Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1976-08-03 PZC MINUTES' ,, • CITY OF ENGLWOOD PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION AUGUST 3, 1976 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 Tanguma. Members present: Jorgenson, Parker, D. Smith, Tanguma, Wade, Williams, Jones Romans; Ex-officio Members absent: Pierson, E. Smith Also present: Assistant City Attorney DeWitt Associate Planner House Planning Intern Alice Fessenden II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES. Chairman Tanguma stated that Minutes of July 20, 1976, and July 27, 1976, were to be considered. Parker moved: Jorgenson and Williams seconded: The Minutes of July 20, 1976, and July 27, 1976, be approved as written. AYES: Jones, Jorgenson, Parker, D; Smith, Tanguma, Wade, Williams NAYS: None ABSENT: Pierson, E. Smith The motion carried. III. FINDINGS OF FACT. Chairman Tanguma stated that Findings of Fact for Case #17-76 and Case #24-76 are to be considered for approval. Parker moved: Wade seconded: The Findings of Fact for Case #17-76 and Case #24-76 be approved by the Commission and recommended to City Council. AYES: Williams, Jones, Jorgenson, D. Smith, Tanguma, Wade NAYS: None ABSENT: Pierson, E. Smith The motion carried. IV. AUTO WRECKING/JUNK YARD ORDINANCE Chairman Tanguma stated that the Commission has invited the people in the auto wrecking business to come to the meeting to discuss informally any problems they may have with the Auto Wrecking/Junk Yard Ordinance, and to determine if changes are felt to be necessary. Mr. Tanguma asked that everyone introduce themselves. -2- The following representatives of the Auto Wrecking/Junk Yard Industry were present: D. E. Ramsey, Harold A. Stoner, George Krebs, Michael Reimann, Carl Strauss, Bob Axelson, Bill Uhrig, Emmett Bonner, Wm. S. Cotter, Owen L. Cotter, Larry Jones and Earl Stoner. Mrs. Romans noted that Planning Intern Alice Fessenden has put together a slide show of the auto wrecking yards in Englewood, and the progress that has been made in efforts to clean up the operation. Miss Fessenden presented the slide show, with an accompanying narrative. Mrs. Romans stated that the Englewood Zoning Ordinance has permitted auto wrecking yards in the industrial districts since 1940. Under the 1940 Zoning Ordinance, auto wrecking yards were permitted in the M-1, Light Industrial District, with the restriction that the auto wrecking yards must be set back 40 ft. from the property line, and they must be .enclosed by a wall or fence six feet high. The 1955 Zoning Ordinance permitted auto wrecking and dismantling yards in the M-2 Zone District. The north- west Englewood area was annexed to the City of Englewood in 1957, and was zoned in 1958. Mrs. Romans discussed the zone classifications and the boundaries that were imposed on the area. Auto wrecking yards were ·permitted on the majority of the land in northwest Englewood in 1958, and from 1958 to 1963, auto wrecking yards were a permitted use in that area. In 1960, the zoning ordinance was amended by adding the provision that required the owners to enclose the yards with a solid face fence or wall that was at least six feet high; two entrances were required, and two exits were also required, but the ordinance still permitted auto wrecking yards. There also could be no ~dvertising except for the name of the business on the fence, and there could be no operation of the yard outside of the fence. The operators were given one year to comply with the Ordinance. In 1963, the City adopted the Auto Wrecking and Junk Yard Ordinance, and the City is operating under that same ordinance today. In July of 1963, the City went to public hearings on the revised Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance, and at the time the Ordinance was adopted, auto wrecking and junk yards became non-conforming uses. Those that were in operation were told they could continue the operation, but they had to comply with the auto wrecking ordinance. On at least four occasions within the last year, the staff has talked to people who are in the auto wrecking yard business, who have indicated they want to construct a small office and/or garage type building to store used auto parts and from where they could sell these parts. Under the staff interpretation of the Comprehensive.Zoning Ordinance, Non-conforming Use Section, the requests for construction of a sales office or garage building have been denied, inasmuch as a Non-Conforming Use is not permitted to extend its use. The staff has asked the City Attorney's office for an interpretation of "extend" in relation to the auto wrecking 'business. Mrs. Romans stated that it seems to the staff that possibly the restriction in the Non-Conforming Use section has discouraged some of the auto wrecking yard dealers from improving their business. Mrs. Romans pointed out there is an auto-shredder business operating in Denver just east of the Englewood- Denver boundary, which may be of aid in getting rid of the auto bodies that are still in the yards. Mrs. Romans noted that by virtue of the non- conforming status, the auto wrecking operators have an oligopoly on the business in Englewood; they have the only land that can be used for auto < -3- wrec~ing yards, and they have licenses issued to them as an auto wrecking business. Mrs. Romans