Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1977-07-06 PZC MINUTES\ CITY OF ENGLEWOOD PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION July 6, 1977 I. CALL TO ORDER. The regular meeting of the City Planning and Zoning Commission was called to order by Chairman Pierson at 7:05 P.M. Members present: Williams, Lathrop, Owens, Parker, Pierson, Smith Wanush, Ex-officio Members absent: Wade, Tanguma Also present: Assistant Director Romans, Associate Planner Steve House, Planning Interns Brian Ross and Tom Gougeon, and Harvey Pratt of the Commercial Review Committee. Mr. Tanguma entered and took his place with the Commission. II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES. Mrs. Pierson stated that the Minutes of the June 14, 1977, and June 21, 1977 meetings were to be considered for approval. Parker moved: Lathrop seconded: The Minutes of June 14, 1977, be approved as written. AYES: Williams, NAYS: None ABSTAIN: Smith ABSENT: Wade Lathrop, Owens, Parker, Pierson, Tanguma The motion carried. Lathrop moved: Parker seconded: The Minutes of June 21, 1977, be approved as written. AYES: Tanguma, Williams, Lathrop, Parker, Pierson, Smith NAYS: None ABSTAIN: Owens ABSENT: Wade The motion carried. Mrs. Pierson stated that the Commission has before it for con- sideration this evening, two applications for interpretation in the B-2, Business Zone District. Members of the Commercial Review Committee have been invited to attend this meeting. Mrs. Pierson reviewed the purpose of the Commercial Review Com- mittee and its review of the Comprehensive Plan for the members , -2- of the audience. Mrs. Pierson stated that the Conunission decision on the matter of interpretation of the Comprehensive Zoning ~ Ordinance is final, and that in reaching this decision, the ,_, Conunission will address two questions: (1) Is the use the applicant is interested in allowed in the zone district; (2) What is the impact of the proposed use on the surrounding area? III. PHILLIP ELLIOTT Auto Mechanic Shop 4230 South Broadway CASE #10-77 Mrs. Pierson asked the applicants if they wished to present their case to the Conunission? Mrs. Elliott stated that she and her husband propose to operate an auto mechanic shop at 4230 South Broadway. She stated that she felt the proposed use will improve the tax base of the City, and will provide them with the type of business opportunity they want. Mr. Elliott stated that he proposes to construct a five-car garage ·on the site, and will do small mechanic work. There will be no body work done on the site. Mrs. Elliott stated that the lot is 125 feet in depth, by 50 feet in width; there will be ample parking on the rear of the lot. The driveway will be on the front of the lot, and the customers will drive through from Broadway to the alley. Mr. Elliott stated there will be no outside storage of cars. All storage of parts and materials would be inside the shop. Mr. Wanush asked if the Elliott's had contacted any of the surrounding property owners to discuss their proposal? Mr. Elliott stated they had not. Mrs. Pierson asked what interest the Elliott's had in the property? Mrs. Elliott stated that they have been assured they can lease the property on a 30-year lease. They have no conunitment on the property at this time. Mrs. Pierson asked if the proposed garage would abut the structure to the north? Mr. Elliott stated it would not; there would be a setback between the buildings. Mrs. Pierson asked if the applicants planned to purchase the single-family house inunediately to the south of the subject property? Mr. Elliott stated that if their business did as well as they hoped it to, they would consider expansion onto the property to the south. Mrs. Pierson asked if the applicant would consider access only from the rear with landscaping along the Broadway street side? Mr. Elliott stated that they had planned to landscape the site anyway. Mr. Lathrop asked if the applicant would be doing work on "race" cars? Mr. Elliott stated that he would not work on race cars, but rather on the standard family-type car. -3- Mr. Smith discussed the problems that occur when vehicular access across the sidewalks is permitted. Mr. Wanush stated that this is a problem wherever automotive traffic is permitted from the street; he did not think it mo re severe in this loca- tion than at any other point along Sou t h Broadway. Don Williams pointed out that service stations do minor auto- motive work consistently. Service stations are permitted in the B-2 Zone District; he asked why auto repair shops are not permitted when the work is being done all over town? Mr. Wanush stated that auto repair shops are permitted in conjunction with a new or used auto sales lot, but are not permitted by themselves. Mr. Wanush pointed out that the staff report recommends favorable action on this request. Mr. Wanush pointed out that this use does occur all along Broadway now; the staff feels that it is very similar to other uses that are in existance. Mrs. Pierson referred to the impact on the surrounding area by this proposed use. She asked what type of building was pro- posed for the garage? Mr. Elliott stated that the