Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1976-01-06 PZC MINUTESI I I I. CALL TO ORDER. CITY OF ENGLEWOOD PLANNING AND ZONING C01:1MISSION JANUARY 6, 1976 Page 1891 The regular meeting of the City Planning and Zoning Commission was called to order at 7:05 p.m. by Vice-Chairman Tanguma. Members present: Brown, Jones, Jorgenson, Williams, Parker, Pierson, Smith, Tanguma, Wade Romans, Ex-officio Members absent: None Also present: Planning Associate House; Assistant City Attorney DeWitt Mrs. Romans stated that Mr. Don Williams is the new City Council representative to the Planning Commission, replacing Mr. Jones, and that Mr. Jones was reappointed to the Com- mission to take Mr. Martin's place, Mr. Martin having recently resigned from the Commission. Mrs. Romans noted that Councilman Brown has asked to be replaced on the Commission, but he will serve until the first of February, at which time Mr. Don Smith will be the Council representative. II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES. Mr. Tanguma stated the Minutes of December 17, 1975, were to be considered for approval. Jones moved: Jorgenson seconded: The Minutes of December 17, 1975, be approved as written. AYES: Jorgenson, Williams, Smith, Tanguma, Brown, Jones NAYS: None ABSTAIN: Parker, Pierson, Wade The motion carried. III. ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT Proposed R-2-C Zone District Jones moved: Brown seconded: The Public Hearing on Case #2-76 be opened. AYES: NAYS: Pierson, Brown, Jones, Smith, Wade, Jorgenson, Williams, Tanguma, Parker None The motion carried. CASE #2-76 Mr. Tanguma stated that Case #2-76 is related to a proposed amendment of the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance, by the adoption of an R-2-C Zone District. Mr. Tanguma asked Mrs. Romans to review the development of this proposed Zone District. Mrs. Romans stated that at the City Council meeting of December 1, 1975, the Council asked that the Planning Commission consider the possibility of drafting a second R-2 Medium Density Zone District designed to meet the needs of medium density areas within the City in which attached residential units in excess of two would not be compatible with existing develop- ment. In response to the City Council re q uest, the proposed R-2-C District was prepared. This Di strict is very similar to the R-2 Medium Density District, but will permit only a single-family or two-family use on 50 ft. frontage; there cannot be any residential us2 larger than a two-family unit in the District. The R-2 District, on the other hand, will permit a three-family unit on a 75 foot frontage, or a four-unit on 100-foot frontage. As in the R-2 District, the R-2-C District requires open space and landscaping. The R-2-C District also permits churches, educational institutions , and public facilities as does the R-2 District. Mrs. Romans stated that the minimum floor area per each unit is the same as in the R-2 District, and 35 % lot coverage is permitted. Mrs. Romans stated that a two-family unit must have at least one party wall and a common roof. Mrs. Romans pointed out that new con- struction would have to conform to the regulations contained in the proposed R-2-C Zone District; existing structures could continue to be occupied even though they might not meet the requirements of the new ordinance. Mr. Parker asked if existing units could convert a basement into an apartment under this proposed ordinance? Mrs. Romans stated the units would have to meet the Building Code and Housing Code , but that it is possible to convert a basement into an apartment. Mr. Tanguma stated that the Commission would now hear from members of the audience; he asked those who wished to speak to come to the podium and identify themselves for the record . He stated the Commission would now hear from opponents of the proposal. No one indicated a desire to speak in opposition. Mr. Tanguma then asked for proponents to speak. Mr. John A. Criswell, Attorney at Law 3780 South Broadway -stated that his clients feel the changes from the R-2-A District t o the R-2-C District are "six of one and half-a-dozen of t:ie other." Mr. Criswell stated that he and his clients feel the thrust, idea and purpose of the R-2-C Ordinance is substantially the same as the R-2-A, and they have no opposition to the proposal and do, in fact, support the proposed ordinance. Mr. Criswell stated that he had ~ad some question regarding the "party wall" and felt that this would re- quire units side-by-side, but was assured by Mrs. Romans that there could indeed be two-family units vertically. Mr. Criswell re i terated there is no objection to the proposal, and urged passage of the ordinance. Mr. Criswell requested that the City initiate the zoning of the area as soon as possible. Page 1892 Mrs. Harvey Springer 3737 South Lincoln -stated that she has considered enlarging her house to add a music room or increase the size of some other rooms in the house; she asked if there would be any problems with enlargement under the new ordinance? Mrs. Romans stated that as long as the maximum lot coverage was not exceeded, she could see no problems. Mrs. Mary Campbell 3865 South Lincoln -asked persons in the audience from the area between Kenyon and Oxford on South Lincoln Street and South Sherman Street to stand --23 persons stood. Mrs. Campbell stated that the people in this area did support the proposed R-2-C Ordinance and thanked the Commission for their effort in drafting the Ordinance. A woman in the audience asked why the zoning was being changed at all if the R-2-C is so very similar to their previous zoning? Mr. Tanguma and Mr. Jones discussed the background of this particular area, and the reasons surrounding the development of the R-2-C Zone Dis- trict in an effort to place this land in a zone classification which would be acceptable to the property owners. Jones moved: Wade seconded: The Public Hearing on Case #2-76 be closed. AYES: NAYS: Jorgenson, Williams, Jones, Brown, Smith, Tanguma, Parker, Pierson, Wade None The motion carried. Jones moved: Parker seconded: The