Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1976-06-22 PZC MINUTES• CITY OF ENGLEWOOD PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION June 22, 1976 I. CALL TO ORDER. The regular meeting of the City Planning and Zoning Commission was called to order by Chairman Tanguma at 7:05 p.m. Members present: Parker, Pierson, D. Smith, E. Smith, Tanguma, Wade, Williams, Jorgenson D. Romans, Ex-officio Members absent: Jones Also present: Associate Planner House Assistant City Attorney DeWitt II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES. Chairman Tanguma stated that Minutes of June 8, 1976, were to be considered for approval. Parker moved: E. Smith seconded: The Minutes of June 8, 1976, be approved as written. AYES: Jorgenson, Parker, Pierson, D. Smith, E. Smith, Tanguma, Williams NAYS: None ABSTAIN: Wade ABSENT: Jones The motion carried. III. LITTLEHORN/JACKSON BROS. R-1-C, Single-family Residence , to I-1, Light Industrial. Don Smi th moved: CASE #17-76 Jorgenson seconded: The Public Hearing on Case #17-76 be opened. AYES: Jorgenson, Parker, Pierson, D. Smith, E. Smith, Tanguma, Wade, Williams NAYS: None ABSENT: Jones The motion carried. Mr. Tanguma set forth the procedure followed in Public Hearings, noting that persons giving testimony will have to be sworn in. Mr. Tanguma asked for the staff report. , -2-, Associate Planner House was sworn in by the Secretary, and stated that the request filed by Messrs. Littlehorn and Jackson • is for a change of zoning from R-1-C, Single-family Residence, to I-1, Light Industrial. The request encompasses an area of 1.59 acres south of West Quincy Avenue, and west of South Lipan Street. The property has been posted giving notice of the Hearing, and notice of the Public Hearing was published in the Englewood Herald Sentinel on June 2, 1976. The subject area is surrounded on three sides by single-family zoning, and ad- joins I-1 zoning on the west. The property is un-subdivided, and flat in topography. Mr. House stated that the request en- compasses three parcels of land; Parcel #1, owned by Mr. Little- horn, has 67 foot frontage on West Quincy Avenue, and extends south for 300 feet; Parcel #2 has frontage on West Quincy Avenue, and is owned by William and James Jackson. This parcel has a house and garage on it. The third parcel is owned by Mrs. Rosa Lee Banks and the Seventh Day Adventist Church, and has a 15 ft. roadway fronting on West Quincy Avenue leading south to her home and other buildings. Mr. House stated that the applicants have stated in their reason for rezoning that the property "cannot be used under present zoning and adjoins the I-1 Zone District, and can be better used under that classification." Mr . House stated that the staff recommends denial of the rezoning request for the following reasons: 1. It has not been demonstrated that there has been a sufficient ~ change in the character of the area to warrent the rezoning. 2. The area has been single-fami l y for some period of time, and the most recent development in the area has been on the land a djoining t o the e as t , o n wh i ch Mr. Li tt lehor n ha s constructed two single-family houses, demonstrating that the land can be developed under the present zoning. 3. If the rezoning request is granted, it would create an encroachment of the I-1 zoning into the R-1-C area, and would be taking some of the small amount of developable land in the City that is available for single-family de- velopment. Mr. House stated that two letters of protest to the rezoning have been received, and are as follows: .. ~ -... -3-,. -. :• JEPARTl\1ENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT F.:NGLEWOOD, COLORADO JUN 1 9 1976 3 'f o o s ['Y-cZ';fU --~---------- ~_;Z---C .. --v 0 ~/1-'(f i - qi:;f-/lO ;u/l( Jl.~1 ~'td. ' rrf{cz ~ C;\, /? 9 fc :'\,J /?0<-V»:,;{! J,7f c~t ~-·1.A-j/?-:tzh1 -!Yic/j ~,,f 7( /JILi 1 h cf £ H ( J' ~~1 1 T~ (; -([{ ~' ~ l-t) ( /_, ~ ~r'l/7, B fr wf &. / sc-rt. s -b 11,;,7 ki,i) r;t:J/r ,t, C'-'k. c,b lfJ lV /!1 ( t)f J flt $<£< · C/ 1J;,1 £1) I~ ~fr lit. ~; If/ I ?-6 t-r. n. IA.-' I ';)Fr-. f J?,,.; s 3 {)[' l;f, 71?.-f I 0 3 I$' Fl. -gi,-I'll ) ~ b Frf. Jo ~ f? B.. ,2c.-,,~. -c,/u~_ , r ,hC-Y~/) a? /-L s~~~ ~~ .:lu4U"f'~eef 10 1-1 .b ?t p ~t,14_,;t,,,{,~<-f :4:~ <D~:t~ ~t -4- MRS. JAMES H. JENSEN • 4375 S. KALAMATH • ENGLEWOOD, COLORADO 80110 June 21~ 1976 I will be out of town at the ti me o f the meeting of June 2 2 nd, 1976 in regard to re z o n ing the property east o r Lipan and s _uth of Quincy in Englewood to light indust~ial. I am hereby prote s ting this rezoning. It will leave houses on the north side and south side of West Radcliff in the 1200 block (just two roes of houses) surrounded on THREE sides by industDial property and will surely cause a drop of valuation of these houses besides making them out of place. I'm not Lalking about tax evaluation--I'm sure that will stay the same. OEPARTMENT OF COMMUNIT.Y DEVELOPMENT ENGLEWOOD . f-:0'-0RADO' JUN 1 9 1976 co.