Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1975-01-07 PZC MINUTESI I I I. CALL TO ORDER. CITY OF ENGLEWOOD PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION JANUARY 7, 1975 Page 1721 The Regular Meeting of the City Planning and Zoning Commission was called to order at 8:00 P. M. by Chairman Martin. Members present: Jones; Jorgenson; Lentsch; Martin; Smith; Tanguma; Wade Supinger, Ex-officio Members absent: Brown; Weist Also present: Assistant City Attorney Lee; Parks & Recreation Director Romans; City Engineer Sagrillo II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES. Chairman Martin stated that Minutes of December 3, 1974, were to be considered for approval. Lentsch moved: Tanguma seconded: The Minutes of December 3, 1974, be approved as written. AYES: Brown; Jones; Jorgenson; Lentsch; Martin; Smith; Tanguma; Wade NAYS: None ABSENT: . Weist The motion carried. III. NEW ENGLEWOOD, LTD. Off-Street Parking Lot CASE #33-74A December 3, 1974 Mr. Martin stated that this matter had been discussed at the December meeting, and action had been deferred until needed facts and figures could be obtained, and until the members of the Commission had an additional opportunity to view the area .. Mr. Weist entered and took his place with the Commission. Lentsch moved: Brown seconded: The matter of the off-street parking lot for New Englewood, Ltd., be raised from the Table. AYES: NAYS: Wade; Weist; Brown; Jones; Jorgenson; Martin; Smith; Tanguma None The motion carried. Mr. Supinger referred to copies of a letter from Mr. James Moorman of New En g lewood, Ltd., dated December 27, 1974, which letter states there are approximately 2,200 regular employees of the Center, and approximately 900 additional employees during the Christmas season. Mr. Supinger then referred to a memorandum from Parks Director Romans, dated December 30, 1974, which memo set forth the history of attempts by the Parks & Recreation Department and Com- mission to obtain the subject property as a part of and addition to Dartmouth Park. Mr. Supinger noted that Mr, Romans of the Parks & Recreation Department, and Mr. Sagrillo, City Engineer, were in attendance. Mr •. Supinger also noted that Messrs. Marriott and Zambelli were present representing New Englewood, Ltd., and to answer any questions the Commission might have. Mr. Martin stated that he had received the following letter from Mr. Von Frellick: "December 31, 1974 Mr. Arthur L. Martin, Jr. Chairman Englewood Planning Commission City of Englewood 3400 South Elati Street Englewood, Colorado 80110 Dear Mr. Martin: Re: Approval of Cinderella City Parking Lot Expansion Thank you for your consideration of our requested approval by the Englewood Planning Com- mission of our plans for expansion of Cinderella City parking areas. We have now confirmed that in the last few days of the congressional session, implementation of the environmental protective agency regulations was delayed for six months. You were correct that no special meeting of the Planning Commission was necessary before the end of 1974. The congested parking and traffic during the past Christmas season demonstrates the urgency for providing additional employee parking, if the City of Englewood is to continue to receive maximum sales tax benefits. For a number of years, we have been paying taxes and interest carrying charges exceeding $60,000 annually on this property to have it available for employee parking at this time when it is needed. The appraised value on this property exceeds $5.00 per square foot. Page 1722 Since there is so much land available to Englewood at much less expense for park purposes, we will appreciate the Planning Commission appr.oving the plans for this land adjacent to Cinderella City for parking purposes. If there is any further information required of us, or any way we can be of ~urther assistance, please advise. GVF:gk cc: T. Merriott D. Zambelli J. Moorman" Sincerely yours, s / Gerry Von Frellick Gerri Von Frellick Mr. Martin stated that following a conversation he had with a representative of the EPA, he had discussions with Mr. Von Frellick, and indicated that the EPA regulattons would not apply to a parking facility of the size and type proposed, and there was no urgency for a special meeting prior to this meeting this evening. Mr. Merriott, President of New Englewood, stated they have furnished the information requested by Mr. Supinger relative to the volume of employees: 2,200 constant, and 900 additional temporary employees during the Christmas season. Mr. Merriott stated that he did not know of any additional information they were asked to furnish. Mr. Lentsch asked about policing of the lots and enforcement of the parking plan? Mr. Merriott stated that the right of enforcement is within the provisions of the lease agree- ments between New Englewood and the tenants, and the individual stores will .cause compliance with the parking plan. Mr. Lentsch asked about