Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1987-04-21 PZC MINUTES' • • • • I. CITY OF ENG~EWOOD PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION APRIL 21, 1987 CALL TO ORDER. The regular meeting of the Englewooq Planni~g and Zoning Commission was called to order at 7:00 P.M. by Chairman Carson. Members present: Carson, Maunakea, Mulhern, Russell, Allen, Barbre, Beier Romans, Ex-officio Members absent: Hanson, Magnuson Also present: Senior Planner Susan Hirsch Planner II Harold Stitt Zoning Enforcement Officer Joyce Parsons Traffic Engineer Joe Plizga Patrol Chief Robert Moore II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES. March 17, 1987 Chairman Carson stated that the Minut~s of March 17, 1987 were to be con- sidered for approval . A 11 en moved: Mulhern seconded: The Minutes of March 17, 1~87 be approved as written . AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Maunakea, Mulhern , Russell, Allen, ~~rbre, Beier, Carson None Hanson, Magnuson None The motion carried. III. COMPREHENSIVE ZON!NG ORDINANCE. §16.4-1: Zone District Restrictions §16.4-16: Flood Plain District §16.4-18: Landscape Ordinance §16 .5: General Regulations §16.7-4: Legal Status Provisions §16 .8 : Definitions Chairman Carson stated that he does have in hand a copy of the legal not i ce of the Public Hearing, which was published in the Englewood Sentinel on April 8 , 1987. Chairman Carson stated that there are amendments to several sections of the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance to be considereq in the Public Hearing thi s evening. The Hearing will be conducted on e~ch section separately, with s t af f presentation, testimony from the audience in favor of the amendment , and f ol - lowed by testimony from the audience in opposition to the amendment . Follow - i ng the consideration of all sections of the Zpning Ordinance, the Hearing -1 - will be closed, the Commission will discuss the amendments and the testimony that has been presented, both written and verbal, and will render their decision. Mr. Carson asked that all persons addressing the Planning Commission come to the podium and be sworn in prior to giving their testimony. Mr. Carson asked for a motion to open the Public Hearing. Beier moved: Barbre seconded: The Public Hearing on Case #7-87 be opened. AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Maunakea, None Magnuson, None The motion carried. Mulhern, Russell, Allen, Barbre, Beier, Carson Hanson Mr. Carson asked for the staff presentation. Mrs. Dorothy Romans was sworn in. Mrs. Romans asked that the Staff Report for Case #7-87 be made a part of the official record of the Hearing. Mrs. Romans introduced Ms. Susan Hirsch, Senior Planner, who will be making a presentation in conjunction with Zoning Enforcement Officer Joyce Parsons on the problems that exist which have led up to the proposed amendments of the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance. Mrs. Romans stated that for a number of years, members of the Planning Commis- sion, Board of Adjustment and Appeals, and City Council have been critical of the enforcement procedures within the City. In fact, a statement was incorpo- rated in the last edition of the Comprehensive Plan that there was a need to "beef up" the enforcement procedures. This has resulted in the hiring of a full time Zoning Enforcement Officer, a position filled by Mrs. Parsons, in addition to two Code Enforcement Officers. Mrs. Romans presented members of the Commission with a list of complaints that she has personally received within the last six months. Mrs. Romans stated that additional copies of the proposed amendments are available for members of the audience. She pointed out that in the proposed amendments words and phrases to be eliminated are crossed out; new wording that is to be added to and included in the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance is indicated in capital letters. Mrs. Romans stated that the drafting of the proposed amendments to the Com - prehensive Zoning Ordinance has been a joint effort by staff members of the Municipal Court, the Police Department, the City Attorney's Office, the Build- ing and Safety Division (Code Enforcement), and the Planning Division. Mrs. Romans stated that Senior Planner Hirsch and Zoning Enforcement Officer Par - sons would now show slides of problems that will be addressed by the proposed amendments to the Ordinance. These slides depicted problems with junk and trash stored in yards, vehicle storage, inoperable vehicles, front yard violations, recreational vehicle storage on streets, tractor trailers parked on street or on public right-of- way and/or in close proximity to an adjoining residential use. Ms. Hirsch -2 - ' • • • • • • stated that with the exception of two or three slides which are of the in- dustrial area, these problems exist in the residential areas of the City today. Mrs. Russell asked if any of the property