-------.. -··-·---- Si n ce r el y , .J. ·-71-/ .. Vi t {._, 'z. ( ( I. ·-ti L ( < l fl! ',,i...'J l..t.._ i:/!/(J )/) -5 - Mr. Don Smith asked if Mrs. Banks, owner of Parcel #3, is in oppo sition to the rezoning request? Mr. House replied that Mrs . Banks is opposed to the request. Mr. Don Smith asked if the staff had figured the area of land to be rezoned in the event Mrs. Banks' property is not included? Mr. House stated that Mrs. Banks' property encompasses approximately 1/2 of the area included in the application. In answer to a question, Mrs. Romans noted that rezoning applica- tions should consist of one city block, or complete one city block of like or compatible zoning; however, there is no rule that a rezoning has to encompass "x" number of acres. Mr. Parker stated that he had viewed the area; he asked if the 15 ft. roadway is a dedicated roadway? Mr. House stated that it is not; to the best of his knowledge, the 15 ft. roadway is private property, and provides access to Mrs. Banks' house. Mr. Tanguma asked that the proponents present their case. Mr. Littlehorn 4530 South Broadway -a f ter being swo rn in by the Secretary, asserted that this piece of p roperty i s i n a un ique situation. He stated that in addition to the land under his ownership whi c h is included in t he a p plic ation, he p1esent ly o wns four o f the five parcels on the i mmed i at e e a st of the subject area and tha t h e h as constructed houses on two o f them , so l d one parce l, and plans to construct homes on the remai n ing two parcel s . Mr . Li tt lehorn s tated that he is not as concerned about c h ang i ng the r emaining property he owns to I-1, as he is abo ut whether· o r no t he can use t he property. Mr. Littlehorn emphasized tha t t h e p r operty is 68 ' x 300'; there is no way to ex tend South L i pan Street through t h e a r ea; there would h a v e t o be a c ul-de-sac on the south end. Dedication of a stree t would mean loss of a great deal of the property, and he f ee l s the bes t use of the ground could be realized under the I -1 z oni n g . Mr. L i tt l eho rn s t a t ed that he had no particular indu st rial u s e in mi nd a t t he p rese n t t i me; but he does want to have the means to pu t t he land to u se. Don Smit h noted t hat the applicants, Littlehorn and the Jackson Brother s, have included Mrs. Banks' property, and that she is opposed to the rezoning; if the rezoning were to be granted on only the Littlehorn/Jackson prope rties, this would actually make their properties an "island" s urrounded by residential zoning and development. Mr. Littlehorn stated that Mr. Jackson is present, and that he was under the impression that the Jackson Brothers had an agree- ment with Mrs. Banks and the Seventh Day Adventist Church re- garding her property. -6- Mr. Williams asked Mr. Littlehorn to indicate on the map the subject properties, and which property he owned. Mr. Littlehorn tt did so. Mrs. Wade asked the depth of the parcels Mr. Littlehorn is developing on South Lipan Street? Mr. Littlehorn stated the parcels are 60' x 100'. Mr . William Jackson, upon being sworn in, stated that he was speaking for himself and for his brother, James. He stated there were several issues at stake in this Hearing, and ex- pressed his appreciation in the interest shown by the citizens of the area in their attendance tonight. Mr. Jackson stated he did not feel the staff presentation was a fair presentation. Mr . J a ckson noted that there had been two letters of opposition, and that one was f rom Mrs. Banks. He noted that Parcel #3, purpor t ed to be owned by Mrs. Banks, belongs to the Seventh Day Adv e ntist Church, being willed to them by Mrs. Banks. There is a trust agreement between Mrs. Banks and the Church, whereby she may continue to live on the land until she dies, or until she can no longer care for herself. Mr. Jackson stated that he had discussed the matter with the regional representative of the Seventh Day Adventist Church; the price has been set on t he land, which Mr. Jackson and his brother will purchase, and the ma t ter of "isolation" and development of the prope r ty was discussed. Mr. Jackson stated that the Church representatives are not opposed to the rezoning request. Mr. Jackson stated that he and his brother have owned their property for nine years and are cooperating with Mr. Littlehorn in an effort to get t he zoning changed. Mr. Jackson stated that he felt pressu re had been applied to encourage Mrs. Banks to oppose the rezoning request . Mr . Jackso n stated that he had heard tha t Mrs. Jenson , th e o t h e r person who opposed the request by letter, wa s opposed because of fear of "competition" if warehouses and storage were