stated that she wants to find out if the staff has been interpreting the problems of these businessmen correctly. Mr. Tanguma stated that the reason the Commission wanted to get together with these businessmen was to talk over some of the problems they are experiencing under the present Ordinance. Mr. Owen Cotter asked if the Commission had considered giving the auto wrecking yard owners the right to construct a building for office/sales/ garage purposes on their land? Mr. Cotter noted that the property owners have spent money for concrete and black-top for the yards that wouldn't have been necessary if a building would have been permitted; he noted that some of the owners could not financially afford to construct a building now if they were permitted to do so, because of the extra ex- penses they have had on the concrete and blacktopping and other items. Mr. Cotter noted that the business is changing, and that possibly the auto wrecking business has leveled out. Mr. Carl Strauss stated that he owns a salvage yard, and that it is very difficult during the winter months to dismantle the vehicles in the open. Ms. Pierson entered and took her place with the Commission. Mr. Strauss stated that if the owners could construct an enclosed facility - a garage -it would provide much better working conditions. Mr. Strauss stressed that the present operations with no garages are unhealthy and dangerous operations in the winter months. Mr. Strauss stated that he has no inside storage space for engines, and no place to work on them. Mr. Strauss stated that the salvage business is the removal of useable parts from a car and selling the hulk to a shredder, or crusher , operation. Mrs. Wade asked if Mr. Strauss felt a change in the Ordinance would be of benefit to him? Mr. Strauss pointed out that within two months time, he cannot count on good weather for the stripping of the cars outdoors; he is trying to get the lot cleaned out as much as possible before bad weather sets in. Mrs. Wade stated that she felt people are beginning to understand that the auto wrecking-salvage business is a viable business, and is an im- portant segment of the business-industrial operations. Mr. Tanguma asked, if the operators were allowed to construct the building on1heir property, whether this would speed up the cleaning up of the yards; whether the cars would be stripped and the hulks hauled out in a shorter period of time? Michael Reimann stated that he felt the operation would move faster. He stated that he liked to move two or three cars per day through his operation. Mr. Reimann pointed out that they are in business for the profit, and they are trying to make the business as "good" as they can. If they could construct a building, they could clean all the parts before they shelve them, and it would help change the image of the business. -4- Owen Cotter stated that he felt the image of the business is changing throughout the world; he felt the Auto Wrecking Association had a great deal to do with this change of image. _Mr. Cotter stated that they had put in a very expensive parts cleaner in their business; this parts cleaner is self-contained, and there is no pollution resulting from this operation. The cleaning process is accomplished with the use of chemicals, and the refuse from this process is easily disposed of. Mr. Tanguma stated he thought there is a very upward trend in the auto wrecking business; people are going to keep the cars they are driving longer because ·it is too expensive to buy new ones, and they will have to patronize the salvage yards for repair parts. Discussion ensued. Mr. Reimann pointed out that the auto wrecking yards in northwest Englewood cannot expand in area much even if they were allowed to do so; it would be more profitable for them to build a building on the auto wrecking yard site for the sale and storage of parts. He pointed out that this improvement of the auto wrecking yards would be more profitable for the City of Englewood also, through increased tax base. Bill Uhrig stated that he owns and operates the car shredder located just over the Englewood/Denver boundary; in 1970, scrap metal was $6.00 per ton; today, they are paying $50 -$75 per car. To recycle steel is l/lOth the cost of new steel. Don Williams asked if the auto wrecking yard operators had to transport the wrecked vehicles to the auto crusher? Mr. Reimann stated that they do have to haul the vehicles to the shredder. Mr. Uhrig pointed out that his operation is not a "crusher", but is a "shredder". Further brief discussion ensued. Mr. Ramsey pointed out that part of the ·concern is the fact the auto wrecking yards have been non-conforming since 1963; he asked if the non- conforming status of these yards is realistic? Is this the way the City wants to go? Mr. Ramsey stated that the City has "hoped the auto wrecking yards would disappear"; he pointed out that it is not realistic to plan for extinction of these auto wrecking yards, and they do have a place in society. Mr. Ramsey pointed out that the auto wrecking yard operators have tried to be good citizens and comply with the ordinances and regula- tions, and the City wants to put them out of business. Discussion ensued . .: Mr. Jones noted that he was a member of the Planning Commission when this area was annexed and the matter of zoning was