Planning Commission recommend to City Council the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance be amended by the approval and adoption of the R-2-C Zone Dis- trict as set forth in Case #2-76. AYES: NAYS: Wade, Jones, Pierson, Jorgenson, Parker, Williams, Smith, Brown, Tanguma None The motion carried. Mrs. Therle Oldenburg 3776 South Lincoln Street -expressed her appreciation to the members of the Planning Com- mission for their efforts in drafting the proposed zone district. IV. MRS. TINA WARDEN 3001 West Bellewood Drive Jones moved: Brown seconded: The Public Hearing on Case #1-76 be opened. AYES: NAYS: Pierson, Williams, Jones, Parker, Smith, Brown, Jorgenson, Tanguma, Wade None The motion carried. CASE #1-76 Mr. Tanguma asked Mrs. Romans to discuss the background of the requested rezoning. Mrs. Romans stated that the legal notice of the public hearing did appear in the Englewood Herald Sentinel, the official City Newspaper. The property has been posted the required number of days. The subject area is Lot 30, Block 19, of Centennial Acres Second Filing, known as 3001 West Bellewood Drive. Mrs. Warden has requested a change of zoning from R-1-A, Single-family Residence, to R-1-C, Single-family Residence. The property to the east of Mrs. Warden's land is zoned B-2, Business, as is land to the south of Mrs. Warden. Property to the north and west of Mrs. Warden is zoned R-1-A, Single-family Residence. Mrs. Romans stated that the R-1-C Zone District does permit a home occupation, in which Mrs. Warden is interested. The R-1-A District does not permit home occupations and is the most restrictive residential district in the City, designed to be isolated from uses of high intensity. Mrs. Romans stated that when the area was annexed to the City, there was a provision that the land came in zoned R-1-A, and unless other steps were taken to rezone the land into a more compatible zone classification, the land remained zoned R-1-A. This particular residential area was not considered for a different zone classification, though the area to the east and south was re- zoned to B-2, Business. Mrs. Romans stated that Mrs. Warden had applied for a B-1 Zone classi- fication for her land in November, 1975; this request was denied by the Planning Commission, and upon appeal to City Council, the Council also determined the B-1 zoning would not be proper. However, City Council did ask the Commission to further consider Mrs. Warden's situation to determine if something could be worked out that would benefit Mrs. Warden and not be detrimental to the area. Mrs. Warden then applied for the R-1-C Zone District, which does permit a home occupation and would allow Mrs. Warden to style wigs in her home. Mrs. Warden does under- stand that she would not be allowed to fix hair on the human head, but would be restricted to fixing wigs. Mrs. Romans stated that the staff does recommend approval of this rezoning request. Mrs. Romans pointed out that Mrs. Warden's property is the only property in that area which is adjacent on two sides to B-2 Business zoning. Mrs. Pierson asked why the staff had changed their mind and would recommend approval of this request? Mrs. Romans pointed out that the first request was for a B-1 Business classification, while this request is for a single-family classification that is less restrictive than the existing R-1-A. Mrs. Romans pointed out that the regulations governing home occupations are extremely limited: there may be no outside entrance, no employees may be employed, the use may occupy only 300 sq. ft. of floor area in the residence, and the use of electric motors is limited. Mr. Williams asked if the zoning would go with the property? Mrs. Romans stated that zoning does go with the property, not with the property owner. I I I I I I Page 1893 Mr. Tanguma asked for persons opposed to the request to speak. No one indicated a desire to speak. Mr. Tanguma then asked for proponents of the request to speak. Mrs. Tina Warden 3001 West Bellewood Drive -stated that she has made several appearances before the Com - mission to discuss her request to fix wigs in her home. She stated that she would be happy to answer any questions members of the Commission might have regarding her request. Mr. Tanguma asked if anyone else would like to speak in favor of the request? No one else spoke in favor. Jones moved: Wade seconded : The Public Hearing on Case #1-76 be closed. AYES: NAYS: Williams, Jones, Par ker, Brown, Tanguma, Wade, Smith, Pierson, Jorgenson None The motion carried. Parker moved: Brown seconded: The Planning Commission recommend to City Council that the rezoning request filed by Mrs. Tina Warden for Lot 30, Block 19, Centennial Acres Second Filing, for a change of zoning from R-1-A, Single-family Residence, to R-1-C, Single-family Residence, be approved. AYES : Brown, Parker, Tanguma NAYS: Williams, Jones, Wade, Jorgenson, Smith, Pierson The motion was defeated. Mrs. Romans noted that Mrs . Warden should be advised of her right to appeal the decision of the Commission to the City Council. Mrs. Warden stated that "you people keep pushing me from one place to another"; she caut ioned that she will not give up on her request , and that she is just trying to make a living. Mr. Tanguma did advise Mrs. Warden that she may appeal to the City Council. V. MARY E. MITCHELL REZONING R-3 to B-1 , Business CASE #37-75 Parker moved: Wade seconded: The matter of Case #37-75 be raised from the Table. AYES : Brown , Jones, Jorgenson, Parker, Pierson, Smith, Tanguma , Wade NAYS : None ABSTAIN: Williams The motion carried. Mr . Tanguma called for discussion among the members of the Commission . Mr. Parker stated that he knows the area very well, and that he has viewed the area recently several times. Mr . Parker stated that he can see possible traffic problems if the area is rezoned to B-1, but no more than if the area were to redevelop with multi-family uses. Mr . Parker noted that at the Public Hearing it was noted the area might develop "piece meal", and that he feels some areas need to develop in that manner. Mr . Parker stated