to be developed on the Jackson/Littlehorn properties. Mr. Jackson stated that he felt the rezoning request was a valid request. Mr. Jackson stated he felt they need to do something in that area that has a "master plan". Mr.Jackson noted that Mrs. Banks had "pursued" him on sale of her property, and has given him a copy of her will and the instrument giving the property to the church. Mr. Jackson stated he did not see why the rezoning request is a problem; he again stated he felt it was unfair representation, and that he was "set up". Mr. Don Smith asked if Mr& Banks owns her property until she dies? Mr. Jackson stated that Mrs. Banks has the right to live there until she dies or can no longer take care of herself, and the Church will take the responsibility of her at that time. Mr. Smith stated that she does own the property until she dies. He stated he was curious why her property was included in this request. Mr. Jackson reiterated that Mrs. Banks had "pursued" them regarding the sale of her property. In checking with the Church, it was determined that Mrs. Banks has the right to live on the property until her death, but if the land is sold, it -7- must be sold by the church. Mr. Jackson reiterated that the Church is not opposed to the rezoning request. Mr. Jackson stated that their dealings have been and will be with the Church. Mr. Smith noted that if Mrs. Banks does in fact own her property, and is opposed to the rezoning, then the Jackson/Littlehorn properties are not contiguous to 1-1, and could not possibly be rezoned. Mrs. Romans pointed out that the Ordinance does not require '100% of the property owners in an area included in a rezoning application to sign the application for rezoning. Mr. Smith asked if the properties were not contiguous to say an 1-1 District, could other properties such as Mrs. Banks' be included in the application? Mrs. Romans stated they could be. Mrs. Pierson asked if there were any requirements on contiguity? Mrs. Romans stated that the requirement is that the land be an extension of like or compatible zoning. Mr. Williams protested the lengthy discussion regarding the matter of ownership, and suggested that the merits of the re- zoning request be considered. He stated that he didn't feel the matter of ownership was that important at this time. D scuss on ensued. Mr. Don Smith stated that it is prope1ty purported to be owned by Mrs. Banks that is contiguous to the 1-1 District, and she is opposed to the zoning; he stated he felt the matter of ownership is vitally important. Mr. Ed Smith stated applicants can include property other than their own in an application, and he did not think there was any problem of legality; and for that matter, Mrs. Banks' property could have been included without her consent even if she did out-right own the property. Mr. Williams asked that the criteria for rezoning be given. Mrs. Romans read the following criteria, as set forth in the 1976 edition of the Planning Commissioner's Handbook: "There are certain fac tors that should be considered in any rezoning application: a. The possibility of a mistake in the original zoning of the area. b. Any significant changes that have occurred in the area under consideration that would render another zone classification more applicable. c. Whether or not a person is denied the use of his land be- cause of existing zoning. "Other factors to be taken into consideration by the Commission in the process of examining an application for rezoning include: a. The areashouldcomplete at least one city block of compatible zone classification, or should consist of at least one city block and be contiguous to like or compatible zoning classi- fication. -8- b. Proof should be presented that there is a demand and need for enlarging the existing zone classification. c. There must be compliance with all of the provisions of the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance. d. The proposed rezoning must comply with the Comprehensive Plan." Mr. Tanguma asked if Mr. DeWitt could clarify the matter. Mr DeWitt stated that he felt the criteria cited did clarify the matter, and there was nothing he could add at this time. Mr. Tanguma asked if there was anyone else who wished to speak in favor of the request? No one indicated they wanted to speak in favor. Mr. Tanguma then asked for opponents to speak. Mrs. Rosa Lee Banks 1296 West Quincy -was sworn in and stated that her position is that this area was for residential purposes and that they do not need industrial zoning in the area. Mrs. Banks stated that her property adjoins the back yards of some of her neighbors and that her entire ownership was to be for residential use. She stated she felt it would be a change of policy that is not right to now approve a rezoning for industrial purposes. Mrs. Banks stated she wanted to continue to live