owners whose properties were shown in the slides have been cited by the Zoning Enforcement or Code Enforcement Officers, and are not the ordinances that currently are in effect adequate to handle these problems. Mrs. Parsons stated that some of these property owners have been cited, some on more than one occasion. The current ordinances are not adequate to address all of the problems that were depicted by the slides. Mrs. Romans introduced Chief Robert Moore of the Police Department . Robert Moore was sworn in, and testified that he is Chief of Patrol in the Englewood Police Department. Chief Moore stated that the Police Department is not called on the problems cited in the slides as often as the Zoning Enforce - ment Officer and Code Enforcement Officers are called. Chief Moore discussed the problems that the Police Department experience in dealing with "abandoned'' vehicles, tractor trailers parked on streets which are posted for a specific weight limitation, etc. He pointed out that the Police Department can handle only those problems wherein the public right-of-way is involved. They do not address the storage of junk and trash on private property, or the storage of inoperable vehicles on private property. Mr. Moore suggested that it is the responsibility of the Commission and Council to determine whether this type of use of private property and public streets should be allowed. He stated that he felt that sufficient complaints have been received to demonstrate that the majority of the citizens of the City feel this is a problem. Chief Moore stated that the Police Department responds on a "complaint basis"; they do not seek out violations of this nature. Chief Moore stated that if the proposed amendments are approved by the Commission and City Council, it will not mean a step-up in the citation and warning procedures presently followed by the Police Department, but it will mean that the officers will be better able to respond to the complaints and see something done. Mr. Maunakea asked what procedure would be followed if a vehicle was unregis- tered. Chief Moore stated that the vehicle could ultimately be towed by order of the Police Department if it was unregistered. Mrs. Russell asked about the parking of tanker trucks carrying hazardous materials; does this occur frequently. Chief Moore stated that the Department has received complaints about tanker trucks parking in violation of the load limitations, but he was not aware whether they were carrying a full load or not. Ms. Joyce Parsons, Zoning Enforcement Officer, was sworn in . Ms. Parsons ad - dressed the i ssue of whether existing ordinances are sufficient to handle the problems depicted in the slides shown previously. She pointed out that there are no provisions to handle the salvage and storage operations that are being conducted on residential properties or on the public streets. There are no provisions to handle the problem of motor vehicles and recreational vehic l es stored on the streets or in yards. Complaints are received from neighbors and realtors about the condition of various properties, but the ways to address these problems are limited . Mr. Allen asked if the proposed amendments would address the problem of unau - thorized use of a dumpster by unknown individuals. He cited his experiences -3 - of having to dispose of sofas, mattresses, etc. that have been left at his commercial dumpster over night or over the weekend, and he does not know who is responsible. Ms. Parsons stated that if it could be determined who does this unauthorized dumping they could be cited for trespassing. Mr. Allen stated that he feels the proposed amendments covers the problems of vehicular storage, salvage and illegal parking in residential districts very well, but the problem of illegal dumping should be addressed. Mr. Carson asked if such an amendment could be included in this section of the Ordinance. Mrs. Romans stated that amendments are also being made to two com- panion ordinances that are part of the Englewood Municipal Code. She sugges- ted that this problem would be more properly addressed in the Weed, Trash, and Litter Ordinance. Chief Moore supported Ms. Parsons's statement that if it is determined who is doing the illegal dumping, they can be cited into court. Mr. Allen stated that he has taken pictures of some of the materials that have been left at his dumpster; he also discussed his unsuccessful efforts to con- tact City personnel to register a complaint, and he finally had the items hauled to the dump at his expense. Ms. Parsons stated that if Mr. Allen will call her in the future, she will arrange for a City truck to pick up the items that have been illegally dumped on Mr. Allen's property and have them hauled away. Mr. Maunakea pointed out that large dogs cause problems with trash barrels placed in alleys, and create a very unattractive, unsanitary situation. Mr. Magnuson entered the meeting at 7:45 P.M. Mrs. Russell