there is a need for the small businesses that employ a small number of people as well as a need for the larger business establishments. Mr. Parker stated he would vote for approval of the rezoning request. Wade moved: Parker seconded : The Planning Commission recommend to City Council the following described area be rezoned from R-3, High Density Residence, to B-1 , Business . All of Lots 17 through 26, Block 1, Skerritt's Addition, and Lots 7 through 18 , Block 5, Skerritt's Addition, Second Filing, and those parts of South Cherokee Street and West Ithaca Avenue which abut said Lots, described as follows: Beginning at the point of intersection of the centerline of the Bannock/Cherokee alley and the extended north line of Lot 7, Block 5, Skerritt's Addition, Second Filing; thence south along said centerline a distance of 300 ft . to the intersection with the extended south line of Lot 18, Block 5, Skertitt's Addition, Second Filing; thence west a distance of 163 ft. to the centerline of South Cherokee Street; thence north along said centerline a distance of 20 ft. to its point of intersection with the centerline of West Ithaca Avenue ; thence west along said centerline of West Ithaca Avenue a distance of 163 ft . to its intersection with the centerline of the extended Cherokee/Delaware alley; thence north along the centerline of the Cherokee/Delaware alley a distance of 280 ft. to its intersection with the extended north lot line of Lot 26 , Block 1, Skerritt's Addition ; thence east a distance of 326 ft. to the point of beginning. Mr. Tanguma asked Mrs. Romans for an up-date on the request. Mrs. Romans stated that the request encompasses both sides of South Cherokee Street between the commercial strip on the south side of U.S. 285 and West Ithaca Avenue e x tended. The re- quest would be an extension of the business zoning on the south side of U.S . 285. Mrs. Romans stated that the B-1 Zone District is that which is applied in the central business district; while the B-2 Zone District is typically applied along major arterials and permits drive-in operations. Mrs. Romans stated that she felt the applicant applied for the B-1 Zone District because it would limit the type of business development, therefore providing some protection to the area while still permitting greater latitude in the use of the land . Mr. Jones stated that he had been concerned about the piece-meal development of the area, and he still has concerns about the matter. Mr . Jones made reference to the "piece-meal" develop- Page 1894 ment that has occurred in the 3400 block of South Bannock Street , and noted that the long process of development has been because of the multiple ownerships. Due to the fact the area is zoned R-3, and that it would require 42,000 sq . ft . to develop further multi-family structures, the property owners would be limited to single-family or two-family development on their land . Mr. Jones noted that the single-family or two-family development on this land would not be the highest and best use of the land, and that he would vote in favor of the motion , even though he has some reservations as to the impact of development over a period of time. Mrs . Pierson stated that she was impressed with the staff's opinion that conditions do not e x ist which justify rezoning the area, and quoted from the staff report the following reasons: 1 . There has been no evidence presented that an error was made in the previous zoning of this area. 2 . No evidence has been presented which indicates that persons would be denied the use of their land under the proposed R-3, High Density Residence District. 3. Inasmuch as the area is now developed with residential uses, the City has no assurance that the subject area can develop into a viable commercial location. South Cherokee Street is identified in the Master Street Plan onl y as a local street , that it does not serve as a major interceptor with U.S. 285. Without frontage on U .S . 285 low visibility would exist for businesses and the difficulties of access would impair the attraction of the area for future developers of commercial property. 4. Although the area has been and is proposed to be zoned for multi-family or high density residence use, it can also be developed under the proposed R-3 Zone District for office use. The R-3 Zone classification which is proposed to be applied to this area has the same permitted uses as did the former R-3-B Zone District. Mrs . Pierson stated that it seemed to her that if this rezoning were granted , it would leave a peninsula of R-3 zoning on South Delaware Street that would be isolated. Mrs . Romans noted that at the meeting of December 17th, the Commission did recommend to City Council that the rezoning applications filed by Mr. VanHeusen for B-2 zoning be approved. This application by Mr. VanHeusen encompassed both sides of South Delaware Street, extending south from the existing B-2 zoning along U .S. 285, to the properties developed with the apart- ment house structures adjacent to West Ithaca Avenue . The application also encompassed the east side of South Elati Street where the First National Bank parking structure is located. Mrs. Romans pointed out that some ownerships in this particular area have been split b y zoning districts , and the property owners could not use their land for this reason . Mrs. Pierson asked if this changed the staff's opinion on the Mitchell rezoning request? Romans stated that it did not . Mr. Smith stated that he agreed the property will be developed with a piece-meal approach on an individual basis. Mr. Tanguma stated that he is concerned about encroachment of business into residentially zoned and developed areas. The question was called for: AYES: Wade, Brown, Jones , Jorgenson, Parker, Smith, Tanguma NAYS: Pierson ABSTAIN: Williams The motion carried. Mrs. VI. MAPLES REZONING REQUEST R-3 to B-2 CASE #34-75 Parker moved : Brown seconded: The matter of Case #34-75 be raised from the Table. AYES: Tanguma , Wade, Brown, Jones, Jorgenson, Parker , Pierson, Smith NAYS: None ABSTAIN: Williams The motion carried. Mr. Tanguma