there --it's her home, and she doesn't want to see it change. ~ Mrs. Banks stated that she understood that if the industrial ~ zoning were approved, and if residents didn't like the use that was proposed for the land, they couldn't do anything about it, and she didn't think that was right. Mrs. Banks noted that people have put money into their homes, and she didn't feel the rezoning request was right. Mr. Pete Brockman 4348 South Jason -was sworn in, and stated that he is a friend of Mrs. Banks. Mr. Brockman discussed the efforts by the City to install a greenbelt along a drainageway a couple of years ago, and from this experience he has determined that people don't have much to say about what goes on so far as the City is concerned. Mr. Brockman stated he felt Mrs. Banks has the right to oppose the rezoning request; she has lived in her home for 40 years, and she has the right to live there until she dies or until she can no longer care for herself. Mr. Brockman stated he speaks for a lot of other people; if the land is approved for I-1, there will be further encroachment of industrial uses and zoning into a residential area. He stated he is opposed to the rezoning. Mr. Merle Doane 1201 West Radcliff -was sworn in, and asked if the land were rezoned, what type of business would go in? Mr. Tanguma noted that Mr. Littlehorn had indicated there was no specific use in mind. Mr. Doane stated he had under- stood a used car dealership is proposed? Mr. Jackson stated that he owns the Denver Auto Mart, but there are no plans to use their land at this location for such purposes. -9- Mr. Doane noted there is industrial zoning on two sides of him now, and if this is approved, they will have industrial zoning and development on three sides of them. Mr. Doane asked what would keep industrial zoning and development from squeezing in on the residential area further? Mr. Carl Abbott 1231 West Radcliff -was sworn in and stated that he bought his house and moved in seven years ago. At that time, Mr. Jensen's warehousing and storage development was to the west of them, and there was "probably a county-maintained" development around Sinton's. He stated this was no problem they knew about it when they moved in. There were homes to the south of his property; warehouses have now been constructed to the south of these homes, destroying their view. Mr. Abbott stated they have done a nice job of constructing the warehouses he isn't sure about the landscaping of the area. Mrs. Banks property abuts his on the north. Mr. Abbott stated that they feel the rezoning of the subject land would detract from the value of the home-owners properties. Mr. Abbott noted that Mr. Jackson had indicated they intend to acquire Mrs. Banks' property from the Church at such time as it is up for sale; if they do intend to purchase this property, why cannot they acquire the land and develop it for residential purposes. Mr. Abbott noted that the dedication of right-of-way for this area would result in "waste land", but felt that to protect the residential area and develop this land residentially also would justify the "waste land". Mr. Abbott stated they cannot change what is presently zoned I-1 in the area; they can try to keep this rezoning request from being approved. Ms. Theresa Spear 1200 W. Radcliff -was sworn in, and asked what would happen to Mrs. Banks' home, whether or not it belonged to her? Mr. Tanguma noted that the residential use could con- tinue if the rezoning were approved. Mrs. Spear asked what uses the I-1 zone district permitted? Mrs. Romans read a list of the permitted uses in the I-1 Zone District. Mrs. Romans noted there were requirements for screening in industrial areas that abu t or adjoin a residential zone district. Mrs. Spear stated that screening had been put in for part of the distance on the industrial property abutting their back yard, but that it is not entirely screened. Mrs. Spear stated that when they bought their house, they knew the area was zoned light industrial to the west and to the south; they now wonder how much longer before the industrial zoning encroaches even more into the residential area. By the same token, Mrs. Spear added, Messrs. Jackson and Littlehorn knew what their property was zoned when they purchased it. -10- Mr. Gene Zinn 1190 West Radcliff -stated he is opposed to the I-1 zoning for reasons that have already been cited by previous speakers; he stated he doesn't want to see further zoning for light industrial in that area. Barbara Richards 1090 West Oxford Avenue -stated that she moved into her home 13 years ago, and they have light industrial zoning to the north of them. She noted there is a lot of noise in the industrial district. She is beginning to feel that the area between Belleview and Oxford is being squeezed by the industrial encroachment. Mrs. Richards noted