considered. Mr. Jones noted there was a variety of mixed uses in the northwest Englewood area, and it became apparent the junk yard did not fit·into the residential,commercial, or industrial classifications. It was the hope of the City at that time that business operations could be established that would be compatible with the total area. Mr. Jones stated there have been changes of attitude and economic change since that time. Mr. Jones stated that it was evident to him that the auto wrecking yard operators have "endured", and that most of them would like to be able to up-grade their business operation. Mr. Jones noted that a great deal of criticism had been leveled against the City on attempts to put these businessmen out of business; he pointed out that the auto wrecking yard dealers that are in business do have a monoply on auto wrecking or salvage yards in the City of Englewood; if this use was to be -5- made a conforming use, new yards could go in which would increase the competition for the existing businesses. Mr. Jones noted he understood CF & I is planning to move their auto crusher to Arapahoe County west of · South Santa Fe Drive. He Discussed the CF & I operation and the changes that have occurred in their process. Discussion ensued. Mr. Tanguma asked about the noise level of Mr. Uhrig's operation? Mr. Uhrig stated that his operation is in Denver; they have no problem with noise levels; and in 1971, they won the clean-air award. Mr. Williams stated that as he understood the discussion, the auto wrecking yard operators are asking that the City recognize them as a legitimate business, and that the City initiate the process of making them legitimate. Harold Stoner stated that this is of concern to them; he stated that the auto wrecking yard operators are subjected to very close scrutiny by the City, and cited an instance where the Code Enforcement Division required that he and his brother rewire a building to meet the Code. Mr. Stoner stated that it was a residence, and they wanted to convert the residence to an office use, but were told they would have to rewire to specifications set forth in the Building Code. He emphasized that the wiring in the residence met Code when it was installed. Discussion ensued. Mr. Ramsey stated he was sure there was no order to "hassle" the operators, but pointed out the problem is the policy of making the auto wrecking yards remain a non-conforming use. Mr. Ramsey stated that these auto wrecking yard owners have hung on in Englewood for 13 years, since the Auto Wrecking/Junk Yard Ordinance was passed; they have continued in business because there is profit in it. Mr. Ramsey stated that he realized there must be regulations for this type of business, but the outcome of some of the regulations is rather absurd. The operators are told they must construct a fence around the operation to hid it from the passers-by, yet they cannot construct a new office/garage building which would be a "fence with a roof on it." Mr. Ramsey stated that the property owners do feel hassled and subjected to more scrutiny than other types of business. Discussion ensued. Harold Stoner again discussed the matter of rewiring the building on their property; he emphasized that the wiring was approved at the time the structure was built, but there are now new standards, and the Code Enforcement Division says they must ·have conduit wiring. Mr. Stoner stated that the entire building is not worth the cost of the wiring. Mr. Stoner stated that if the City would only allow improvement of the properties, owners would not be so averse to bringing structures up to Code. Mr. Ramsey pointed out that the City interpretation is that there was a change of use on Mr. Stoner's building, from residential to an office use, which would require compliance with different standards. Mr. Stoner stated that he had lived in the house until 1963. Earl Stoner stated that he and his brother had been in the business since 1946, and their property was used as an auto wrecking/salvage yard before the land was annexed to Englewood. He stated that they have put 30 years of their lives into this business and they not appreciate someone (the City) wanting to put them out of business. Harold Stoner stated that he had discussed the possibility of constructing a new building with the Building Inspector, and was told he could not construct a new building. -6- Lee Jones noted that it has been suggested the auto wrecking yards be made conforming uses; he stated he could foresee requests for new auto wrecking yards if they are approved as a conforming use. There is vacant land in northwest Englewood, and if the business is very profitable, it would be logical there will be demands for additional auto wrecking yards. Mr. Jones stated he felt the proposal needs a lot more study before it is recommended; it should be determined what effect the change in status of these uses would have on the neighborhood. Don Smith stated that he felt the Commission has to look at two problems; the immediate problem, and the "future" problem as well. The immediate problem is the matter of improving the existing auto wrecking yards, by allowing construction of an office/garage/sales outlet. The future problem is the question of conforming use vs. non-conforming use. This would have an impact on the entire neighborhood, and