structure would be of concrete and block construction. Mrs. Pierson asked if the applicants would be willing to "harmonize" their structure with the existing buildings in the block? Mrs. Pierson stated that all indications are that the 4200 block of South Broadway is getting "cleaned up"; she asked if the applicant would be willing to put something on the lot that would be compatible with the uses that are in existance? She stated that she felt it very important to preserve the direction of improvement that the block has taken. Mr. Smith stated that he did not feel it could be demanded of the applicant to coordinate their type of construction to be compatible with the s rrounding uses. He felt the use must be allowed or disallowed on the basis of the use. The Commission can ask the applicant to construct a building that may be com- patible with the existing uses, but if the use is approved, they may construct any type building permitted by the Building Code, and go into business. Mr. Tanguma stated that he would agree with Mr. Smith's statement. Mrs. Pierson stated that she felt the Commission did have a bargaining point at this time and that it was to the advantage of the City to attempt to gain compatibility of the uses . Mr. Tanguma stated that he would object to limiting access from the alley; he pointed out that most of the business will be drive-in from Broadway, and in order for the business to succeed, they will have to have as much access as possible. Mr. Smith pointed out that the print shop and the drug store both have access from Broadway, and questioned that the Com- mission could limit the access from Broadway if the use is permitted. -4- Mr. Wanush pointed out that the ordinance does permit the Commission to examine the impact on the surrounding area of a use that is not mentioned, but might be found similar to other permitted uses. He stated that the Commission is in a position to negotiate to a degree. Discussion ensued. Mr. Lathrop asked if the structure would be set back from the front property line far enough to permit a vehicle driving in from Broadway to get onto the property and not block the side- walk? Mr. Lathrop stated that vehicles blocking the sidewalks create a hazardous situation for any pedestrians that might have to walk in the gutter or street to get around the vehicle. He urged that the structure be set back far enough to provide maneuvering space for those vehicles driving in from Broadwa~ Mr. Elliott stated that the structure would be set back far enough to provide sufficient maneuvering space. Mrs. Elliott stated that they propose a 35 ft. x 65 ft. building and the lot is 125 ft. x 50 ft. Mr. Smith asked how much setback would be required on this site? Mrs. Romans stated that the Compre- hensive Zoning Ordinance does not require any setbacks in the B-2 Zone District; there may be a provision in the Building Code that would govern the amount of side setbacks required between this and the adjoining buildings. Mr. Wanush reiterated that the staff is of the opinion this is a similar use to others permitted in the B-2 Zone District; the only concern is that there be sufficient on-site parking, that there be no outside storage of materials or car parts, and that noise emission levels be in compliance with the Noise Ordinance. Mr. Wanush asked about the hours of operation? Mr. Elliott stated that they propose to be in operation from 7:00 A.M. to 6:00 P.M.; there will be no work done on Saturday or Sunday. Mr. Elliott stated that he is working in the automotive repair business now, and has for a number of years. He is familiar with the business, and just wants to have his own place of business. • Mr. Parker stated that all the filling stations are doing this type of business, and it is generally accepted. Mr. Owens stated that the staff report indicates a permit was given nine years ago to tear down a house; this is apparently the first effort to construct something on this site. Mr. Owens pointed out that the construction will have to meet the Building Code, and he felt this is an opportunity to get some new business in the area, and that it is a good idea. Mr. Pratt stated that he owns Merit Drug Store which abuts tre subject site on the north; he stated that while the structure on the subject site was torn down nine years ago, the lot has not been vacant and available for development. There has been storage of trailers and similar usage of the lot in the interim. Mr. Pratt pointed out that the Conoco Station in this block cannot afford to keep a mechanic because there is not enough wor~, there have been multiple owners of several of the filling stations in the immediate area. He pointed out that when some- • -5- one constructs a building, they are taking a substantial financial risk; he asked what would happen with the 30-year lease if the mechanic shop did not succeed? Mr. Pratt stated that he understood the subject area, and while the Planning and Zoning Commission was responsible for the decision of whether or not the use would be allowed, he urged that the applicant consider the economics of the area. Mr. OWens inquired if it was necessary that the applicant