that there are some new homes in the area, and that the school district is in need of additional children; she urged preserva- tion of the residential areas. Mr. Tanguma stated he would now give an opportunity for rebuttal by both sideso Mr. Littlehorn stated that his intent in seeking the rezoning was to have a classification under which he could use his property. Mr. Littlehorn stated that he purchased the land fronting on South Lipan for residential purposes, and he is developing it residentially. Mr. Littlehorn stated he felt people are concerned about industrial encroachment, and pointed out there is very little further encroachment which could be done --the property is developed. Mr. Littlehorn stated that he could make promises ~ that certain uses won't be developed on the site, but that would not be realistic at this point. Mr. Littlehorn stated that i t is a situation which has developed over a period of tine . Mrs. Pierson asked if it could be clari fi ed as to whether or not there was to be an investigation into the actual ownership of Parcel #3? She noted that if the property is in a life- estate, it cannot be developed as industrial; she stated ehe felt this should be investigated. Mr. Tanguma stated that he didn't think zoning has anything to do with property ownership. Mrs. Pierson stated that she is saying that if there is a con- tract that keeps the parcel in a residential use for a period of time --it can't be developed until such time as the life estate is terminated. Mr. Tanguma stated that he didn't think it entered into consideration on the zoning. Discussion ensuedo Mr. Littlehorn pointed out that he cannot use his ownership 67' x 300' --for residential purposes. Further discussion ensued. Mr. Jackson pointed out that the agreement between his brother and himself and the Seventh Day Adventist Church states that Mrs. Banks may reside on the property for her life time; they do have the right to agree on the selling price at the present time. Further discussion followed. -11- Mr. DeWitt pointed out that property owners do not have to be a party to a rezoning application, and in this event neither does the Seventh Day Adventist Church. As far as this particular ownership is concerned, Mr. DeWitt stated that he wasn't sure the matter of ownership bears directly upon the question be- fore the Commission --that of the use of the land and the zoning of the land. Mr. DeWitt pointed out there is no require- ment that land must be developed within a given period of time. Discussion ensued. Mr. Littlehorn emphasized it is not their intent to disturb Mrs. Banks' residency --they are simply trying to do some- thing with the land. Mr. Jackson noted that he felt problems cited by the opponents were minor problems based on the fact they live "in that kind of area". Mr. Jackson stated that when one looks at the I-1 boundaries, the rezoning really doesn't present too many problems ; he stated that the opponents are assuming that the very worst possible use permitted in I-1 will be developed on this property. Mr. Jackson stated that one use that had been proposed for their property is that of a tree bank; trees are moved from the Black Forest and will be used in landscaping new property, but until they are sold, they need some place to keep these trees. Mr. Jackson stated he felt this would be a definite improvement over the weeds etc. that are in the properties now. Mr. Tanguma asked for a spokesman from the opponents. Mr. Abbott assured the Commission that problems and concerns cited by the residents are not minor to them; if they could be assured that it would be the tree bank that would be on this property, that is one thing; but he didn't feel there could be that assurance. Mr. Abbott stated that he felt the primary concern is the encroachment of industrial zoning and uses into the residential areas, and that they do feel it is a very legitimate concern. Mr. Abbott noted that the residents have to consider the future use of that land, too, and he felt it is entirely possible to put a car lot in if it were to be re- zoned. Mr. Abbott acknowledged that ''it's not the prettiest place in Englewood, but that isn't to say that it couldn't be,'' and that maybe from a meeting such as this, residents of the neighborhood will take even more interest in their area. Mr. Abbott stated that it is possible the residents are unduly alarmed as the applicants seem to think, but he noted that even with the screening provisions, industrial zoning and development does have an effect on the neighborhood. He noted that Sinton does a very poor job keeping the landscaping in a living condition. -12- Mr. Tanguma asked if the staff had anything further to add? Mrs. Romans stated that the staff recommended against granting ~ the rezoning at the time the staff report was written; she stated that