observed that Ms. Parsons had stated it is difficult to determine "junk" under the existing ordinance; how will the amendments to the Ordinance make this determination easier. Ms. Parsons stated that it will not be neces- sary to cl ass i fy stored items as "junk", which is a judgment ca 11; it wi 11 not be as difficult to prove the material to be "salvage". Therefore, the en- forcement of the Ordinance will be easier. Mr. Carson asked if the staff had further information to present at this time. Mrs. Romans stated the staff did not. Mr. Carson then stated the Commission would hear from persons in the audience who are in favor of the proposed amendments to Section 16.4-1, and asked that Mr. Joel Huston address the Commission. Mr. Joel Huston was sworn in, and testified that he has lived in his house at 3290 South Galapago Street since 1953 when he had it built. Mr. Houston dis- cussed the matter of a tractor trailer that is parked off of South Fox Street. There is no alley in the 3200 block of South Fox Street between South Fox and South Galapago. This tractor trailer unit is parked with the front bumper within eight feet of Mr. Houston's property line. Mr. Huston discussed the problems that are created when he attempts to back his vehicle out of his garage and cannot see the oncoming traffic on Floyd Avenue because of the visual obstruction created by the tractor trailer. Mr. Huston also discussed the air pollution problems which the tractor trailer creates during the cold weather when the engine is allowed to run for some length of time to warm up. -4 - • • • • • • • • The diesel fumes get in to his house through the air intake system on his fur- nace. Mr. Huston also noted that school children have to walk in the street because the sidewalk is obstructed by the parking of this tractor trailer. Mr. Huston then discussed another situation across the street wherein one-half of the fence has been torn down to accommodate the parking of another large tractor trailer unit. Mr. Huston stated that he feels the people of Englewood are entitled to have the amendments proposed incorporated in the Ordinance. Mr. Oliver W. Yeo, 4297 South Elati Street, was sworn in, and testified that he is of the opinion that the amendments proposed to the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance are important to the future of Englewood. Mr. Yeo discussed the impression that prospective residents may receive of Englewood by driving through the residential areas. Mr. Yeo stated that the downtown area is being improved and beautified, and he felt it is necessary that the residential areas be kept in a clean and attractive condition, also. Mr. Yeo noted that the majority of homes in Englewood are well maintained, but there is that one or two homes per block that can blight an entire neighborhood. He pointed out that it will not be difficult to comply with the restrictions of the proposed ordinance, and it will only require a little bit of ambition on the part of the home owner. Mr. Gerald Davis, 3055 South Cherokee Street, gave affirmation that his state- ments to the Commission would be the truth and nothing but the truth . Mr. Davis described a property in his area that has at least three cars that have been moved in over the last year; a fourth vehicle was moved in not too long ago, but has a 1985 license. Mr. Davis stated that he is of the opinion the City should require a valid license on all cars, as well as a current emis- sions sticker. Mr. Davis stated that on this particular property he is citing, tires, gas cans and other items are stored between the cars in the rear yard. The front porch on the house is at least one-half full with equip- ment, machines, and miscellaneous auto parts. Mr. Davis reiterated his opinion that all vehicles must carry a current license and should be in operable condition. Frances Schaeffer, 3536 South Ogden Street, was sworn in, and testified that she has been a resident of Englewood since 1946. Mrs. Schaeffer read into the record a letter signed by B. David Miley, Issues Political Action Committee Chairman of the South Suburban Board of Realtors, in support of the proposed amendments to Section 16.4-1. Mrs. Schaeffer stated that she is a realtor by profession, and has seen instances wherein property values have decreased by several thousand dollars because of the condition of a property in the same block or in close proximity. Mrs. Schaeffer urged passage of the proposed amendments and stated that she "would like to see some real teeth put in the law to allow better enforcement". Ms. Lois Lighthall, 1540 East Girard Place, was sworn in. Ms. Lighthall stated that one of the things she finds very irritating is the number of vehi - cles that may be parked in a driveway, and the last vehicle which is parked is protruding over the sidewalk. Ms . Lighthall stated that senior citizens are urged to walk for exercise , and often find they have to walk in