the screening provisions? Mr. Merriott stated that he understood Mr. Supinger had recommended the planting of trees along the property .lines that must be screened, and he felt New Englewood would be "most amenable" to this. Mr. Tanguma referred to the existing fenced parking lot; he stated he has been to the site . four or five times, in the past month, and this parking lot has not been filled at any time. He asked why New Englewood, Ltd., wanted the additional parking lot when the existing lot is not filled? Mr. Zambelli, General Manager of the Shopping Center, stated that the existing fenced parking area is not filled because the employee parking plan is not enforced at this time. Mr. Zambelli stated that the additional lot is necessary to provide sufficient parking area for employees when the parking plan is in force. Mr. Zambelli stated that 2 /3 to 3 /4 of all employees in the Center work in the larger department stores, and the existing lot and proposed lot will be designated for the use of these employees. Mr. Zambelli stated that the administration of the department stores are willing to make every effort to en- force the parking plan. Mr. Tanguma asked if there were plans for shoring up the creek bank? Mr. Merriott stated that . \!adequate measures will be taken to control erosion." Mr .. Martin asked how many parking spaces are in the existing fenced lot? Mr. Merriott stated there were 450 parking spaces. Mr. Martin asked if New Englewood, Ltd., is the owner of the land on which the proposed parking lot will be located? Mr. Merriott stated that Von Frellick Associates is the general owner of the property; New Englewood, Ltd., has a lease agreement with Von Frellick Associates on the property. The property for the .existing parking lot is owned by the 1075 Company, and New Englewood, Ltd. has a long-term lease on the land. Mr. Merriott stated that the 1075 Company is not affiliated with Von Frellick Associates; he stated he thought the 1075 Company is a Corporation, but he is not sure of the names of the principals. Mr. Martin asked who was responsible for maintenance on the existing parking area? Mr. Merriott stated that New Englewood, Ltd. is responsible for the maintenance, as they will be on the proposed parking lot. Mr. Jones asked if it is still the plan to not have access onto Eastman Avenue? Mr. Supinger pointed out that it is a staff suggestion there be no access to and from Eastman Avenue. Mr. Merriott stated that New Englewood, Ltd. has concurred with this suggestion, and will install crash gates for emergency use; there will be no general open access to and from Eastman A venue. Mr. Supinger stated it was the staff opinion the Planning Commission should approve the parking lot with whatever conditions they feel should be applied. It would be the depart- ment's duty to see the conditions are enforced. Mr. Smith noted that he had understood there was to be a guard at the entrance of the parking area? Mr. Merriott stated that was correct. Mr. Smith stated he was concerned about employees who might have to walk to and from their places of employment. Mr. Merriott stated the shuttle bus proposed to bring employees to and from the parking lot will run approxi- mately 1 hour prior to and 1 hour after the normal store hours of the major department stores. Mr. Tanguma asked who owned the homes on the west side of South Huron Street? Mr. Supinger stated there were multiple ownerships in that area. Mr. Tanguma asked what the long-range plans were for this area; he noted the land proposed for parking lot will be too expensive to use for parking in a few years. Discussion followed. Mr. Brown asked Mr. Merriott if New Englewood personnel felt that by adding the proposed parking lot there would be sufficient parking spaces to enforce the employee parking plan? Mr. Merriott stated that the proposed lot and the existing fenced lot will not provide sufficient parking for all · the employees of the Center; but they will provide sufficient spaces for employees for the larger department stores. Mr. Merriott pointed out that the I I I I I I Page 1723 larger department stores are "pivotal" in enforcement of the parking plan. The balance of the employee parking areas will be designated in the more remote parts of the shopping center site itself. Mr. Brown then asked about persons who park their cars in the shopping center and take the bus downtown, leaving the cars all day. He noted that he had seen a brochure designating Cinderella City as a parking area for persons who don't wish to drive downtown but prefer to use the bus. Mr. Zambelli stated there are some persons who do leave their cars in the parking lot all day, but he estimates this is under 30 cars per day, and it is not a problem. Further discussion followed. Mr. Zambelli noted that the employee parking plan covers all 2,200 full-time employees, plus the additional temporary employees during the holiday season. Mr. Zambelli