stated the matter was open for discussion among the Commission members. Mrs . Wade noted that the Minutes of December 17th had contained some discussion on whether members could vote on the matter who were not in attendance at the Hearing , or who had not listened to a tape of the meeting. She asked for clarification of this matter. Mrs. Romans stated that Mr. DeWitt had stated that if a member was not at the meeting but did come into the office to listen to the tape of the hearing, that member could vote on the matter. Mr. DeWitt stated that it is his feeling that those persons who did not hear the testimony in person, or at least listen to the tape of the meeting, should abstain from voting on the matter . Mr . Tanguma asked if the Minutes of the meeting were not a legal source of information ? Mr. DeWitt stated that the Minutes are a synopsis of the meeting, and are not transcribed verbatim. Mr. Tanguma asked Mrs. Romans for an up-date on this case. Mrs . Romans stated that Mr. Maples' rezoning request is for an area south of West Belleview Avenue west of the K-Mart property. Mrs. Romans stated there is R-4, Residential/Professional, zoning abutting the property on the east, which is in turn abutted by B-2 zoning and the K- Mart development. To the west and south, the property is abutted by R-3, High Density Resi- dence; to the north across West Belleview Avenue, there is an R-2, Medium Density Zone District, and to the northwest, there is the R-1-A Single-family Residence District . Mrs . Romans stated that the request encompasses property owned by Mr. Maples , and by Messrs. Richard and Robert Hoffschneider, who joined in the request with Mr. Maples . I I I I I I Page 1895 Mr. Parker asked if the R-4 Zone was the "black-topped area?" Mrs. Romans stated that the R-4 Zone was imposed on the west side of the K-Mart property to act as a buffer between the corrrrnercial zone district and the R-3 residential area to the west. The R-4 Zone District permits single-family, two-family uses, professional offices, and parking for commercial uses. Parker moved: Jorgenson seconded: The Planning Commission recommend to City Council the rezoning request filed by Mr. Maples for the following described property be approved, the change of zoning being from R-3, High Density Residence, to B-2, Business. An area including all of Lot 6 of Interurban Addition, except the west 75 feet thereof, or an area described more precisely as: Beginning at the intersection of the east line extended of Lot 6, Inter- urban Addition and the centerline of West Belleview Avenue; thence south a distance of 400 feet; thence west along south line of said lot line a distance of 256 feet; thence north a distance of 400 feet to the inter- section with the centerline of West Belleview Avenue; thence east to the point of beginning. Mr. Jones asked if there was any possibility the R-4 District could be included in this B-2 application? Mrs. Romans stated the area would have to be posted, and a public hearing would have to be held on that particular question. Mrs. Romans stated that there is an ambulance service to the west of the subject site, which was in existence at the time of annexation, and is a non-conforming use in the R-3 Zone District. This property is not in- cluded in this request. Mr. Parker asked if the R-4 Zone District was instituted in this particular case as a buffer or a parking requirement? Mrs. Romans stated it was to serve as a buffer to protect the area to the west of the K-Mart development. Mr. Brown asked how many single-family residences there are in a six-block radius of the subject site? Mrs. Romans stated there would be approximately 16 houses per block in the R-1-A area, which would be 96 homes in a six-block area; there are several single-family houses west of the subject site, but it is not heavily developed residentially at this time. Mr. Brown asked if Mrs. Romans knew of any future plans to widen Belleview Avenue? Mrs. Romans stated that there may be plans for improvement, but she knew of no plans for a major widening. Mr. Brown asked if the staff could see problems with B-2 zoning along Belleview Avenue because of the street width? Mrs. Romans stated that it would be her personal opinion she would not like to see strip zoning along Belleview Avenue. She stated that strip zoning is not necessarily good, and cited some problems along South Broadway. Mr. Jorgenson stated that Mr. Maples has attempted to get this site rezoned previously, and the zoning was denied. Mr. Jorgenson stated that he feels there has been new evidence of attempts to develop the area; he noted that the applicant has stated he has been unable to develop the land or sell the land under the present zoning. Mr. Jorgenson stated that the land is abutted by the ambulance service on the west, and the K-Mart property on the east. Mr. Jorgenson stated that he would be in favor of the B-2 zoning. Mr. Jorgenson stated that he didn't feel it was a good thing to have vacant land in Englewood. Mr. Tanguma stated he didn't think he wanted to see the area developed for commercial use; he noted there are many single-family homes in the area, as well as parks in both Englewood and Littleton, and the additional traffic could present hazards in that regard. Mr. Tanguma stated that to open this area for more commercial development would only increase the dangers already existing on Belleview Avenue. He stated he did not feel this was the time for com- mercial zoning in this area, and again cited the single-family areas in the immediate area. Mr. Parker stated that he had listened to the tape of the meeting of December 17th; on the tape, Mr. Unrein stated that if this property were to be rezoned for commercial use, he would ask that his property also be considered for commercial zoning. Mr. Parker pointed out that Mr. Unrein does have a commercial use at the present time, that is non-conforming in the R-3 Zone District. Mr. Parker stated that he doesn't think strip zoning is the worst thing in the world, and felt that in the future there would be commercial zoning from