the street because the sidewalks are blocked by vehicles improperly parked . Ms. Ligh- thall stated that repeated citations to an individual don't do any good; she stated that there is a need to "put teeth in the Ordinance" so that if com- pliance is not forthcoming after notification, the City can clean a property and bill the property owner. Ms. Lighthall discussed the problem of absentee -5 - property owners and the renters in the City. Ms. Lighthall stated that she did not feel the policy of the Police Department of responding only to com- plaints has helped the situation, and that it is wrong to administer by com- plaint of neighbors. It is not wrong to enforce an ordinance by viewing the violation first hand and feels that members of the Police Department should issue citations on illegally parked vehicles on their own rather than waiting for a complaint. Mrs. Houghton, 4439 South Pearl Street was sworn in. Mrs. Houghton stated there is a towing company that has moved into this block; there are three cars parked on the street, and two parked in the driveway that are being worked on, and one parked in the back. The vehicles at this location are worked on until midnight or after, which disturbs the peace and quiet of the neighborhood. Mrs. Houghton stated that this is a residential neighborhood, and asked why this individual is allowed to bring a business into this area. Other resi- dents of the area have no place to park because he takes up the on-street parking for his vehicles. Mrs. Parsons stated that this individual is operating a towing business out of this residence, but the business is on call via phone. She stated that she cannot have his telephone taken out. Mrs. Parsons stated that she has no con- trol over the on-street parking of the vehicles. Neither can she do anything about the "storage" in the back yard until some provisions are approved to give her that authority. Mrs. Parsons stated that she realized what the neighbors have to contend with, and that she understood some of the neighbors have been threatened by this individual. Ruth Mannon, 4450 South Pearl Street, was sworn in. Mrs. Mannon testified that she is also a neighbor of the towing company. She further testified that some of the vehicles he works on are race cars, and that the motors are revved up until midnight or l A.M. The neighborhood is fairly quiet until 10:30 A.M. or so. Mr. C. R. Mannon, 4450 South Pearl Street, was sworn in, and also testified that vehicles are worked on by the individual at the towing company all hours of the day or night. Mr. Mannon stated that this was a nice, quiet, residen- tial neighborhood until this individual moved in and opened the towing busi- ness. Mr. Mannon stated that on his way to this meeting, he counted seven vehicles parked in various sections of the block that belong to this indi- vidual. He stated that this is a very annoying problem to the other residents in the neighborhood. Mr. Kratzer, 4440 South Pearl Street, was sworn in. Mr. Kratzer also tes- tified that the cars at the towing business are worked on all night, and it is an annoyance to the neighbors. Don Seymour, 4750 South Lipan Street, was sworn in. He stated that in one of his walks, he has observed two or three violations per block. Mr. Seymour stated that his concerns are that more law isn't necessarily better law. He stated that he is also concerned about the requirement that parking in front of the front setback of the principal structure not be allowed unless the parking area is concrete, brick paver, or an asphalt surface. Generally speaking, Mr. Seymour stated that he thinks the proposed amendments are good, • • • and should be enforced. Mr. Seymour stated that he "would like to put in a • good word for the poor guy with one boat parked along the side of his house on the street". He asked that this type of offense be viewed with care. -6 - • • • / Mrs. Russell asked how an ordinance could be written to distinguish between the "hard core offender" and the other type of individual who may have one boat, or one trailer that is not properly stored on his property. Mr. Seymour stated that there are lot of dirt driveways in the City, and a lot of campers parked/stored in the back yard that would still be in violation of the ordinance as it is written. He strongly advised against being "nit- picky". Mr. Seymour stated that he and his neighbors try to resolve any prob- lems between themselves. Mr. Seymour further stated that most of his neigh- bors have some type of recreational vehicle, and that he "gets nervous when someone tells me how many "toys" I can have and where they may be stored". Mr. Seymour suggested that proper screening could handle a lot of the problems. Mr. Carson asked if there were other members of the audience who wanted to address the Commission in favor of the proposed amendments to Section 16.4-1. No one else indicated a desire to address the Commission in favor of the