should not be considered without taking the entire neighborhood into consideration. He stated that he felt we should allow the operators to improve within their own boundaries. Mr. Reimann . stated he felt it would be rather difficult for another auto wrecking yard to go into the area even if they were permitted uses; one would have to consider the cost of the land, the cost of stocking the site ' and inventory. Mr. Strauss noted that most of the auto wrecking yards that are in existance are pretty well surrounded with other industrial uses, and could not expand land-wise. Mr. Ramsey stated that the basic question in the whole discussion has been that of conforming use vs. non-conforming use. Discussion ensued. Mr. Ramsey stated that something needs to be done to allow those auto wrecking yards in business now to improve and construct a garage, office or sales outlet on their site. Mr. Bob Axelson stated that he has a place in Arapahoe County, and this is the first meeting he has been to where the Commission was trying to do something to help the auto-wrecking business. He stated that he has spent more money in courts than he paid for the land itself. He noted that the salvage business is the only business that cannot expand in Englewood. He noted that efforts have been made to clean up the business, but that the operator cannot do so if a building cannot be built to store the salvaged parts. Mr. Axelson stated that he felt the land will eventually become too valuable to be used for auto wrecking yards, but that they should not be forced out of business. Discussion ensued. Mr. Jones stated it was clear the auto wrecking yard dealers are making a sincere attempt to improve their land, and they know it would be more profitable to do so. Mr. Jones stated that the Co~­ mission is here to help these businessmen, but he was sure that they under- stood the position of the Commission: the residential neighborhood in northwest Englewood must be considered as well as the industrial district. Mr. Jones stated that he felt this had been a very productive meeting. Earl Stoner discussed the problems they have experienced in being denied the right to construct a building on their property for storage and sale of auto parts; he stated that the sales building is now located in Qenver; they have two sets of employees, two sets of telephones, and Englewood could have realized tax income from their business had they been allowed to locate in Englewood. Mr. Stoner stated that the auto parts business is a good business, and that the profit is secondary in consideration of the business. The primary consideration is service to their cu~tomer~. • -7- Mr. Cotter noted that he had been in business at his present location since 1960, and has seen the businesses change and up-grade over the years. Don Smith stated he had talked to people in the area and these people seem to have no objections to the expansion of the auto wrecking yards. He stated that he thinks the peopl~ seem to feel that improvement of these sites would be of benefit to the neighborhood. Mr. Parker asked why there were so many hulks stored on the yards if they were stripping them and taking them to the shredder as fast as they come in? Mr. Strauss noted that the bodies are not stacked as they used to be, and that they cannot afford to keep a great number of hulks. Mr. Strauss stated that he handles trucks and vans, and takes at lease one truck per day to the shredder. He stated that an operator could not "crowd" the yard and still function. Mr. Reimann stated that he used auto hulks to store used parts in, inasmuch as he is not allowed to construct a bui~ding for storage of parts removed from the cars. He stated that he must have some way to keep the parts out of the weather. Discussion ensued. Don Smith moved: Pierson seconded: The Planning and Zoning Commission make a preliminary reconnnendation that there be a joint meeting with the City Council, Planning Connnission, and the auto wrecking yard owners and operators to further discuss the matter. AYES: Wade, Williams, Jones, Jorgenson, Parker, Pierson, D. Smith, Tanguma NAYS: None ABSENT: E. Smith The motion carried. Mr. Tanguma expressed appreciation to those auto wrecking yard owners and operators who had attended the meeting, and stated they would be notified of the date of the joint meeting. A recess of the Conunission was declared. The meeting was called to order with the following members present: Tanguma, Wade, Jones, Jorgenson, Parker , Pierson. Those members absent: Williams, Don Smith, Ed Smith V. DIRECTOR'S CHOICE Mrs. Romans stated that she had nothing to bring before the Commission • -8- VI. COMMISSION'S CHOICE There was nothing to be discussed under Commission's Choice. The meeting adjourned at 8:55 P.M. • -Q- MEMORANDUM TO THE ENGLEWOOD CITY COUNCIL REGARDING ACTION OR RECOMMENDATION OF THE CITY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION DATE: August 3, 1976 SUBJECT: Findings of Fact: Case #17-76 and Case #24-76 RECOMMENDATION: Parker moved: Wade seconded: The Findings of Fact for Case #17-76 and Case #24-76 be approved by the Conunission and reconunended to City Council. AYES: Williams, Jones, Jorgenson, D. Smith, Tanguma, Wade NAYS: None ABSENT: Pierson, E. Smith The motion carried. By Order of the City Planning and Zonin~ Conunission.