have an option on the site prior to action by the Commission? Mrs. Romans stated that this matter is different than a re- zoning application in that an option to purchase or other form of interest in the site has not been required prior to the Com- mission's consideration. Mr. Smith asked if the interpretation of the ordinance was granted to the property or to the applicant? Mrs. Romans stated that in the past, the Commission has granted the use which is the subject of the interpretation to the applicant, but it would depend on the wording of the motion made by the Commission. Mr. Lathrop asked about provisions for scrap materials, oil and grease accumulations; will they be housed in some sort of building, or would it be stored outside? Mr. Elliott stated that they would construct a small metal shed for storage of such materials. Smith moved: Lathrop seconded: The Planning Commission grant to Mr. and Mrs. Phillip Elliott, approval of the use of land at 4230 South Broadway as an auto mechanic shop, pur- suant to the provisions of §22.4-llb(l6) of the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance, with the following conditions: 1. Noise emission from the auto mechanic garage operation shall not disturb the adjoining residential area. The operation shall comply with the Englewood Noise Ordinance which sets forth a sound pressure level limit of 55 db(A) from the hours of 7:00 A.M. to 10:00 P.M., and 50 db(A) from 10:00 P.M. to 7:00 A.M. 2. The auto mechanic garage operation shall provide sufficient off-street parking space for customer vehicles and employee parking in order to meet the parking requirements of the Compre- hensive Zoning Ordinance. Discussion ensued. Mr. Owens asked what the requirements are for off-street parking? Mrs. Romans stated that the amount of off-street parking is dependent on the square footage of the structure. Cars cannot block the sidewalk at any time. Mrs. Romans pointed out that considering the need for a driveway in front and in the rear of the structure, the useable parking area will accommodate possibly three cars. Further discussim ensued. -6- Mrs . Pierson stated that she felt the Zoning Ordinance is very clear that an auto repair shop shall be an accessory to a new or used car sales lot. Mr. Wanush pointed out that a precedent has been set by approval of previous Commissions on this type of business. Further discussion followed. The vo te was called: AYES: Smith, Tanguma, Williams, Lathrop, Owens, Parker NAYS: Pierson ABSENT: Wade The motion carried. IV. PA RA QUAD MOBILITY SYSTEMS, LTD. 1190 East Hampden Avenue CASE #11-77 Mrs . Pierson asked that the applicant make their presentation. Mr. Ed Nelson stated that he is Vice-President of Wheelchairs, Inc. Para Quad Mobility Systems, Ltd., wants to purchase the property which is directly across the alley from Wheelchairs, Inc . to use for the conversion of vans. This property has been used by Rev Motors for the past several years. Para Quad Mobility Systems is in the business of installing hand controls and li f ts on vehicles for the handicapped. Mr. Lichty stated that he was counsel for Para Qua~ Mobility Systems and Wheelchairs, Inc., and stated that Para Quad Mobility Systems, Ltd. is a subsidiary of Wheelchairs, Inc. The proposed use of land at 1190 East Hampden Avenue is really an extension of the Wheelchairs, Inc. business at 3500 South Corona Street. Para Quad Mobility Systems is presently working out of a hbuse on Santa Fe Drive, which is inconvenient for them and their customers. It is the opinion of the personnel at Para Quad Mobility Systems and Wheelchairs, Inc. that the site at 1190 East Hampden would be more convenient and would enable them to get the business in close proximity . The people who are customers of Wheelchairs, Inc. and of Para Quad Mobility Systems are those who have a great deal of contact with Swedish Medical Center and Craig Rehabilitation Hospital, and it would be much better to have these services located within this service area. Mr. Lichty stated that while their operation may appear on the surface to be similar to that of an auto mechanic, they are not involved in auto mechanics. The business is concerned with the installation and maintenance of hand controls, electric elevator and lift devices, and elevated vehicle tops and other related equipment on vehicles fo r the handicapped. There is no sale of vehicles involved, nor is there a great deal of throw-away material or storage of material involved. It is their belief that Para Quad Mobility Systems will be of great benefit to the community if it can be located at 1190 East Hampden Avenue. Mr. Lichty stated that in reviewing the staff report, there is one item which does concern them, that being the requirement th~t the fence on South Downing Street shall be set back to the building line of the residences to the south of the subject • -7- property to comply with fence requirements for a residential neighborhood. If this condition is approved and enforced, it will result in the loss of a substantial amount of available parking area. It is the thinking of Para Quad and Wheelchair s, Inc. personnel that the fence