Broadway to Santa Fe, and that we should expect that. Mr. Parker stated that he could not think of any kind of non-business use that would go in between K-Mart's backdoor and the ambulance service. Mr. Jones noted that the R-4 zoning imposed on a portion of the K-Mart property is a resi- dential/professional classification, and is not included in the rezoning action. He asked if this R-4 area would be considered a "spot" of residential zoning between two areas of B-2 zoning if this request were to be approved? Would this be spot zoning? Mr. DeWitt stated that it would not be spot zoning in this particular situation; he cited the fact the R-4 Zone District is basically a commercial use, even though it is not built on. Mr. Smith stated that as far as the City of Englewood was concerned, the area developed by the K-Mart Store was not intended to be commercial, but when the annexation was contested and the area was placed back under County jurisdiction, the commercial zoning was granted. Mr. Smith stated that it appears to him that Englewood's basic plan was to zone the area residential. Mr. Smith pointed to the topography of the general area and stated that he does not feel the topography lends itself to commercial development. Mr. Smith emphasized that the original concept was residential development in this area, and that to approve this rezoning request would be erroding the residential concept. Mr. Smith stated that he feels the terrain is much more suited to residential development than to commercial. Mrs. Pierson stated that it is on the record that those members who were not in attendance at the meeting or who did not hear the tape should abstain from voting. She felt it should be noted that these members have been asked not to vote. Mr. DeWitt stated that he could not tell the members not in attendance at the hearing, or who did not listen to the tapes not to vote, but he felt there could be problems if they did vote, in that the vote could be challenged. Mrs. Pierson stated this would set a precedent and cause constraint for members who did not attend a meeting in the future. Mrs. Pierson stated that she felt the purpose of a public hearing is to make sure the facts are noted, and that persons have an opportunity to be heard. she stated that she was not sure the Minutes are not a complete enough record to apprise members who might not have been in attendance of the facts and enable them to make a decision on the matter. Mrs. Pierson stated that the members deal in zoning philosophy, and are apprised of the needs of the City of Englewood. Mrs. Pierson stated that she felt members of the Commission who had not heard the testimony could make an intelligent decision on this matter, and she would like to further discuss Mr. DeWitt's comments at a later time. Mrs. Pierson reiterated she did not feel that some members were ineligible to vote on the matter. Page 1896 Mr. Brown stated that he did not know of another person who has done as much for the City as Mr. Maples has; he now has a piece of land he wants to sell, but has been unable to do so under the existing zone classification. Mr. Brown stated that the Commission is charged with the responsibility to consider each case, weigh the facts, and decide what is best for the City of Englewood. Mr . Brown stated that in all fairness to the residents of the area, he would have to say he would give stronger consideration of the rezoning request were for B-1 classification. Mr . Brown noted that Mr. Maples may be able to sell his land if the B-2 zoning were granted, and the new owner might want to put in a car dealership, and he cannot see inflicting such a use on the residential neighborhood. Mr. Brown stated that he could not in good conscience vote for B-2 zoning , but would give stronger consideration to a B-1 classification if Mr. Maples or a future property owner were to apply. Mr . Brown emphasized he feels the B-2 Zone classification would hurt the surrounding residential property owners. Mr. Parker noted that he did go to the office of Community Development , and did listen to the tape of the Public Hearing on Mr. Maples' rezoning request. Pierson moved : Jones seconded: The matter be Tabled for clarification of those members who may vote. It was noted that at the Council meeting of the preceeding evening, it was determined that a motion to Table cannot take precedence over a motion that is before the particular body. Mr . Tanguma asked if the Commission had to abide by Mr . DeWitt's ruling those eligible to vote? Mr. DeWitt stated that the Public Hearing before the Commission was a quasi-judicial hearing, and the people at the hearing heard the testimony. Mr. DeWitt stated there is more to making a decision on the matter than reading a staff report ; both sides of an issue have a right to be heard. Mr . DeWitt stated that he feels the Courts will not sustain a deciding vote by members who were not present at the Public Hearing . The vote on Mr . Parker's motion to approve the zoning was called : AYES: Jorgenson, Parker NAYS: Smith, Tanguma, Wade, Brown , Jones, Pierson ABSTAIN: Williams The Chairman declared that the motion failed. Mrs . Romans noted that Mr. Maples should be advised of his right to appeal the decision to City Council. Mr. Lou Cangilla 5000 South Delaware -stated he would like to thank the Commission , particularly those who had attended the Hearing, for their decision. He stated he realized that considerable thought was given to the matter , and he wanted to express his appreciation and that of other property owners in the neighborhood for the Commission's time and effort. A recess was called . The meeting was reconvened with the following members present: Pierson, Smith, Tanguma, Wade, Williams, Brown , Jones, Jorgenson, Parker. No members were absent. VII. PROPOSED ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT Definition of "Temporary Structure" CASE #4-76 A proposed definition of "Temporary Structure" has been prepared by Mr. DeWitt at the request of the Planning Commission. Mr . DeWitt stated that the proposed definition was