pro- posed amendments to this section of the Zoning Ordinance. Mr. Carson then asked that those members of the audience who were in opposi- tion to the proposed amendments of Section 16.4-1 address the Commission. Mr. Clifton P. Coleman, 3901 South Galapago Street, was sworn in, and tes- tified that he has lived in Englewood for over 10 years. Mr. Coleman stated that he appreciates the efforts that are being made to improve the City. Mr. Coleman stated that he is all in favor of eliminating the storage, salvage and junk operations in residential areas, the elimination of abandoned vehicles, etc. Mr. Coleman stated that in the slides that were shown, he did not recall any of a "motorhome". He saw several shots of recreational vehicles. Mr. Coleman stated that he has a motorhome that is in excess of 6,000 pounds. Mr . Coleman stated that if the definition of a recreational vehicle includes a motorhome, he would have a problem supporting this portion of the proposed amendments. Mr. Coleman suggested that there should be an exception for vehi- cles in excess of the 6,000 pound limit. Mr. Coleman stated that a number of residents of Englewood own motor homes; these residents pay license fees and highway user fees, which brings income to the City. Mr. Coleman questioned the "generic definition" of "Housekeeping Vehicle" which is a proposed amend- ment to the Ordinance. Mr. Coleman stated that a motorhome is a self- contained vehicle. Mr. Carson stated that he has driven down Galapago Street, and finds the visibility at the intersection is impaired because of the location of Mr. Coleman's motorhome. The motorhome appeared to be parked too close to the school crossing, and it has an electrical cord extending from the house to the motorhome across a sidewalk. Mr. Coleman stated that he has discussed the matter of the electrical cord with Mrs. Romans previously. The motorhome has two batteries equivalent to those contained in tractor trailers, which cost approximately $500 each. This electrical cord extends to a converter which converts the 110 electrical ser- vice to 12 volt to keep the batteries charged during the winter months. The cord goes over the motorhome, and over the trees into the house, and there is no way a small child could reach the cord. As far as the crosswalk is con- cerned, if Mr. Carson was referring to the crosswalk at the alley this was abandoned some time ago when the crossing signal was removed. Mr. Coleman -7 - stated that he has his motorhome parked 70 feet "exactly" from the intersec- tion of South Galapago Street and West Mansfield Avenue, and he supports the 65 foot sight distance as proposed in another section of the amendments. Mr. Carson asked if there was anyone else in the audience who wished to speak in opposition to amendments to Section 16.4-1. No one else spoke in opposition. Mr. Carson stated the Commission would now hear a presentation on amendments to Section 16.4-16, Flood Plain District. Mr. Harold Stitt, Planner II, was sworn in. Mr. Stitt submitted to the Com- mission members a copy of proposed changes to be incorporated in the Flood Plain District regulations. These changes are primarily "housekeeping"changes in the proposed amendments as previously considered by the Commission. Mr. Stitt stated that the Flood Plain regulations have been in effect in Englewood for several years. The Federal Government and State Water Conservation Board have proposed revisions to the existing regulations that should be enacted by April l; however, if a community is working on the revisions and making prog- ress, the flood insurance program will not be pulled from that community. The Flood Plain Ordinance before the Commission does comply with the Federal Reg- ulations. Mr. Stitt pointed out to the Commission that the proposed amend- ments are federally mandated changes and the City must comply or lose the Flood Insurance Program. Mr. Carson asked if any member of the audience wished to address the Commis- sion in favor of the proposed amendments to Section 16.4-16. No one addressed the Commission. Mr. Carson then asked if anyone in the audience wished to speak in opposition to the proposed amendments. No one spoke in opposition. Mr. Carson declared a five minute recess of the Meeting. The meeting was again called to order by Chairman Carson, with the following members in attendance: Maunakea, Mulhern, Allen, Barbre, Beier, Magnuson, Russell, and Carson. Mr. Hanson was absent. Mr. Carson stated that the Commission would now consider amendments to Section 16.4-18, the Landscape Ordinance. Mr. Carson asked for the staff presentation. Mrs. Romans stated that the proposed amendments to the Landscape Ordinance have been discussed by the Commission on several occasions, but that the staff would be glad to answer any questions. Mr. Carson asked if any member of the audience wanted to address the Commis- sion either in favor of or in opposition to the proposed amendments