Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1975-08-05 PZC MINUTES• CITY OF ENGLEWOOD PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION August 5, 1975 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 Martin. Members present: Wade; Jones; Jorgenson; Martin; Parker; Tanguma Romans, Acting Ex-officio Members absent: Brown; Pierson; Smith I Also present: Planning Associate House II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES. Mr. Martin stated that Minutes of July 22, were to be considered for approval. Parker moved: Tanguma seconded: The Minutes of July 22, 1975, be approved as written. AYES: Tanguma; Wade ; Jones; Jorgenson; Martin; Parker NAYS: None ABSENT: Brown; Pierson; Smith The motion carried. III. JAMES L. SUPINGER Mr. Martin stated that the Planning Commission has lost a friend with the death of Mr. James L. Supinger; he stated that he felt Mr . Supinger was truly a friend of every member of the Planning Commission as well as a friend to the people of the City of Englewood. Mr. Martin stated he felt Mr. Supinger was a dedicated employee, and had done a good job for the City. Mr. Martin noted that friends and associates of Mr. Supinger have been taking contributions to be given to Children's Hospi tal in Mr. Supinger's memory. Mrs . Romans noted that Mr. Supinger had been very active in his support of Children's Hospital, both in the donation of blood, and in financial support. Members of the Commission who wish to do so, may contribute directly to-Children's Hospital, or give the contribution to a member of the Planning Division staff, who will deliver it to Children's Hospital . -2- IV. CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM CASE #22-75 Mrs. Romans stated that the City Charter gives the responsibility to the Planning Commission to prepare a list of Capital Improve- ment projects, ranked in priority, for submission to the City Manager. The City Manager may or may not follow the Commission recommendation in making his recommendations to the City Council; but he must have the input from the Commission. The project requests originate in each operating department, and are co- ordinated by the Planning Division for presentation to the Com- mission. Mrs. Romans expressed appreciation to Staff Members Steve House, Barbara Young, Mark Barber, Esther Myers, and Gertrude Welty, for their efforts in the compilation, typing and printing of the document. Mr. Martin asked what time schedule the Commission has in reaching a decision on the Capital Improvement Program? Mrs. Romans stated that the Commission's recommendation should be available to the City Manager not later than the first week of September. Mrs. Romans stated that she hoped the Commission could concentrate on the Capital Improvements Program at a special meeting on August 12 and at the regular meeting of August 10th, so that any necessary corrections can be made and the report published in final form with the Commission's recommendations for submission to the City Manager around September 1st. Mr. Martin stated that he hoped the Commission members would seriously study the Capital Improvement requests and assist the City Manager and City Council in guid i ng the future of the City. Mrs. Romans noted that some projects are coordinated with several departments, such as a request in the Bates/Logan Park, wherein the Parks & Recreation Department has requested funds for purchase of additional land, and the Pu 0 lic Works and the Utilities Departments have also requested funds for development of storm drainage systems and an underground water storage facility. · Mr. Mart i n suggested that possibly the department heads of these three departments would meet with the Commission on the same eve ning, and the rest of the department heads could meet with t he Commission on a subsequent evening. Mr. Jones asked that ·each member of the Commission be given a copy of the six-quarter .budget; he noted that allocations may have already been made for some of these projects. Discussion ensued on the Capital Improvement Program. • • -3- The Commission determined to meet in special meeting on August 12, 1975, at 7:00 p.m. to review the Capital Improve- ment Program. V. DIRECTOR'S CHOICE Mr. Jones asked Mrs. Romans to discuss the matter of revising the zoning map in accordance with the recent changes made in the Zone District classifications. Mrs. Romans stated that the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance states it is the intention of the City that every parcel of land within the City shall be placed in a zone classification. If, by reason of annexation or whatever, land is not zoned, then the City must zone that land within i2o days. During the 120 day period, building permits shall not issue. After the 120 day period has expired, permits may be issued for any use in any zone district in the City.* Mrs. Romans stated there are amendments to the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance under way, which will repeal the R-2-A and R-2-B Zone Districts, and establish one R-2 District; also to be repealed are the R-3-A Zone District and the R-3-B Zone District, with one R-3 Zone District to be established. These amendments are to the Compre- hensive Zoning Ordinance itself, and do no't apply to the map, which must also be amended. All the areas now zoned R-2-A, R-2-B, R-3-A, and R-3-B will become unzoned once the amendments under consideration become final; zoning procedures will have to be started to amend the map and bring these parcels of land under the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance . Public Hearings will have to be held before both the Planning Commission and the City Counc~l after public notice in the official City Newspaper, and posting of the properties. Mrs. Romans noted that the matter of posting the p·r~perties to give adequate notice is of concern, and wil.l be quite expensive if each block must be posted. She noted · that in 1963, when the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance was adopted., there were signs posted at main entrances to the City, and at strategic points · throughout the City, such as at City Hall, giving notice of the hearings before the Commission and before .the City Council. Mrs. Romans stated that the matter ·of posting is still being considered by the City Attorney's Office and the posting will be carried out according to the City Attorney's direction. Mr. Jones stated that Council passed the amendments to the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance on final reading on August 4th. Mr. Parker asked if he had understood correctly that a permit could be issued for any use permitted in any zone district if the property is unzoned? Mrs. Romans stated that this is correct, provided the City has not placed the property in an appropriate zone district within 120 days from the date the property becomes unzoned. Discussion followed. Mr. Parker * §22.1-5 of the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance. stated he felt this could be the "most chaotic thing to happen in Englewood." Mrs. Romans stated she had been aware of