she did not feel a change in the neighborhood has been shown which would justify the rezoning. It has not been shown the property cannot be developed under the present zone classification. Mrs. Romans stated that no proof was presented there is need for additional land to be zoned to I-1 --there is vacant land to be developed in the I-1 District. Parker moved: Wade seconded: The Public Hearing be closed. AYES: Williams, Jorgenson, Parker, Pierson, Don Smith, Ed Smith, Tanguma, Wade NAYS: None ABSENT: Jones The motion carried. Discussion ensued. Parker moved: Ed Smith seconded: The Planning Commission forward the applica- tion of Mr. Littlehorn and the Jackson Brothers for a change of zoning from R-1-C to I-1 on the following described property to the City Council, with a recommendation that it not be approved for the following reasons: 1. It has not been shown the property cannot be developed under the present zone classification. 2. There have not been changes in the area to warrant a chan ge of zoning on the subject property. For these reasons, the Commission is of the opinion that it is more advantageous to leave the zoning as it is at the present time. "Beginning at a point 100 ft. West of the NE corner of the NW 1/4 of the NE 1/4 of Section 9, Township 5 South, Range 68 West of the 6th P.M.; thence West along the north line of Section 9, a distance of 230.8 ft.; thence South a distance of 330 ft.; thence East a distance of 230.8 ft.; thence North a distance of 330 ft. to the point of beginning, containing 1.75 acres, more or less." Mr. Don Smith stated that he would vote in favor of the motion, and cited the fact that one of the property owners included in the application is against the rezoning; the staff has also recommended against the expansion of tle I-1 Zone District; there is considerable vacant land already zoned I-1 that has not been developed, and until those areas already so zoned do develop, no expansion of the District should be considered. The vote was called: J I AYES: Wade, Williams, ~orgenson, Parker, E. Smith, Tangu~~ NAYS: None I ABSENT: Jones The motion carried. -13- Mr. Tanguma noted that this matter will be referred to City Council, and that the applicants may appeal the decision of the Commission to the City Council. Mr. Tanguma suggested if appeal is the route the applicants want to take, they should discuss the matter with Mrs. Romans. A recess was called at 8:25 P.M. The meeting was reconvened at 8:40 p.m. with the following members present: E. Smith, Tanguma, Wade, Williams, Jorgenson, Parker, Pierson, D. Smith. Mr. Jones was absent. IV. ALLEY VACATION Block 9, Jackson's Broadway Heights CASE #21-76 Mr. Tanguma r e qu ested that Mrs . Romans give the staff presentation. Mrs. Romans point e d the location out on a map, and stated that the parc el under consideration this evening is on the north side of West Ox f ord Avenue. The parcel is zoned R-1-C, Single- famil y residence. Galapago Street dead-ends at the City Ditch, as does this alley. The Riddle family has been of the opinion over the years that this portion of the alley was a part of their property; Mrs. Romans cited tax certificates, and other records of many years previous, which all refer to "and alley", seeming to indicate that the "alley" is indeed part of the ownership. The staff could find no evidence of vacation of the alley, but did find wh e re the alley was platted as part of Block 9, Jackson's Broadway Heights Subdivisi.on. Mrs. Romans noted that the owner of the property is now deceased, and members of his family are trying to settle matters. It would be poss ible, if the alley were to be vacated, to divide the property into two building sites with access from South Galapago Street. The Riddle family would prefer to have the question of the alley settled prior to sale of the property, and are asking that the City take action now, while they continue to check Count.y records. The staff recommends that the alley be vacated, inasmuch as there is no public purpose to be served by retaining the alle y. There is utility service in the alley south of Oxford Avenue and if there is need to extend the utility lines, it would be cheaper to do it in the alley rather than proceeding around to Galapago. At such time as the property is developed, an ease- ment would have to be given or retained to provide for the lines. Mrs. Romans noted that members of the Riddle family were in the audience. -14- Mr. DeWitt noted that one of the reasons the tax certificates may refer to the alley in the legal description is, according to Colorado Law, the property owner has "subsurface rights" to the alley. Mr. DeWitt noted that regarding utility service, the property owner must pay to have this service provided re- gardless of the route used to give service; the route to be followed and whether or not an