would be better located on the perimeter of the property. They are proposing a six-foot chain-link fence around the property for security purposes. Mr. Lichty pointed out that the completed vehicles are worth approximately $12,000 to $15,000, and they do not want to run the risk of vandalism to these vehicles that are in the l o t to be picked up by the owner. It is their intent that the chain link fence would be set three feet within the property line, and they would provide landscaping in the front of the fencing. Discussion on the fencing provision as set forth in the staff report ensued. Mr. Lichty stated that if the fence must be set in from the property line as required, approximately 25 feet, it will totally ruin their parking plan; they will be able to park about 10 vehicles on the lot if the fence is located as the staff suggests. It will also eliminate the ability to effectively landscape the property. Mr. Lichty stated that there is a retaining wall with a fence atop it that runs the entire length of the south property line; if this fence were to be repainted, it would be quite attractive . Mr. Lichty stated that he felt their proposal of the chain link fence on the perimeter of the property would cut the visual impact of the use on the community. He reiterated that their concern is for the security of the vehicles parked in the lot. Mr. Wanush noted that there are two entrances to the site fr o m South Downing Street, and two entrances from East Hampden Avenue. He asked if all these entrances would be maintained? Mr. Lichty stated that the main access will be from Hampden Avenue; they have not made a firm decision on whether to leave the other entrances on South Downing Street open. Mr. Lichty stated that rolling gates would be installed across the points of entrance; these gates could be locked when not in use. Mr. Parker stated that he did not feel the installation of a chain link fence on the perimeter of the property was out of line; he pointed out that the property is a "junk car" place now. Mr. Nelson pointed out that the major installation work will be done inside the building; however, for the convenience of the customers, minor adjustments to the vehicles would be done outside. Mrs. Pierson stated that the Hampden Corridor has been under close scrutiny by the Commercial Activities Review Committee, -8- and they feel that this commercial corridor may be one of the more viable commercial areas in the City. Swedish Medical Center is a large property owner in the general area, and the neighbor- hood "appears to be on its way upo" Mrs. Pierson disagreed with the staff report that this particular use proposed by Para Quad Mobility Systems might give an "industrial" appearance to the neighborhood. Mrs. Pierson acknowledged that it appears there is a code enforcement problem along this commercial corridor, but stated that the Commercial Activities Review Committee does feel that this area is well on its way to an economic rebirth. Mr. Owens asked the reason behind the staff recommendation that the fence be set in to the building line of the residences to the south of the site? Mr. Wanush stated that by providing the setback to the building line the residential character of the area would be carried out. He questioned that there would be a visual problem on the corner. Mrs. Romans pointed out that this intersection is controlled by a traffic signal. Mr. Smith stated that as he understood it, the height of the fence was to limit access to vehicles that are stored on the lot while being worked on. He asked if a lower fence could be installed on the front of the lot, with a smaller security area to the rear surrounded by the higher fence? Mr. Lichty stated that this would decrease the area they need for the storage of vehicles and fiberglass tops. Mro Lichty pointed out that their storage area per vehicle must be larger than for the typical vehicle, inasmuch as one must take into con- sideration the capability of the individual bringing the vehicle in to be worked on. There may not always be a member of the staff available to park these vehicles, and the handicapped vehicle owner will have to do so; there must be sufficient space to provide for the lifts and other special equipment that are part of the vehicles. Mr. Smith asked if there was any way to provide security for the over-night storage of vehicles without constructing a six foot fence around the corner of the lot? Discussion ensued on the question of fencing the entire site vs. fencing a small security areao Mrs. Pierson inquired as to whether the applicant had considered the construction of solid fencing rather than the chain link? Mr. Lichty stated that in his opinion, the chain link fencing would not have the adverse impact on the neighborhood as would the solid fencing. Mr. Owens noted that a solid fence would inhibit vision into the lot, and would make it more difficult to patrol for security. He stated that he did not see any great problem with the six foot chain link fence. Mr. Smith asked if a five foot fence would serve the purpose, or if the six foot fence is proposed for a specific reason? -9- Mr. Lichty stated