the matter for some time, and has been hoping the City Attorney would come up with a more feasible solution to the posting procedure. Mrs. Romans suggested that an effort should be made to explain about the adoption of the new ordinances and the effect they will have on the properties now zoned R-2-A, R-2-B, R-3-A and R-3-B prior to the Public Hearings before the Commission and City Council. It was suggested that informal meetings be held to give property owners an opportunity to become familiar with the new regulations and the procedure. Mr. Parker stated that the City will have to be very careful that this issue is not confused with the Broadway zoning expansion p r oposed by the Chamber of Commerce. Further discussion followed . Mrs. Romans stated she anticipated getting into the informal meetings and, if possible, the public hearings in September. Mrs. Romans stated that copies of the Comprehensive Plan, which was adopted in 1969, have been provided for members of the Com- mission. Mrs. Romans suggested that perhaps the Comprehensive Plan might be of aid in considering the Capital Improvement Program. Mrs. Romans stated that some concern was expressed at the Council meeting over the permitted density of 14 units in one structure in the R-2 District. Mrs. Romans stated she felt this is a legitimate point of concern, and that possibly the Commission might want to consider an amendment at some time in the future. She pointed out that a str ucture that will accommodate 14 dwelling units would not necessarily be compatible with a single-family or two-family area. Discussion followed. Mrs. Romans suggested that possibly a limitation should be considered that no more than six units wou l d be permitted under one roof, which provision would l essen the effect of the bulk of the structure upon the adjacent single- family uni ts. Mrs. Romans stated that City Council determined a t their meeting of August 4th not to appeal the Court Decision regarding the annexation of land in the Santa Fe /Union area . Mr. Martin asked if the Court Decision was based on a technicality? Dis- cussion followed. Mrs. Romans noted that ce r tain services will have t o be provided to the area and that a higher level of gove rnment will step in to provide the servi c es if the property owne r s will not take steps to do so themselve s . Further dis- cussion followed. Mr. Martin stated that the fact the decision against the City was based on a technicality doesn't warrant "giving up", and he noted that the City had gone t o a great deal of expense in the f ive years this mat t er has been pursued. Mr. Jones noted that the property owners of t he annexation area • "will never get as .much from the County as they would from the A City". Further discussion followed . W • • -5- Mrso Romans then discussed Councilman Clayton's motion of August 4th asking the City Attorney to draft an ordinance eliminating the Department of Community Development. Mrs. Romans reviewed the development of the Department from its inception as a Planning Department, then as the Planning & Traffic Department, to its present status in the Department of Community Development. Mrs. Romans stated that the Planning Division is charged with the preparation of the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance, and the Commission is involved in zoning matters. Enforcement of the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance is the responsibility of the Building (Code Enforcement) Division, which was, until 1972, under another department. There was no coordination between the Planning Division and the Building Division until the two divisions were placed under one Depart- ment Head in the Department of Community Development. The total department also includes the Housing and Redevelopment Division, which is very closely related to the Planning and Building functions. Mrs. Romans discussed some of the frustra- tions which did occur with no coordination between the Building and Planning functions, and noted that matters of enforcement of the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance have improved in the last three years since the two functions have been in one Department. Mrs. Romans stated that she personally f~els the Department of Community Development has worked out quite well for the public benefit, and she is very concerned that the function of the Department is not understood. Mrs. Romans stated that many persons have made comments that it is much easier to work with the Department of Community Development in Englewood to get building permits issued, approved as to zoning, etc., than it is in other cities. Mrs o Romans stated that she hoped a great deal of careful consideration would be given to the proposal to eliminate the Departm~n~ of Community Development. Discussion followed. Mr. Jones stated he did not know the reasoning behin~ Mr. Clayton's request. Mr. Martin stated he did not know what the legal ramifications of the proposal would be. He stated he would be favorably disposed to discuss a recommendation to City Council that the Planning staff retain its integrity and the Department of Community Development not be broken up. Mr. Martin stated he woultj hate to see the com- munity lose the inherant ,good that has been realized under the Department of Community Development .• Mr o Parker asked if one councilman c6uld ask the City Attorney to draf t a resolution or ordinance? Mr. Jones stated that the City Charter reads that one councilman may do so. Mr. Parker tha t he had been a member of the Charter revision committee, and it was the intent of those serving on the committee to amend the Charter .that this procedure be stopped. It was their intent that one person would not be . able to request the drafting of a resolution or ordinance by the City ·Attorney. Mr. Jones reiterated the Charter does allow this procedure at the present, and the Charter would have to be amended to change the provision • Mr. Jones stated he felt that part of Mr. Clayton's reasoning might be based on financial reasons, inasmuch as he had asked -6-. City Manager Mccown if the position of Community Development Director would come under the hiring moratorium. Mr. Mccown had ~pparently indicated it would not. Mr. Martin stated he would hate to see the Department of Com- munity Dev€lopment eliminated, and he would hope this is not what is intended. Mr. ·Martin stated that he thinks a progressive City needs a Department of Community Development, and that he hopes Mr. Clayton will be able to explain his reasoning for making the request of treCity Attorney. Mr. Jones stated that he felt some of Mr. Clayton's reasoning is political, and there is serious concern regarding the moratorium on hiring of new employees. Discussion followed. V. COMMISSION'S CHOICE Mr. Parker stated he would hope that the City of Englewood could get a facility such as is at Washington Park, with the swimming pool, weight lifting equipment, etc. He stated he felt there might be more demand for such a faci lity than there is for a golf course. The meeting adjourned at 8:40 p.m. t€i'trude G. WetY Recording Secretary • •