stated that because of the distribution of employees throughout the center, it is advantageous to have the employees of the larger department stores park in the existing and proposed lot and provide a tram service for them. The remainder of the employees will be assigned to designated employee parking spaces throughout the Center. He pointed out that a program has also been devised whereby every employee automobile will be "stickered", and it can easily be deter- mined whether or not all employees are using the designated employee parking areas. Mr. Zambelli pointed out that it will require several months to get the program properly functioning. The security of employee vehicles was then discussed. Mr. Merriott stated that there would be a guard circulating through the employee lots. Mrs. Wade asked about security for employee - automobiles parked throughout the center itself. Mr . Merriott stated he felt it would be easier to control security of employee vehicles if they we~e to be concentrated in designated areas rather than throughout the Center. Mr. Jones asked if there were some spaces within the three-hour restricted parking that are designated for employee parking? Mr. Jones stated he understood there were areas in the Center site itself which were designated for employee parking, yet there is a three-hour restriction on the spaces, and asked if there would be a conflict with the lease? Mr. Lee stated it would depend on the provisions within the lease. Discussion followed. Mr. Supinger stated he had not seen parking plans for the entire shopping center regarding which areas were designated for public and employee parking. Mr. Supinger noted that the three-hour restrictions on parking areas do apply to everyone who parks in those spaces; likewise, the public parking areas cannot be restricted for employees, but must be open to everyone. Maps of the shopping center and the areas designated for public parking and areas designated as three-hour restricted parking were displayed. Mr. Merriott noted that employee parking and public parking areas are on the "outlying areas" of the upper level of the shopping center, and on the lower level. Further discussion ensued. Mr. Packy Romans, Director of Parks & Recreation, stated he felt the Commission has been given all the information on the attempts to purchase this site for additional park land. Mr. Romans stated that the Parks & Recreation Department and Commission feel this area is very important to the future development of Dartmouth Park. Mr. Romans made the following points: 1. This piece of land was originally considered in the land for park development to replace the former park site, which is now the site of the Cinderella City Shopping Center. However, City Council did not feel they could purchase the land at that time. Mr. Romans stated that he spoke to many groups at the time of the sale of the former City Park and assured citizens that the Dartmouth Park site would be 11 acres, and would in- clude .this site under consideration for a parking lot. 2. The site is ideally located for an extension of the existing park; it could be developed with tennis courts, a swimming pool, and handball courts. 3. There is a very real need for the additional park Land; Dartmouth Park is used extensively and needs to be enlarged. Mr. Romans stated that if this four acres under consideration is "lost" as a parking lot, it would never be replaced as possible park land. Mr. Romans stated he felt another recommendation would be forthcoming from the Parks Commission re- garding this site. Mr. Jones noted that the Rouse property is not part of the proposed parking lot. He asked if an attempt should be made at this time to obtain the Rouse property for an addition to Dartmouth Park? Mr. Romans atated that this particular piece of property would be large enough by itself to consider as an addition to Dartmouth Park; it would accommodate a small pool and picnic areas. Mr. Jones then inquired on the matter Qf drainage of the proposed parking area? Mr. Sagrillo, City Engineer, stated that at this time the Public Works Department feels the drainage plan that the applicant bas presented is sufficient. Mr. Martin asked if staff thought Mr. Von Frellick might be willing to come to terms with the City of Englewood on the possible sale of the property? Mr. Romans stated that Mr. Von Frellick had called him earlier in the ~ay and had indicated that he would be willing to sell the property, but that "we will have to pay the price for it." Mr. Romans stated that he felt the parking areas should be closer to the shopping center itself, and suggested that possibly the houses along Huron could be removed for a parking area. Mr. Martin stated it appears that it is Council that is unwilling to go forward on the pur- chase of the land. As far as the Planning Commission is concerned, the proposed parking plan is in conformance with the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance, and