission members are in agreement the property in question should be included as part of Dartmouth Park, rather than used as a parking lot. Mrs. Howard stated that when the question of cost for this parcel arose, it was felt by the City Council it was too much money. Mrs. Howard emphasized that members of the Parks & Recreation Commission "still see it as part of Dartmouth Park." The Comprehensive Plan for the City of Englewood reflected the City was deficient in park land; this Plan was adopted in 1969. Mrs. Howard stated as a private citizen, she would hope the Commission could delay a decision on this request until such time as Public Hearings are held or the matter can be referred to City Council. Mrs. Howard stated she felt the need for additional parking areas "could be solved in other ways," and suggested that people be encouraged to use public transportation. Mrs. Howard emphasized • the desire for more greenery and park space, and stated she would like to see the existing employee parking lot filled to capacity prior to approving the request now before the Commission. Mr. Lentsch as~ed if this subject site has been discussed as an extension of Dartmouth Park by the Parks & Recreation Com- missi on? Mrs. Howard stated that it had been for several years. Mr. Lentsch noted that he had "never seen in the budget a request for funds to purchase this land." Mrs. Howard stated that she understood purchase of the property has been investigated, but the price quoted was felt to be too high. Mr. Lentsch discussed the desirability of this site as park land; he noted the proximity of Santa Fe Drive, the railroad tracks and the river to the west. Mr. Lentsch stated that he felt a park should be within the residential area. Mrs. Howard noted that she lived six blocks east of Broadway, and that her children use Dartmouth Park rather than Bates- Logan Park; they walk or ride bicycles. Mrs.Howard stated there is a need for a swimming pool in the north Englewood area, and there is not sufficient space in Dartmouth Park at the present time to accommodate a pool. If this land were to be purchased and used for park land, the swimming pool could be constructed. Mrs. Jean Carlberg stated she represented the League of Women Voters, and referred to a statement given the Commission earlier . Mr. Martin asked that the following letter be in- cluded in the minutes. • '· •• • • "December 3, 1974 TO: Members of Planning and Zoning Commission City of Englewood, Colorado Mr. Art Martin, Chairman FROM: League of Women Voters of Arapahoe County -7- The League of Women Voters of Arapahoe County takes this opportunity to express its support of aesthetic and environ- mental values in Planning and Zoning to meet the needs of the people of Arapahoe County. This includes the use of land for parks systems, recreational facilities, green belts and open space. The League advocates the acquisition of land by appropriate government entities for these purposes. There is presently before the Planning and Zoning Commission a request to permit the paving of open space immediately adjacent to Dartmouth Park in Englewood. This paved area would then become a parking lot making the future use of this land for a park and recreation area in all probability an irretrievable possibility. I We feel the Planning and Zdning Commission will give concerned thought to this measure in view of the need for additional park space in Englewood, and that the Commission can in addition be instrumental in supporting acquisition of this land by the City of Englewood. s/ Virginia Kaechele Virginia Kaechele President" Mr. Lentsch asked Mrs. Carlberg if this matter was discussed at a regular meeting of the League? Mrs. Carlberg stated that the letter represents a concensus of the members and was reached during an open meet~ng. Mr. Martin stated he felt "we are torn between logic and facts o f the situation as opposed to emotion and beauty." He commented t h at the suggestion to delay action was a good point, but questioned the basis for doing so inasmuch as the parking lot is a permitted use, and if it were less than 50 spaces, the Planning Commission would not have been asked for their consideration. Mr . Brown stated he felt this matter should be given further study; he pointed out that the Commission is representing the citizens of Englewood, and is responsible to these people. Mr • Brown stated that he would like to see the matter tabled until the next meeting. • -8- Mr. Jorgenson stated "we are becoming an asphalt and cement jungle", with little open green area. He felt we "should look at land use rather than the almighty dollar." Discussion followed. Mr. Lentsch asked if the applicant could, at this time, develop a 50 space parking lot on the site? Mr. Lee stated that a 50 space parking lot would be permitted without Commission approval. Discussion followed. Mr. Weist stated he felt the main problem is improper use of the existing parking, and that the problem should be approached from a different angle rather than creating more parking. Mr. Weist noted that park land is inadequate, and the Parks Commission has regarded this land as a possible addition to Dartmouth Park. Mr. Weist stated he was opposed to approving the request at this meeting, and that he was opposed to the use of this property as a parking area. Mr. Jones asked where the "existing designated" employee parking is? Mrs. Romans stated that the lot just south of the proposed lot is for employee parking, and an area west of South Elati just south of West Floyd is also designated for employee parking.