easement was to be given would be between the property owner and the Water and Sewer Board. Mr. DeWitt stated that the Commission could recommend retention of a utility easement in the alley, but he did not feel it was necessary. Mr. Parker asked the location of the manhole in Oxford in the vicinity of the alley? Mrs. Romans stated there was no manhole there, and Mr. Allan Riddle stated there is a manhole on the south side of the street. Discussion ensued. Mr. Parker then asked if Mr. Love, property owner on the west of the alley, would receive 1/2 of the vacated alley? Mrs. Romans pointed out that this alley was dedicated entirely from Block 9, Jackson's Broadway Heights, and that Mr. Love's property is in another subdivision; therefore, the alley would revert to the Riddle property. Mr. DeWitt affirmed this. Discussion ensued. Mr. DeWitt noted that the vacation of the alley would be effective upon the approval of the City Council, and would rest ownership of this alley with the Riddle family. Mr. Allan Riddle stated that he understood the water and sewer service is the developer's responsibility, and not the City's; he stated he is trying to buy the small triangular piece of property owned by Mr. Love on the east side of the City Ditch . Mr. Riddle pointed out that to the best of his knowledge, his fathe r had paid taxes on the alley for many years, and he felt the family was entitled to the land. Don Smith moved: Ed Smith seconded: The Planning Commission recommend to City Council that the alley in Block 9, Jackson's Broadway Heights, be vacated. Discussion followed. The vote was called: AYES: D. Smith, E. Smith, Tanguma, Wade, Williams ., Jorgenson, Parker, Pierson NAYS: None ABSENT: Jones The motion carried. -15- V. DIRECTOR'S CHOICE Mrs. Romans introduced Miss Alice Fessenden, an intern in the Department of Community Development for the summer. Miss Fessenden will be with the Department for three months, and will be working with the Housing Division. She is pursuing her Masters Degree in Planning at the University of Tennessee, and is a resident of Englewood. Mrs. Romans stated she would like to suggest a Special Meeting on June 29th to consider the 1977-1981 Capital Improvement Pro- gram. The Charter gives the Planning Commission the responsi- bility for recommending a Capital Improvement Program. Mrs. Romans discussed the procedure the staff is pursuing on the proposed CIP. It was determined the special meeting would be at 7:00 p.m. on June 29th. Meetings in July will be July 7th and July 20th. Mrs. Romans presented Commission members with a memorandum from City Manager Mccown relative to the Director of Community De- velopment position. VI. COMM I SSION'S CHOICE Mrs. Wad e asked t hat the staff look into the matter of screening in t he industrial area where it abuts residential zoning. Mr. Smi t h suggested that the oath given to those testifying be the same as that before the City Council. Don Smith moved: Parker seconded: The oath given to persons giving testimony before the Planning Commission be: Do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth in this matter before the City Planning and Zoning Com- mission, so help you God? Discussion ensued. The vote was called: AYES: D. Smith, E. Smith, Tanguma, Wade, Jorgenson, Parker NAYS: Pierson, Williams ABSENT: Jones The motion carried. Mrs. Pierson discussed the report of her ASPO trip, which she will present to the Commission at a later meeting. Mrs. Romans stated there was one item which she neglected to discuss under Director's Choice. Mrs. Romans stated that a staff meeting had been held concerning the possible development of a paper recycling business on property aqjacent to the City of . Englewood on West Stanford Avenue and Santa Fe Drive. Representatives -16- of the City of Englewood, Arapahoe County, and the proposed developers were in attendance. There is a possibility of ~ annexation of this area; however, the developers have not petitioned for annexation at this time. The developers have agreed to give the necessary right-of-way for Windermere and Stanford Avenue upon annexation, so there would be no con- ditions that would have to be imposed on the annexation. In the past, the City has been very much interested in the annexa- tion of property in this area, which was a part of the Santa Fe/Union Annexation attempt. Mrs. Romans stated that the City Manager asked that the matter be discussed with the Commission. Mrs. Romans discussed the operation which is proposed to be constructed on the site. The Englewood Fire Department, Utilities Department, Public Works Department and Code Enforcement Division have all said they see no problem with either the proposed de- velopment or the annexation of the area to the City. Discussion followed. Pierson moved: Ed Smith seconded: The Planning Commission approve the