they have no alternative but to approve the request. The purchase of the property is up to Council determination. Mr. Romans stated that he thought the responsibility of the Commission laid with the physical development of the City, and that it might be within the prerogative of this Commission to recommend that the subject land be purchased for park purposes. Mr. Lentsch pointed out that more than a month has elapsed since the December 3, 1974, meeting at which this matter was initially considered; the Parks & Recreation Department and Commission knew at that time of the proposal and of the concern of the Planning Com- mission, yet no representative of the Parks & Recreation Commission or Department bas, apparently , appeared before Council to this time. He felt some effort should have been Page 1724 expended on the part of the Parks & Recreation Department before this date. Mr. Lentsch noted that there is a legitimate request before the Planning Commission, and that he could not vote against approval of the parking plan based on the information given by Mr. Romans this evening. Mr. Romans stated he felt the application could be approved; the approval doesn't necessarily mean the end of attempts to procure the land for park purposes. Mr. Romans stated that previous City Councils have failed to appropriate funds for purchase, and he does not know how the present City Council will react to a request for land acquisition. Mr. Martin asked why the City Council had declined to go ahead with the appraisal of the property in March, 1974? Mr. Brown stated that, as he recalled, there were so many pro- jects under-way at that time --golf course, storm drainage, etc. --that it just was not worked into a priority list. Mr. Lentsch asked if it would be possible to add another $1,000,000 in next year's budget for the purchase of this land? Mr. Jones stated he did not think it would be possible to add the $1,000,000; but it might be possible to work out an option-purchase agreement that would extend into 1976. Mr. Jones stated that the Council had, on January 6, 1975, in- structed the City Attorney to proceed with land acquisition for the golf course. Mr. Jones asked if he was correct in recalling that if the traffic circulation of the proposed parking lot is proper for safety, and the drainage plan is adequate, the Commission could be expected to approve the plan? Mr. Lee pointed out that the only reason the request is before the Commission is that the lot is proposed for more than 50 parking spaces; it is· a permitted use in this zone district. Brown moved: Lentsch seconded: The Planning Commission approve the 350 space off-street parking plan as proposed by New Englewood, Ltd., for the following reasons: 1. Vehicular access to the proposed lot shall be from the south through the existing parking lot or from the north off of West Dartmouth Avenue. A crash gate shall be installed on the east side of the lot for emergency service entrance and a pedestrian entrance may be permitted on the east side. Because both West Eastman Avenue and South Huron Street dead-end at their intersection, those streets carry primarily local traffic, servicing the adjacent residential neighborhood and providing secondary access to Dartmouth Park. The traffic generated by a parking lot of this size would have a detrimental effect upon the residential area, causing increased noise and fumes and creating a hazard to the families in the area. 2. In an effort to provide screening of the parking lot from Dartmouth Park and the residences to the southeast and south, landscaping shall be provided. The landscaping shall extend the entire length of the eastern boundary of the parking lot, and along the south boundary of the parking lot where it adjoins residenti~l property. The land- scaping shall be planted and henceforth maintained in a he~lthy, growing condition. The spacing of trees and shrubs shall not be more than fifteen feet apart measured from the trunks. Trees shall be not less than four feet in height at the time of planting. 3. The drainage for the site and the surfacing of the lot shall be ap- proved by the Department of Public Works and the applicant shall comply with all applicable City ordinances in the development of the parking lot. AYES: NAYS: Tanguma; Wade; Weist; Brown; Jones; Jorgenson; Lentsch;Martin; Smith None The motion carried. Tanguma moved: The Planning Commission recommend to City Council that every effort be made to obtain the subject site for park land. It is also recommended that all parking spaces on the Cinderella City site be designated as three-hour parking. There was no second to the motion; motion declared dead. Wade moved: The Planning Commission recommend to City Council that the City do all possible to come to an agreement with Von Frellick Associates to obtain this parking lot for park faciLities. There was no second to the motion; motion declared dead. IV. OFF-STREET