to the Landscape Ordinance. Mr. Seymour urged enforcement of the Landscaping provisions. Mr. Carson stated the Commission would now consider amendments to Section 16.5, General Regulations, of the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance. Mrs. Romans stated that Mr. Joe Plizga, Traffic Engineer for the City of En- glewood, would make a presentation at this time. -8 - • • • • • • • Mr. Plizga was sworn in, and stated that intersection sight distance is one of the major safety problems in the City of Englewood. Mr. Plizga then presented slides depicting visibility problems at intersections caused by parked vehi- cles. These vehicles may be parked the proper distance from the intersection, but because of the type of vehicle, i.e., pickup, van, etc., the sight dis- tance is severely limited or non-existant. Mr. Plizga stated that at thls time, parking is prohibited within 30 feet of a signalized intersection, and within 20 feet of a crosswalk, whether it is painted on the street or not. Mr. Allen asked if the sight visibility could not be controlled by the pajnt- ing yellow of curbs at intersections. Mr. Plizga stated that the painted curb isn't legally enforceable, because there is nothing in the Model Traffic Code that allows for enforcement of a painted curb. To be enforceable, the restriction must be signed. Mr. Plizga also discussed the fact that to main- tain the painted curbs is a very labor intensive undertaking, and would be costly to the City. Mr. Plizga discussed the provisions of the Model Traffic Code that specify that there should be no visibility problems within 300 feet of an intersec- tion. If this rule were to be enforced, there would be a lot of irate citizens, because the typical block length in Englewood is 600 feet. Mr. Plizga explained a table that he has devised to determine a sight distance restriction for intersections based on the speed of the traffic carried on that street. This provision would limit the parking of vehicles exceeding five in height beyond the sight distance triangle, which Mr. Plizga displayed on screen . Mr. Carson asked if the proposed amendment would eliminate the visibility problems at intersections. Mr. Plizga stated it could eliminate about 90% of the problems, and the staff would have the authority to prohibit parking in this sight distance area in the other 10% of the intersections. Mr. Plizga urged that this amendment be approved and recommended to City Council. Mr. Plizga stated that if the amendment is approved by the City Council, he would publicize the restrictions in the paper and ask for help from the public in pinpointing problem intersections. Mr. Allen stated that he is of the opinion that painting the curb would be the easiest way to show the distance factor. He pointed out that shrubs, trees, and fences would also have to be monitored in this distance triangle outlined by Mr. Plizga. Mr. Allen suggested that a typical intersection be chosen and used as a pilot program to determine the feasibility of the proposal before the amendment is enacted. Mr. Carson asked for me~bers of the audience to address the Commission on the proposed amendments to Section 16.5. Mr. Coleman addressed the Commission, and stated that he is in favor of the sight distance restrictions. He stated that he did feel a sight distance limitation for streets with speed limits less than 30 miles per hour should be developed . Mr. Coleman stated that he did feel the height limitation of 24 inches for shrubbery in the sight triangle is a little short, and suggested that 36 inches would be more realistic, and should be approved. Mr. Beier asked how the 24 inch figure was arrived at. Mr. Plizga stated that the staff considered studies used by other cities, and also viewed shrubbery -9 - that is 24 inches in height as well as shrubbery that is 36 inches in height before making the recommendation of 24 inch height limitation. Mr. Seymour agreed that 24 inches is too short for shrubbery. He also ques- tioned the wording of the provision that trees shall have the foliage trimmed "to" within eight feet of the ground. He stated that he is not comfortable with this wording, and suggested the elimination of the word "to". Mr. Seymour further commented that he is of the opinion that a five foot height limitation on vehicles allowed to park within the sight distance triangle is, in his opinion, discriminatory. Mr. Carson stated that if there were no further comments to be made on Section 16.5, the Commission would now consider amendments to Section 16.7-4. Mrs. Romans stated that there are conflicting penalty provisions for viola- tions which are contained in the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance and Englewood Municipal Code. This amendment will bring all penalties levied for whatever violation under the provision of the Englewood Municipal Code. Mr. Carson asked if any member of the audience wanted to address the Commis- sion