considered as a result of a temporary building constructed at Broadway and Belleview which was approved early in 1975. The Com- mission had voiced concern over the length of time the "temporary" building could remain on the lot. Another concern voiced was that the structure conform to the zone classification applied to the land on which the building is to be placed . Mr. DeWitt stated that he feels the proposed definition does cover both concerns expressed by the Commission . Mrs. Romans stated that plans were submitted for the permanent structure on the site at Broadway and Belleview showing the location of that structure. She noted that the bids for construction of this project were let a few months ago . Discussion followed. The time limitation of six months and the possible extension of the time limit was considered in depth. It was suggested that possibly the amendment to the Supplemental Regulations be added to to read" ..... b y the Code Enforcement Division, FOR A PERIOD NOT TO EXCEED AN ADDITIONAL SIX MONTHS." Jones moved : Brown seconded: The Commission approve the proposed definition of temporary structure, as amended. AYES: NAYS : Parker, Pierson, Smith, Tanguma, Wade , Williams, Brown, Jones , Jorgenson None The motion carried. It was determined the public hearing on the proposed amendment to the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance would be scheduled for February 18th. Mr . Jones noted he would be out of town from January 28th through February 23rd. I I I I I I Page 1897 VIII. DIRECTOR'S CHOICE. Mrs. Romans reported on progress with the Larwin Corporation in solution of a problem re- ported by Mr. Brown, wherein heat lamps placed in the ceiling directly over the shower and tub units, have broken when splashed with water and have resulted in injury to at least one of the residents of the Complex. The matter was reported to the Code Enforcement Division, and Mr. Brokate had the matter checked into. The Inspectors viewed some of the units, and the heat lamps were properly placed over the dressing area. The staff then called the attorney representing the resident of the complex who was injured, and the attorney arranged for the inspectors to view her apartment; the Inspectors found that the heat lamps are, in- deed, installed directly over the tub and shower in that unit. Mrs. Romans stated that Mr. Brokate has been asked to prepare a recommendation to amend the Codes to keep this from happening in the future. Whether or not the City can require Larwin to change the location of the heat lamps in the existing units has not been determined, but an attempt will be made to do so. The Planning Commission also asked the staff to contact the Larwin Company to see if they could meet with a representative of that company. A letter was received from a Mr. Pogue who is a Vice President of Larwin Multi-Housing Corporation. The meeting has tentatively been scheduled for January 20th. Mrs. Romans asked if there was any information the members wanted for the meeting? Mr. Tanguma stated he would like a list of all the things that were promised that have not been done. Mrs. Romans stated that there is very little in the record to tie Larwin down; that most of the things they said they would do were taken in good faith, and not made a part of the Subdivision Waiver Conditions. Mrs. Romans stated that she hoped to find out what the Company plans to do with the remainder of the site that is undeveloped; she has told them they will have to file a Subdivision Plat for the entire parcel, streets will have to be dedicated to an acceptable width, and they will have to comply in all respects with the Subdivision Regulations. Mrs. Romans reported that the G.0. Bond election did carry, and the groundbreaking for the 104-unit apartment complex for elderly citizens will, hopefully, be on January 15th. Mrs. Romans stated that the ECBC is still very active. The Englewood Centennial-Bicentennial Foundation has been created and will be starting the fund-raising drive very soon. The City Council voted to locate the Senior Citizens Center at Lincoln Street and Girard Avenue, just south of the Elderly Housing units. Mrs. Romans stated that some problems have been noted in trying to work with the Moving and Demolition Ordinance. In trying to control the residential units to be moved into the City, it is now required to have a Public Hearing before any structure can be moved into the City. This applies to all structures, even in the industrial area. Mrs. Romans asked if the Com- mission felt it was necessary to have a Public Hearing on structures to be moved into the industrial area; the building in question was not to be on a foundation, and is to be used as a temporary office. Mr. Jones stated that he felt the intent of the Ordinance was to per- tain to permanent structures, and not temporary buildings. Mr. Smith asked if a Building Permit is required for temporary buildings? Mrs. Romans stated that it is not. Mr. Smith suggested that possibly those structures not requiring a Building Permit could be excluded from the Public Hearings. Brief discussion followed. Mr. Williams asked if the State Highway Department would be sent a copy of the permit at such time as a structure is to be moved out of Englewood? Mrs. Romans noted that the Ordinance requires notification of all jurisdictions. Mr. Williams asked if the mover had a permit from the State Highway Department, did they also have to have a permit from Englewood to move through the City. Mrs. Romans stated that the mover must have an Englewood permit. Mrs. Romans discussed a letter drafted to Mr. Martin at the request of the Commission. The letter, as amended, is as follows: "Mr. Arthur L. Martin, Jr. 5054 South Grove Street Englewood, Colorado 80110 Dear Art: The members of the City Planning and Zoning Commission very much regret your decision to resign from the Commission. We do however, respect the decision you have made, knowing that you did not take this action without first having given very careful and deliberate thought to the matter. Hsving served on the Commission