PARKING Industrial Area CASE #1-75 Mr. Supinger stated that City Council has requested the Planning Commission review the off- street parking standards as they pertain to industrial areas in light of the City Council decision to approve a Chamber of Commerce recommendation regarding street widths. Council also approved a "dropped curb section" so that individual curb cuts would not be necessary. Mr. Supinger referred to proposed off-street parking standards which were initially prepared in 1972, and suggested that possibly the Commission might want to look at the total off- street parking situation at this time. Discussion ensued. Mr. Supinger pointed out that any change in the off-street parking standards would be an amendment to the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance, and would have to go through a Public Hearing before the Planning Commission, and before City Council. I I I I I I Page 1725 It was suggested that perhaps a study session could be held on January 14th at 7:30 p.m. Discussion followed. It was then suggested that, inasmuch as there may be reappointments or new appointments to the Planning Commission, it might be best to delay study sessions and discussions on this matter until February 4th, or later. Discussion of the off-street parking standards was tentatively set for February 4th, depending on the agenda for the meeting. V. DEMOLITION /MOVEMENT OF STRUCTURES Proposed Ordinance CASE #2-75 Mr. Supinger stated that he had been working on some new regulations which would modify existing regulations regarding demolition and movement of structures in Englewood. Dis- cussion followed. Mr. Lentsch stated that he did not feel the proposed license fee was enough, and also questioned the proposed insurance for property damage as being insufficient. Mr. Supinger pointed out that the license fee covers only the license --services rendered such as police escort, etc., are not covered by the license fee. Mr. Supinger also pointed out that this is only a "proposed" ordinance, and that modifications can be made. Further discussion followed. Mr. Brown stated that he had read the proposed Ordinance, and would lik~ to see the staff give the Commission information on ordinances other municipalities may have pertaining to this subject. Mr. Brown said he hated to have an ordinance that might discourage the moving and demolition business in Englewood. It was his impression that by the time compliance with the Ordinance was assured, it would be impossible to take the job. Mr. Smith stated he had pretty much the same reaction in reading the proposed ordinance. He suggested checking with Denver on the regulations they might have governing moving and demolition. Mr. Supinger noted that the first draft of the proposed Ordinance was patterned after Denver's Ordinance. Discussion followed. Mr. Supinger noted that another letter could be sent to house movers in the metro area asking those that are concerned to meet with the Planning Commission for discussion of the proposed ordinance. Mr. Martin suggested the staff try to get as much information as possible, and approved the sending of a letter to the house movers. Mr. Martin stated he felt that a study session could be held after the Commission has the information they need. Mr. Jones stated he felt there should be something done to ensure completion of a job and not have houses left up on blocks for months at a time; Mr. Jones noted the problems of safety and vandalism on such houses. Mr. Lentsch stated that at least one of the projects Mr. Jones referred to is in court; the mover could not fulfill his obligation on the project. Further brief discussion ensued. Mr. Martin again referred to the suggested letter to be sent to house moyers, and suggested that questions pertaining to insurance rates, etc., be asked in an effort to obtain some additional information prior to setting a study session date. VI. LOW-INCOME ELDERLY HOUSING B-1 Zone District CASE #4-75 Mr. Supinger noted that a referral from City Council to the Planning Commission regarding creating a zone district for low-income elderly housing projects had been received. Mr. Supinger stated that he feels the action taken by the Planning Commission was on a specific project and there is no need to amend the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance to create a specific zone district. Mr. Supinger stated that the City will have so few of these developments he did not feel it would be worthwhile use of Commission time or City Council time to draft and approve amendments to the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance. Mr. Martin asked if the Council was thinking in terms of a geographical area to be designated for low-income housing? Mr. Supinger stated it was his impression Council was discussing amending a zone district to allow low-income elderly housing as a permitted use. Discussion followed. Mr. Martin pointed out that by following