either in favor of or in opposition to the amendment of Section 16.7-4. No one addressed the Commission. Mr. Carson stated that the Commission would now consider amendments to Section 16.8, Definitions. Mrs. Romans suggested that the definitions of Major Street and Minor Street on Page 10 are reversed. All definitions proposed in this section, and in Sec- tion 16.4-16, Flood Plain, will be incorporated into the Definition Section bf the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance. All definitions as proposed have been addressed by the Prosecuting Attorney to assure no conflict with State law. Mr. Carson asked if anyone in the audience wished to address the Commission on the amendments to Section 16.8. No member of the audience addressed the Commission. Magnuson moved: Mulhern seconded: The Public Hearing on Case #7-87 be closed. AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Mulhern, None Hanson None Russell, Allen, Barbre, Beier, Magnuson, Maunakea, Carson The motion carried . Mr. Carson stated that he would like to ask the Commission their op1n1on on each individual section of the ordinance that has been considered in public hearing, and make a decision on that particular section before going on to the next section. Mr. Allen stated that the proposed amendments to Section 16 .4-1 are another regulation on the people of Englewood, and that normally, he champions the cause of those who don't want additional regulations. After discussions with -10 - • • • • • • staff and listening to the presentation by the staff and testimony of the mem- bers of the audience this evening, he has changed his opinion and will vote in favor of the proposed amendments to Section 16.4-1. Mrs. Russell stated that when she initially read the proposed amendments to the Ordinance, she was overwhelmed by the regulations. But as she read through the Ordinance, she realized the necessity of providing a means to deal with the "sore thumbs" in the neighborhood. Mrs. Russell stated that she is a little concerned about the method of enforcement that the hard core offenders versus those with only minor violations will be subjected to, but she is in favor of the amendments to Section 16.4-1. Mr. Mulhern stated that he in favor of the amendments to Section 16.4-1, but does feel that Mr. Coleman has a point to consider about motorhomes. He urged that further study be done on means to handle the problem of motorhomes stored on the street or on private property. Mr. Barbre stated that he is in favor of the amendments to Section 16.4-1 . Mr. Barbre questioned the feasibility of requiring paving of driveways and parking areas. He stated that he would also agree that the "little people with minor violations" should not be treated harshly, and urged that the staff be a little lenient i~ dealing with this type of violation. Mr. Magnuson stated that he felt the Commission would have to trust the judg- ment of the Zoning Enforcement Officer that there would not be harassment of individuals with minor violations. Mr. Maunakea agreed that the method of enforcement is the biggest question in his opinion, but stated he is in favor of the proposed amendments. Mr. Beier stated that he is in favor of the proposed amendments to Section 16 .4-1; he suggested that persons with motorhomes rent storage space for these vehicles. Mr. Magnuson asked how these restrictions would be applied: to renters of property, or to the property owners. Mrs. Parsons stated that it could be done by contacts to both the tenant and to the property owner if no satisfac- tion is realized from the contact to the tenant. Mr. Carson stated that he would agree with Mr. Beier's statements regarding the disposition of motorhomes, and that he is in favor of the amendments to Section 16.4-1. Magnuson moved: Barbre seconded: The proposed amendments to Section 16.4-1 of the Comprehen- sive Zoning Ordinance be approved by the City Planning and Zoning Commission and referred to the City Council for favorable consideration. AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Russell, Allen, Barbre, Beier, Magnuson, Maunakea, Mulhern, Carson None Hanson None The motion carried. -11 - Mr. Carson asked the Commission's pleasure on the proposed amendment of Sec- tion 16.4-16, Flood Plain Regulations. Magnuson moved: Allen seconded: The proposed amendments to Section 16.4-16 of the Com- prehensive Zoning Ordinance be approved by the City Plan- ning and Zoning Commission and referred to the City Council for favorable consideration. AYES: NAYS: Allen, Barbre, Beier, Magnuson, Mulhern, Maunakea, Russell, Carson None ABSENT: Hanson ABSTAIN: None The motion carried. Mr. Carson asked the Commission's pleasure on the proposed amendment of Sec- tion 16.4-18, Landscape Ordinance. Mulhern moved: Maunakea seconded: The proposed amendments to Section 16.4-18 of the Com- prehensive Zoning Ordinance be approved by the City Plan- ning and Zoning Commission and referred