since 1973, and as Chairman since February of 1974, you have contributed much to your community. You have always acted honestly, with integrity and in the best interest of the citizens of Englewood. For this, we commend you. We wish you well in your future endeavors, knowing that you will find other ways to serve. Sincerely, /sf Eddie Tanguma, Jr. Vice-Chairman" Mrs. Romans stated that she had been in Houston, Texas, recently, and cited an article in the Houston Business Journal, which discussed problems experienced in Planning in Houston. Mrs. Romans pointed out that Houston has no zoning, and development in that City is controlled primarily by Subdivision Plats. IX. COMMISSION'S CHOICE. Mr. Jones suggested the Commission develop a Mixed Use Commercial District which could be of help in some instances such as the Commission has considered this evening. This District would have a Planned Development aspect, and would permit a mixture of uses. He felt this would provide some protection for adjacent property owners, inasmuch as they would know what uses to expect in such a development. They could be assured that what had been discussed at the Public Hearing would indeed be built. Mr. Jones stated that the present business zoning leaves a lot to be desired. He stated that he felt a Mixed Use District would provide some type of co~trol tha~ would protect the adjacent property owners. Mr. Tanguma suggested a study session on this matter. Mr. Jones stated that drafting this ordinance is going to take a lot of work a~d resear7h. He suggested that the Commission might want to incorporate feed- back from the City Council, and from the business community in their research and study. Page 1898 Mrs. Pierson stated that she will be taking some classes, and will have to miss most, if not all, of the regular meetings for the next two months. She stated that she is very in- terested in the Planning process, and wants to continue to be a member of the Commission, but will have to miss these meetings. Mr. Tanguma stated that he felt it "was time the City woke up and decided there some kids in this town who have needs, too." Mr. Tanguma stated he would like to ask City Council to match the money given for the senior citizens recreation center to be devoted to construction of a community center so the children would have some place to go. Mr. Brown stated that a community center is in the long-range plan of the City, and is in the budget for future con- struction. Mr. Jones stated that it is planned for 1977. Mr. Jones stated that the possibility of working with the schools on the use of the buildings is being explored, and that Mr. Clayton and Mr. Brown are working with the School Board. In reference to discussion earlier in the meeting, Mrs. Romans pointed out that car sales lots are permitted in the B-1 Zone District as well as in the B-2 Zone Districts. Mrs. Romans stated that new car sales lots are permitted in the B-1 Zone District, and used car sales lots are permitted in conjunction with a new car establishment. Mrs. Romans stated that under the R-3 Zone District, which is presently established on Mr. Maples' land, there is sufficient land to put in an office building, high-density residential use, a medical clinic or a nursing home, for example. Mr. Jones expressed concern over possible rezoning of the Maples' site; he noted to have no buffer between the business zoning and the R-1-A, Single-family Residence area, is downgrading the residential area. Mr. Brown noted that the G.O. Bond election passed with a good majority, and this is probably the only place in the U. S. that has been able to pass a bond election with that kind of strength." Mr. Brown stated he wanted to thank Mrs. Romans for checking into the situation at the Larwin site, and for her efforts in getting the gate replaced. Mr. Brown stated that the gates are in place, but they are not connected to the fence, and on the right side a car could get through if they went across the lawn. Discussion followed. Mr. Brown noted that the Larwin Corporation did give the land for the park, and that there are "many plusses to the development." Mr. Smith asked what City Council had done relating to the RTD resolution on the station location? Mr. Jones stated that the City was presented with the maps and drawings of three alternate locations and he understood there is to be a Public Hearing on the 22nd at the Fire/Police Complex. Further discussion regarding the RTD ensued. Mr. Tanguma inquired about the site that was proposed for the Hilton Inn? that nothing further has been heard regarding the site. The meeting adjourned at 9:50 p.m. Gertrude G. Welty Recording Secretary Mrs. Romans stated MEMORANDUM TO THE ENGLEWOOD CITY COUNCIL REGARDING ACTION OR RECOMMENDATION OF THE CITY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION. DATE: SUBJECT: RECOMMENDATION: Jones moved: Parker seconded: January 6, 1976 REcommended Approval of Proposed R-2-C Zone District The Planning Commission recommend to City Council the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance be amended by the approval and adoption of the proposed R-2-C Zone District as set forth in Case #2-76. AYES: NAYS: Wade, Jones, Pierson, Jorgenson, Parker, Williams, Smith, Brown, Tanguma None The motion carried. Respectfully submitted, By Order of the City Planning and Zoning Commission. Gertrude G. Welty Recording Secretary MEMORANDUM TO THE ENGLEWOOD CITY COUNCIL REGARDING ACTION OR RECOMMENDATION OF THE CITY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION. DATE: January 6, 1976 SUBJECT: Denial of Rezoning Request I I I I I I ACTION: Parker moved: Brown seconded: Page 1899 The Planning Commission recommend to City Council that the rezoning re- quest filed by Mrs. Tina Warden for Lot 30, Block 19, Centennial Acres, Second Filing, for a change of zoning from R-1-A, Single-family Residence, to R-1-A, Single-family Residence, be approved. AYES: Brown, Parker, Tanguma NAYS: Williams, Jones, Wade, Jorgenson, Smith, Pierson The motion was defeated. Respectfully submitted, By Order of the City Planning and