· Mr. Supinger pointed out that under the terms of the lease be- tween the City and New Englewood, some of these areas cannot be designated as employee parking. Further discussion followed. Mr. Martin suggested that before action is taken, he would like to meet with representatives of New Englewood to get .into the background of the request. Mr. Lentsch stated that if a decision were to be made this evening, he would have to vote in favor of the request; but, he stated he felt there must be more study on the matter. He noted that he did not mind parking lots, if there is some greenery around them. Mr. Lentsch stated that if a decision were made this evening, the parking lot would not be completed in time to help with the Christmas rush. Mr. Bernardoni stated that he felt they could have the lot graded and mostly completed by Christmas. Mr. Martin asked if this requested parking lot would solve the problems with parking at Cinderella City? Mr. Bernardoni stated it would solve a lot of the parking problems they have. Mr. Jones noted that the weather conditions would be a factor on the completion of the parking lot; if it was not completed during December, it probably wouldn't be completed until Spring. Further discussion ensued. Brown moved: Weist seconded: That action on Case #33-74, approval of an off-street parking lot, be delayed for further study by the City Planning and Zoning Commission until January 7, 1975. Particular consideration shall be given drainage, safety, and construction of the lot. •• • • • • • • -9- Mr. Lentsch stated that he would like to have a report from the Recreation Department and from the staff on the proposed land use for this site; he noted that the Recreation Department is involved in the matter. Mr. Smith stated he would like to have an accurate figure on employees, based on a normal month, from the Shopping Center. They should also include a percentage factor for part-time employees during the Christmas season. Mr. Lee stated that he would hope the Commis sion would make it clear the reason for continuing the matter is to study the recommendation of the staff on the use of the property for more than 50 parking spaces. Mr. Lee asked if a decision could be obta ined from Cinderella City Management regarding the screening of the site inasmuch as the City has no assurance on the screening at this time. Mr. Martin asked if the Commission should involve all interes ted parties in the study session? Mr. Lents ch stated they should be involved, but the consideration woul d have to be based on the use of the land. Further discussion followed. The vote was called: AYES: Weist; Brown; Jones; Jorgenson; Lent sch; Martin; Smith NAYS: None ABSENT: Tanguma; Wade The motion carried. V. DIRECTOR'S CHOICE Mr. Supinger stated he wanted to remind the Commission that the next regular meeting of the Commission would be on Wednesday, December 18, 1974. Discussion followed. Brown mov ed: Lentsch seconded: The next regular meeting of the City Planning and Zoning Commission will be January 7, 1975, unless a special meeting needs to be called. AYES: Smith; Weist; Brown; Jones; Jorgenson; Lentsch; Martin NAYS: None AB SENT: Tanguma; Wade The motion carried • VI. COMMISSION'S CHOICE. Mr. Jones stated that he planned to attend the Planning Conference in Boulder December 9, and 10, 1974. -10- Mr. Martin referred to Planning Commission Minutes of September 22, 1970, and December 8, 1970, wherein the Design Review concept was discussed. Mr. Martin stated that he felt the Design Review concept is important, and he would hope there could be another City Council/Planning Commission meeting to discuss the idea in depth. Mr. Supinger noted that when the last Council/Commission meeting was postponed, City Manager Mccown indicated they would let the Commission know when the Council could meet with them. Brief discussion followed. The meeting adjourned at 9:40 p.m. r • • • • • • • • -11- MEMORANDUM TO THE ENGLEWOOD CITY COUNCIL REGARDING ACTION OR RECOMMENDATION OF THE CITY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION. DATE: December 3, 1974 SUBJECT: VACATION OF SOUTH LIPAN STREET NORTH OF WEST DARTMOUTH AVENUE RECOMMENDATION: Jorgenson moved: Brown seconded: " The Planning Commission recommend to City Council that South Lipan Street, as hereina:ter described, be vacated: Beginning at the NE Corner of the SEl/4 of the NE 1/4 of Section 33, T 4 S, R 68 W of the 6th Principal Meridian in the City of Englewood, Colorado, thence N. 89°50 1 W. 30 feet along the North line of said SW 1/4; thence s. 0°7 1 E. 988.15 feet parallel to the east line of said SW 1/4; thence S. 89°52 1 E. 30 feet; thence N. 0°7 1 w. 13.6 feet; thence S. 89° 52 1 37" E. .30 feet; thence N. 0° 7 1 W. 200 feet; thence N. 89°52'37" W. 30 feet; thence N. 0°07 1 W. 744.55 feet along the east line of said SW 1/4 to the point of beginning • Reasons for the recommended vacation are as follows: 1. The street right-of-way for which the vacation is sought no longer serves a public purpose. 2. The original dedication of South Lipan Street north of West Dartmouth Avenue, was made in order to allow the development of property which had no other access to a public right-of-way. The property lying north of a point 300 feet north of West Dartmouth Avenue has now been purchased by the City of Englewood for the location of the Bi-City Waste Water Treatment Plant, and public access within the area is not needed. 3. The pro~rty which lies north of West Dartmouth Avenue and south of the City of Englewood land will continue to have access off of the portion of South Lipan Street for which a vacation is not sought. 4. The land included in the vacation is needed for the con- struction of the new Bi-City Waste Water Treatment Plant. AYES: Weist; Brown; Jones; Jorgenson; Lentsch; Martin; Smith NAYS: None ABSENT: Wade; Tanguma Motion carried. Respectfully submitted By Order of the City Planning and Zoning Commission.