that as f ar as security is concerned, it is felt the six foot fence would be better. It would be the most reasonable alternative in providing proper security for the vehicles and visibility for the police in patrolling the site. Mr. Lathrop stated that he has been very concerned about this particular corner; he stated that it has looked like a salvage yard for the last two years. He stat ed that he has no objection to the six foot chain link fence. Mr . Lathrop stated that he would agree with Mr. Owens that a sol i d fence would cut down on the police protection. The six foot chain link fence would be better for the neighborhood than what is there now; he stated he was in favor of giving them the security they have asked for. Mr. Pratt asked if there was not an ordinance governing the protection of visibility at corners? He asked what would happen if the vans were to be parked in the corner --this would cut down on the visibility at this corner. Discussion ensued. Mr. Lichty stated that they do not contemplate a large number of vans coming in for servicing at any one time, but they are trying to get the maximum useable area out of the lot. Mr. Lichty discussed the possibility of "angling" the fencing across the corner to protect the visibility. This possibility was dis- cussed in depth. The landscaping of the area was considered. Mr. Lichty stated that the landscaping would consist of trees and shrubs on the outside of the fence. Tanguma moved: Owens seconded: The Planning Commission approve the request of Para Quad Mobility Systems, Ltd., 1190 East Hampden Avenue, for an interpretation of §22.4-llb(l6) of the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance that the sales and installation of handicap equipment in vans and autos is a use similar to and compatible with other uses permitted in the B-2 Zone District. This approval is based on the following conditions: 1. The installation of equipment and the maintenance work shall, except for minor adjustments, be done within an enclosed structure. 2. Noise emission from the sales and installation of handicap equipment shall not disturb the adjoining residential area. The operation shall comply with the Englewood Noise Ordinance, which sets a sound pressure level limit of 55 db(A) from the hours of 7:00 A.M. to 10:00 P.M., and 50 db(A) from 10:00 P.M. to 7:00 A.M. 3. No inoperable motor vehic l es will be stored on the site and no operable vehicles stored for more than three weeks. 4. Outdoor storage is to be limited to the 100 square foot area described in the application, and screened from public view. -10- 5. A three foot setback on East Hampden Avenue and on South Downing Street shall be maintained to comply with the require- ment cited in §22.4-llf of the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance: "Where an opening upon a side or property line may be provided for pedestrian use, a minimum setback of three feet shall be provided ." These setbacks should be landscaped and maintained in ke ep ing with the character established by Wheelchairs, Inc. at 3500 South Corona Street. 6. The fencing at the Downing/Hampden corner shall be set back from the intersection a minimum of 10 feet on Hampden and a minimum of 10 feet on South Downing Street, with a 45° angle area on the corner that shall not be fenced. This area en- compassed in the 45 ° angle shall be landscaped. 7. The expanded operations of Wheelchairs, Inc., shall meet the requirements of the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance for parking. AYES: Parker, Pierson, Smith, Tanguma, Williams, Lathrop, Owens NAYS: None ABSENT: Wade The motion carried. Mrs. Pierson declared a recess of the Commission. The meeting reconvened at 9:00 P.M. with the following members .present: OWens, Pierson, Smith, Tanguma, Lathrop. Members absent were: Parker, Wade and Williams. V. DIRECTOR'S CHOICE. Mr. Wanush stated that at a meeting of July 5, 1977, the Arapahoe County Planning Commission reconfirmed their concept for development of the South Platte River Valley, that concept being heavy industrial development on both sides of the river. The possibility of annexation of portions of this area were discussed. Mr. Wartush referred to a Resolution passed by the City Council reiterating an intent to annex in the future. Discussion ensued. Mrs. Pierson reminded the staff of the proposal to amend the Industrial Zone Districts to preclude the possibility of a use such as the auto shredder. VI. COMMISSION'S CHOICE . Mrs. Pierson stated that she has received a letter notifying the City Council of the resignation of Mr . Ed G. Smith from the Planning and Zoning Commission. Ms. Pierson stated that she felt it would be appropriate for the Commission to pass a resolution acknowledging Mr. Smith's service on the Commission. -11- Don Smith moved: Tanguma seconded: That a resolution be prepared acknowledging the service of Mr. Ed G. Smith as a member of the City Planning and Zoning Commission from September 4, 1973 thru July 1, 1977. The Resolution shall take note of Mr. Smith's service as Vice-Chairman of the Planning Commission for the years 1974, 1976, and 1977, and shall be framed