Zoning Commission. Gertrude G. Welty Recording Secretary MEMORANDUM TO THE ENGLEWOOD CITY COUNCIL REGARDING ACTION OR RECOMMENDATION OF THE CITY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION. DATE: January 6, 1976 SUBJECT: Recommended Approval of Rezoning Request RECOMMENDATION: Wade moved: Parker seconded: The Planning Commission recommend to City Council the following described area be rezoned from R-3, High Density Residence, to B-1, Business. All of Lots 17 through 26, Block 1, Skerritt's Addition, and Lots 7 through 18, Block 5, Skerritt's Addition, Second Filing, and those parts of South Cherokee Street and West Ithaca Avenue which abut said Lots, described as follows: Beginning at the point of intersection of the centerline of the Bannock/Cherokee alley and the extended north line of Lot 7, Block 5, Skerritt's Addition, Second Filing; thence south along said centerline a distance of 300 ft. to the intersection with the extended south line of Lot 18, Block 5, Skerritt's Addition, Second Filing; thence west a distance of 163 ft. to the centerline of South Cherokee Street; thence north along said centerline a distance of 20 ft. to its point of intersection with the centerline of West Ithaca Avenue; thence west along said centerline of West Ithaca Avenue a distance of 163 ft. to its intersection with the centerline of the extended Cherokee/ Delaware alley; thence north along the centerline of the Cherokee/Delaware alley a distance of 280 ft. to its intersection with the extended north lot line of Lot 26, Block 1, Skerritt's Addition; thence east a distance of 326 ft. to the point of beginning. AYES: Wade, Brown, Jones, Jorgenson, Parker, Smith, Tanguma NAYS: Pierson ABSTAIN: Williams The motion carried. Respectfully submitted, By Order of the City Planning and Zoning Commission. Gertrude G. Welty Recording Secretary MEMORANDUM TO THE ENGLEWOOD CITY COUNCIL REGARDING ACTION OR RECOMMENDATION OF THE CITY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION. DATE: January 6, 1976 SUBJECT: Denial of Rezoning Request ACTION: Parker moved: Jorgenson seconded: The Planning Commission recommend to City Council the rezoning request filed by Mr. Maples for the following described property be approved, the change of zoning being from R-3, High Density Residence, to B-2, Business. An area including all of Lot 6, of Interurban Addition, except the west 75 feet thereof, or an area described ore precisely as: Beginning at the intersection of the east line extended of Lot 6, Interurban Addition and the centerline of West Belleview Avenue; thence south a distance of 400 feet; thence west along south line of said lot line a distance of 256 feet; thence north a distance of 400 feet to the intersection with the centerline of West Belleview Avenue; thence east to the point of beginning. Page 1900 The vote was called: AYES: Jorgenson, Parker NAYS: Smith, Tanguma, Wade, Brown, Jones , Pierson ABSTAIN: Williams The Chairman declared that the motion failed. Respectfully submitted, By Order of the City Planning and Zoning Commission. Gertrude G. Welty Recording Secretary * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * I. CALL TO ORDER. CITY OF ENGLEWOOD PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION January 20, 1976 The Regular meeting of the City Planning and Zoning Commission was called to order at 7:00 p.m . by Vice-Chairman Tanguma . Members present : Williams, Jones, Jorgenson, Smith, Tanguma, Wade Romans, Ex-officio Members absent: Brown, Parker, Pierson Also present: Assistant City Attorney DeWitt Associate Planner House II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES. Mrs. Romans noted that Mr. Parker had called and felt that the Minutes should be amended on Pages 11 and 12, as follows: Page 11, Paragraph #1, Line 6: "That he could not think of any kind of NON-business USE that would go Page 12, Paragraph #2, Line 3: " ..... on Mr . Maples' REZONING request." Page 12, Paragraph #7, Line 1: AYES: "JORGENSON, Parker". Smith moved: Jones seconded: The Minutes of January 6, 1976, be approved as amended. AYES: Wade, Williams, Jones, Jorgenson , Smith, Tanguma NAYS: None ABSENT: Brown, Parker, Pierson The motion carried. III. B. L. & WANNITTA WEAVER R-1-C, Single-family to R-2, Medium Density Jones moved: Wade seconded: The Public Hearing on Case #3-76 be opened. AYES: Tanguma, Wade, Williams, Jones, Jorgenson, Smith NAYS: None ABSENT: Brown, Parker, Pierson The motion carried. Mr . Tanguma asked Mrs. Romans to give a background of the rezoning request. II CASE #3-76 Mrs. Romans stated that the rezoning request was submitted by Mr. and Mrs. B. L. Weaver, for a change of zoning from R-1-C , Single-family Residence, to R-2, Medium Density Residence. The request encompasses their property, and property owned by Mrs. Maye Ferguson. Legal notice of the Public Hearing was published in the Englewood Herald Sentinel, and the property was posted the required number of days prior to the Hearing. The property is situated on the south side of West Union Avenue, on the east side of South Decatur Street. Properties to the north and east are zoned for industrial use; properties to the west are zoned R-1-B, Single- family Residence , and property abutting on the south is zoned R-1-C, Single-family Residence. Mrs. Romans contrasted the requirements of the R-1-B and R-1-C Zone Districts, noting that the basic difference is in minimum frontage, and minimum lot area. The area abutting the subject properties on the south is a very "open type" development --houses on acreages, and is not as closely developed as is the area to the west. There is a small area north of West Union Avenue that was zoned for R-3 High Density Residence, but it has not developed to this time. Centennial Park is also the north across West Union Avenue. Mrs. Romans stated that the subject area was zoned R-1-A, Single-family Residence, upon annexation to the City by the Simultaneous Zoning and Annexation Ordinance that was in effect at that time. A re- quest was made for industrial zoning of the area that was not completed because property I I I