the present procedure, each case would be considered on its own merits. Discussion followed. Mr. Jones stated as he remembered the reason for the referral was that the low-income elderly housing project was in a B-1 Zone, and was approved as a similar use. Mr. Supinger stated he understood it was concern whether the Commission had the authority to do what they did. He stated that the matter was checked with the City Attorney and Assistant City Attorney, and they felt it was within the rights of the Planning Commission to give such approval. Mr. Jones stated he felt it was a matter of reaffirming the Commission's previous action; that the Council could be notified that the matter was cleared with the Legal Department, and the action is within the rights of the Commission, and the Commission is still recom- mending the low-income elderly housing project be considered a permitted use in the B-1 Zone District at that location. Mr. Martin suggested that the staff prepare a letter to City Council encompassing Mr. Jones' comments, and emphasizing that the Commission feels, based on legal counsel, that the way the request was handled is appropriate and feels there is no need for an additional zone classi- fication. VII. DIRECTOR'S CHOICE. Mr. Supinger stated the staff is in receipt of a memorandum from City Manager Mccown in- dicating it is Council preference that a study session with the Commission scheduled for January 14th, 7:30 P.M., be postponed. Mr. Supinger directed attention to a letter written to Mr. Keston of Larwin; Larwin .has agreed to give to the City $12,000 for the undergrounding of utility lines at the E. P. Romans Park. Page 1726 Mr. Supinger stated that the Multi-family Development Standards Review Committee is pro- gressing, and will soon make a recommendation to the Commission. VIII. COMMISSION'S CHOICE. Weist moved: Smith seconded: The Planning Commission recommend to City Council they consider purchase of land west of existing Dartmouth Park for park area. This land is shown in the Comprehensive Plan as park area. The Parks & Recreation Department and Commission has shown need for expanded recreational facilities in this area. Mr. Weist stated he realized the budgetary implications that have been pointed out; however, the Commission must look at the overall picture and development of the City of Englewood, and he feels it is reasonable that the Commission go on record as supporting the Comprehen- sive Plan, which does show park development in the area west of existing Dartmouth Park. Mr. Lentsch questioned the dating of this action; he noted he felt the Planning Commission action should come after and support any recommendation on this matter from the Parks & Recreation Commission. Mr. Jones agreed that the recommendation from the Planning Com- mission should be coincidental with the recommendation from the Parks & Recreation Commission. The vote was called: AYES: NAYS: Lentsch; Martin; Smith; Tanguma; Wade; Weist; Brown; Jones; Jorgenson None The motion carried. Mr. Martin asked about progress on the Mobile Home Park Ordinance? He was informed that Assistant Director Romans has been working on this project. Mr. Supinger noted that the Master Street Plan should also be considered by the Commission again now that the information is in. It was noted that Councilman Mann had joined the audience. Mr. Jorgenson stated that some evening be and Councilman Jones would like to report on the Planning Conference that was held in Boulder, Colorado, December 8, 9, and 10. He stated there were a lot of good ideas advanced at this meeting. Mr. Jones stated he felt some of the most important sessions dealt with supplemental appropriations to H.B. 1041. He stated that new communities were considered, as well as coal development, etc. Mr. Jorgenson stated that oil shale development was also discussed; it will be about five years before anything is done in this field. He stated it seemed to be a concensus of the group that strip mining was not favorably regarded. The meeting adjourned at 10:00 P. M. Gertrude G. Welty Recording Secretary MEMORANDUM TO THE ENGLEWOOD CITY COUNCIL REGARDING ACTION OR RECOMMENDATION OF THE CITY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION. DATE: SUBJECT: RECOMMENDATION: Weist moved: Smith seconded: January 7, 1975 Purchase of Land Adjoining Dartmouth Park on the West. The Planning Commission recommend to City Council they consider purchase of land west of existing Dartmouth Park for park area. This land is shown in the Comprehensive Plan as park area. The Parks & Recreation Department and Commission has · shown need for expanded recreational facilities in this area. AYES: NAYS: Lentsch; Martin; Smith; Tanguma; Wade; Weist; Brown; Jones; Jorgenson None The motion carried. Respectfully submitted, By Order of the City Planning and Zoning Commission. Gertrude G. Welty Recording Secretary * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * I I I