concept of annexing the following described property in principle: A parcel of land lying partly in the SW 1/4 NE 1/4, and partly in the SE 1/4 NW 1/4 of Section 9, Township 5 South, Range 68 West of the 6th P.M., County of Arapahoe, State of Colorado, more particularly described as follows, to wit: Beginning at a point 117.8 feet West of the Northeast corner of the SE 1/4 of NW 1/4 of said Section 9, said point being at the intersection of the East line of the right-of-way of the Denver and Santa Fe Railroad, also known as Atchison, Topeka and Santa Fe Railway~ with the North line of the SE 1/4 NW 1/4 of said Section 9, running thence East 447.8 feet; thence South at right angles to said course, 220.9 feet; thence West at right angles to said last course, 196.8 feet; thence South at right angles to said last course, 220.9 feet; thence West 340.6 feet to said East line of the right-of-way of the Denver and Santa Fe Railroad; thence N 11°32 1 00 11 E along said East line of the right-of-way of the Denver and Santa Fe Railroad 450 feet, more or less, to place of beginning. AYES: Parker, Pierson, D. Smith, E. Smith, Tanguma, Wade, Williams, Jorgenson NAYS: None ABSENT: Jones The motion carried. Mr. DeWitt expressed his appreciation for the card sent him by the Commission during his recent surgery and convalescence. The meeting adjourned at 9:25 p.m. • MEMORANDUM TO THE ENGLEWOOD CITY COUNCIL REGARDING ACTION OR RECOMMENDATION OF THE CITY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION . DATE: June 22, 1976 SUBJECT: Littlehorn/Jackson Bros. Rezoning Request ACTION: Parker moved: Ed Smith seconded: The Planning Commission forward the applica- tion of Mr. Littlehorn and the Jackson Brothers for a change of zoning from R-1-C to I-1 on the following described property to the City Council, with a recommendation that it not be approved for the following reasons: 1. It has not been shown the property cannot be developed un- der the present zone classification. 2. There have not been changes in the area to warrant a change of zoning on the subject property. For these r e asons, the Commission is of the opinion that it is more advantageous to leave the zoning as it is at the present t ime. "Beginning at a point 100 ft. West of the NE corner of the NW 1 /4 of the NE 1/4 of Section 9, Township 5 South, Range 68 West of the 6th P.M.; thence West along the north line of Section 9, a distance of 230.8 ft.; thence South a distance o f 330 ft.; thence East a distance of 230.8 ft.; thence North a distance of 330 ft. to the point of beginning, containing 1.75 acres, more or less." AYES: Wade, Williams, Jorgenson, Parker, Pierson, D. Smith, E. Smith, Tanguma NAY S : None ABS ENT: Jones The motion carried. By Order of the City Planning and Zoning Commission. MEMORANDUM TO THE ENGLEWOOD CITY COUNCIL REGARDING ACTION OR RECOMMENDATION OF THE CITY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION. DATE: June 22, 1976 SUBJECT: Alley Vacation RECOMMENDATION: Don Smith moved: Ed Smith Seconded: The Planning Commission recommend to City Council that the alley in Block 9, Jackson's Broadway Heights, be vacated. AYES: D. Smith, E. Smith, Tanguma, Wade, Williams, Jorgenson Parker, Pierson NAYS : None ABSENT: Jones The motion carried. By Order of the City Planning and Zoning Commission. • MEMORANDUM TO THE ENGLEWOOD CITY COUNCIL REGARDING ACTION OR RECOMMENDATION OF THE CITY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION . DATE: June 22, 1976 SUBJECT: ACTION: Pierson moved: Ed Smith seconded: Proposed Annexation The Planning Commission approve the concept of annexing the following described property in principle. A parcel of land lying partly in the SW 1/4 NE 1/4, and partly in the SE 1/4 NW 1/4 of Section 9, Township 5 South, Range 68 West of the 6th P.M., County of Arapahoe, State of Colorado, more particularly described as follows, to wit: Beginning at a point 117.8 feet West of the Northeast corner of the SE 1/4 of NW 1/4 of said Section 9, said point being at the intersection of the East line of the right-of-way of the Denver and Santa FP Railroad, also known as Atchison, Topeka and Santa Fe Ra ilway, ~ith the North line of the SE 1/4 NW 1/2 of said Section 9, running thence East 447.8 feet; thence South at right angles said last course, 220.9 feet; thence West at right angles t o said last course, 196.8 feet; thence South at right angles to said last course, 220.9 feet; thence West 340.6 feet to sa i d East line of the right-of-way of the Denver and Santa Fe Railroad; thence N 11°32 1 00 11 E along said East line of the right-of-way of the Denver and Santa Fe Railroad 450 feet, more or less, to place of beginning. AYES: Parker, Pierson, D. Smith, E. Smith, Tanguma, Wade, Williams, Jorgenson NAYS: None ABSENT: Jones The motion carried. By Order of the City Planning and Zoning Commission.