for presentation to Mr. Smith. AYES: Lathrop, Owens, Pierson, Smith, Tanguma NAYS: None ABSENT: Parker, Wade, Williams The motion carried. Mrs. Pierson asked for a report on the progress of the Compre- hensive Plan Review Committees. Don Smith stated that his committee has made great progress, and great interest has been expressed by citizens in serving on this committee. The Committee has defined the parking areas needed in the downtown area, and will be working on the problem of access to and from the shopping areas and the parking areas. Discussion has centered to this point on "old Englewood" --the 3300 and 3400 blocks of South Broadway. The Committee will have to consider the Cinderella City area and areas to the south of U.S. 285 and attempt to tie these areas together. Mr. Smith discussed the CML Conference, and some of the meetings he attended, notably those dealing with the revitalization of downtown areas. This program dealt with the re-facing of existing buildings to maintain the character of the neighborhood, and yet improve the neighborhood. Mr. Smith reported that the City of Denver has amended some of the ordinances to permit the recon- struction on 37-1/2 lots which was previously banned. Mr. Owens stated that a building code which applies to older structures and a building code which applies to newer structures bas aided in the revitalization process in Denver. Discussion ensued. Mr. Wanush stated that the Housing Code for the City of Englewood is not clear, and should be amended. Also, a rehabilitation code should be developed that would apply to older structures in Englewood. Discussion ensued. Mr. Lathrop discussed the development of the existing Englewood Housing Rehabilitation Program. The financing of rehabilitation efforts by FHA and VA were discussed. Mr. Lathrop reported that the Transportation Committee has postponed further efforts at this time. However, Mr. Nowacki suggested that possibly the Committee might want to consider the Santa Fe/railroad coal train problems separately. He sug- gested that Mr. Brasher of the State Highway Department and someone from the railroads be invited to meet with the Committee. Mr. Smith stated that City Council is on record supporting an- -12- other meeting of the Arapahoe County jurisdictions on the matter of Santa Fe Drive. The matter of Transfer of Funds was ~ brought up at the Council meeting of July 5th; there is $80,000,000 ~ which is uncommitted at this time. It is important that there be input on the ultimate development of Santa Fe, and attempt to get some of these funds committed to the development of Santa Fe and other key arterials through Englewood . Discussion ensued. Mr. Tanguma stated that there is good attendance at the meetings of the Housing Preservation and Residential Development Com- mittee. Mr. Tanguma stated that there are several ideas being discussed, and they are considering the general direction they want the City to go. Discussion followed. Mrs. Romans stated that she had spoken to a person who had attended the initial meeting, and he had said that he was told that only persons who lived in Englewood were to partic- ipate on the Committee. Mrs. Pierson stated that it would be the policy that any one living in Englewood, or anyone who has an interest of any kind in the City of Englewood, is qualified to participate on the Comprehensive Plan Review Committees. Mr. Owens stated that the Public Facilities and Drainage Com- mittee has a meeting the evening of July 7th; they have a tour of City Hall scheduled for that meeting. He stated that he has good participation on this committee, and they . are still in the process of gathering information of the facilities that are available. Mrs. Pierson reported on the Commercial Activities Committee, and stated that she is most impressed with the interest expressed by the members of her committee. The Committee is in the process of inventorying the commercial areas of the City, which have been broken down into "corridors". They have completed the inventory of the East Hampden Avenue Corridor, and will next consider the Evans Avenue Corridor . Mr. Wanush noted that this committee had extended an invitation to all businessmen along the Hampden Corridor to attend a meeting to discuss the commercial development with the committee members. Mr. Lathrop asked if the members felt the Transportation Com- mittee should reconvene to discuss the railroad traffic and the Santa Fe Drive improvement? Discussion ensued . Mr. Smith stated that he didn't feel there was any real purpose in dis- cussing the train traffic. The U.S. 285 and Santa Fe Drive interchange is a real problem to the City of Englewood, and U.S. 285 is a problem throughout the length of the Cityo Mrs. Pierson asked if there were other matters to be considered under Commission's Choice. • -13- Mrs. Romans stated that the staff will ask for an interpreta~ tion of the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance on whether or not mini warehousing is a use similar to other uses in the B-2 District, and whether or not it should be permitted in the commercial zone districts. The meeting adjourned at 9:40 P.M.