to the City Council for favorable consideration. AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Barbre, Allen Hanson None Beier, Magnuson, Maunakea, Mulhern, Russell, Carson The motion carried. Mr. Carson asked the Commission's pleasure on the proposed amendment of Sec- tion 16.5, General Regulations. Mrs. Russell stated she is aware of some intersections near her home that are very dangerous; however, she is of the opinion that the proposed amendment on sight distance restrictions "goes too far", and that imposition of such restrictions should be on an individual basis and not apply to all intersec- tions in the City. Mrs. Russell stated that many residents have put in at- tractive, expensive fences and landscaping in this area which may have to be removed and/or relocated to comply with the ordinance, and that the property owners should be reimbursed for any expenses they incur in bringing their property into compliance. Mr. Magnuson pointed out that present restrictions in the Model Traffic Code would impose a 300 foot visibility restriction from an intersection. He stated that he is of the opinion the proposal as outlined by Mr. Plizga is much more feasible than what presently applies. Magnuson moved: Barbre seconded: The proposed amendments to Section 16.5, General Regula- tions of the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance be approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission and referred to City Council for favorable consideration. -12 - • • • \ • • • AYES: NAYS: Beier, Magnuson, Russell Maunakea, Mulhern, Allen, Barbre, Carson ABSENT: Hanson ABSTAIN: None The motion carried. Mr. Carson asked the pleasure of the Commission on the proposed amendments to Section 16.7-4, Legal Status Provisions. Allen moved: Magnuson seconded: The proposed amendments to Section 16.7-4, Legal Status Provisions of the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance be ap - proved by the Planning and Zoning Commission, and referred to the City Council for favorable consideration. AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Magnuson, None Hanson None The motion carried. Maunakea, Mulhern, Russell, Allen, Barbre, Beier, Carson Mr. Carson asked the pleasure of the Commission on proposed amendments to Sec- tion 16.8, Definitions, of the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance. Maunakea moved: Mulhern seconded: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Magnuson, None Hanson None The motion carried. The proposed amendments to Section 16.8, Definitions, of the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance be approved by the City Planning and Zoning Commission and referred to City Council for favorable consideration.· Maunakea, Mulhern, Russell, Allen, Barbre, Beier, Carson IV. PUBLIC FORUM. Mr. Carson stated that it was a pleasure to have Mr. Seymour and other members of the Board of Adjustment and Appeals attend the Planning Comm i ssion meeting . Mr. Carson formally welcomed Ms . Susan Hirsch, Senior Planner in the Community Development Department. V. DIRECTOR'S CHOICE. Mrs. Romans stated that she would like to express her thanks to members of the staff that worked on the drafting and compilation of the amendments to the Zoning Ordinance . -13 - VI. PLANNING COMMISSIONER'S CHOICE. Mr. Carson stated that he also wanted to thank members of the staff for the work that was done on the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance . Mr. Beier stated that this will be his last meeting, as he is resigning his position on the Commission and will be moving out of the City of Englewood. He has submitted a letter of resignation, which will be effective on Apr i l 22 , 1987. Mr. Beier stated that it has been a pleasure to serve on the Commission. Members expressed regret on learning of Mr . Beier's resignation . The meeting adjourned at 10 :25 P.M. / , /, h ,,,,.._ ·' _,,.. • • # 1, .. ,,. ..... ~ , .·• ~ l ' ;:':_ .f ' Gertrude G. Welty Recording Secretary -14 - I • • • SourH SUBURBAN BoARD OF REALTORS REALTOR® Creating a Healthy Business Environment As A Trade Association EQUAL HOUSING OPPORTUNITY Telephone: (303) 797-3700 7899 South Lincoln Court Littleton, Colorado 80122 Planning Commission City of Englewood 3400 South Elati Street Englewood, CO 80110 April 21st, 1987 RE: zone District Restriction Amendment to Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance Secion 16.4-1 .Dear Planning Commission Members: • Property that some parts of properties. is not well maintained is beginning to be a problem in Englewood, making it difficult for people to sell their • The South Suburban Board of REALTORS® urges the Planning Commission to approve the amendment to the ordinance referenced above which will help keep Englewood a beautiful, desireable community in which to live. FOR THE SOUTH SUBURBAN BOARD OF REALTORS®, INC. , / .I' , •••• // B. David Miley Issues Political Action Committee Chairman BDM/llb