Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1979-05-22 PZC MINUTESt • CITY OF ENGLEWOOD PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION May 22, 1979 Io CALL TO ORDER 0 The regular meeting of the City Planning and Zoning Commission was called to order in Conference Room A by Chairman Tanguma at 7:00 P. Mo Members present: Smith, Tanguma, Becker, Bilo, Carson, Draper, Lathrop Wanush, Ex-officio Members absent : Williams, Pierson Also present: Assistant Director for Housing Mike Reddy Associate Planner Alice Fessenden IIo APPROVAL OF MINUTES. May 8, 1979 Chairman Tanguma stated that Minutes of May 8, 1979, were to be considered for approval. Lathrop moved: Carson seconded: The Minutes of May 8, 1979, be approved as written. AYES: Smith, Tanguma, Becker, Bilo, Carson, Lathrop NAYS: None ABSTAIN: Draper ABSENT: Pierson, Williams The motion carried. III. DUPLEX DEVELOPMENT /INDIVIDUAL OWNERSHIP Stephen A. Lyon Mr. Wanush stated that Mr . Lyon is present to discuss a new concept in home ownership .and development. Mr. Wanush stated that the office has had several inquiries on converting existing duplex units and/or apartment units to condominium units, or constructing new condominium/duplex units. He discussed some of the inquiries that have been made, and pointed out that the proposals would result in ownerships of lots of approximately 3,000 square feet, which is below the minimum set forth in the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance. The duplexes would be constructed with the common wall on the common lot line, and each lot and one-half of the duplex would be under separate ownership. Mr. Wanush pointed out that on existing units, there is no way to prevent the sale of the individual unit and the division of the lot, even though it is in violation of the -2-, J Comprehensive Zoning Ordinanceo He pointed out that this concept of home ownership could result in problems in the • future --3,000 square foot lots that the property owner and/or redeveloper cannot do much witho The concept does present short-term gains in that the units would essentially be single- family units with a common wall, and would be large enough to accommodate families. Mr. Lyon stated that he has considered development in areas that are zoned for two-family units, with a typical lot size of 125 foot depth by 25 foot frontage. Mr. Lyon stated that he has been developing single-family units for the last two and one-half years, and does not really want to get into the development of multi-family units on a large scale. He pointed out, however, that a single-family house constructed on the conventional 50 foot lot would be in the $85,000 to $90,000 price range. If two single-family units with a common wall could be constructed, construction costs and the subsequent selling price of the individual units and lots could be lowered. He stated that he and his associates are working on such a project in an adjoining jurisdiction, and will build 13 duplexes to be sold individually. He displayed floor plans and elevations of units that they are proposing to construct, and noted that the floor area of these units is 1255 square feet minimum. These particular plans have not been tailored to individual preferences, but do feature fireplaces, vaulted ceilings in the living room and kitchen areas, decks, sound-~ proofing, and basements that may be finished. One-car garages ~ are also included. He stated that the price for these particular units would probably be in the mid $60,000 range. He pointed out that there have been problems with the particular site that these units were proposed for, which raises the construction costs. On a "normal site", the cost would be approximately $57,000 for a four-bedroom unit. Mr. Draper asked how much the common wall cut down on construc- tion costs? Mr. Lyon stated that he has not really priced it out, and pointed out that the common wall entails savings on plumbing, gas taps, etco Mr. Tanguma inquired about financing such a venture? Mr. Lyon stated that regular financing procedures can be followed; he stated that in Englewood, they could have FHA financing. Mr. Draper inquired about problems that might arise on outside maintenance of the units --one property owner might want to paint and the other might not, or reroofing, etc. Mr. Lyon stated that some agreement or covenant would have to be signed by the property owners on such matters. Discussion ensued. Mr. Smith asked if it is correct that once such units are built, there is no way to prevent the sale of the individual unit and lot? Mro Wanush stated that the Com- prehensive Zoning Ordinance states that a lot cannot be divided so as to render it non-conforming in size; however, in one • -3- case recently such a sale did take place, and there was no way to prevent it. A letter from the City Attorney was recorded pertaining to this property, which letter indicates that the lot has been divided in violation of the Zoning Ordinance, and that permits would not issue for development of the lot. Mr. Smith . asked if there has been any research done on laws pertaining to condominiums and conversion to condominiums? Mr. Wanush stated that the staff is doing this now. Mr. Wanush stated that he felt there would be a procedure that could handle the new construction under this concept; it is the conversion of existing units that pose problems. Mr. Smith stated that he felt this concept should be adapted to the new construction~ and that this concept should be pursued. Mr. Lathrop asked if this concept would also apply to the single-family districts? Mr. Wanush stated that it would not; it would be used in areas that are zoned for medium density development. Mr. Lathrop stated that he felt very strongly that the proposed concept should not infringe on the R-1 single-family areas, that there has been too much infringe- ment by apartments and multi-family dwellings as there is. He asked what the living area of these units would be? Mr. Lyon stated that the particular unit that he displayed to the Com- mission had a floor area of 1255 square feet plus the option of finishing the basement. This does not count the garage area in the floor area figure. Mr. Lathrop stated that he could see problems resulting from this concept in the future. Mr. Lyon pointed out that he is not proposing a change of zoning; the lot he is concerned with in Englewood is zoned for the construction of a duplex. He acknowledged that there may be problems, but does see the potential in this type of development. He pointed out that 2-1/2 years ago, he could construct a single-family home to sell for $48,000; on today's market, the same house would sell for $72,000. He pointed out that this is a $24,000 in- crease in just 2-1/2 years. Mr. Lathrop stated that he didn't care how high the land cost or construction costs; a single- family house could be constructed and over-priced by several thousand dollars, and someone would buy it. Mr. Bilo asked Mr. Lyon if consideration had been given to "block housing". Mr. Lyon stated that this has been con- sidered, but pointed out that such construction would have to fit the neighborhood that is being considered also. Mr. Lathrop asked if Mr. Lyon was looking at property that was in need of improvement, or vacant land? Mr. Lyon stated that the particular property he is considering had a garage apartment on it that should be demolished. -4- Mr. Smith stated that this concept would "eliminate the apart- ment dwellers and turn them into home owners", and felt the • idea should be pursuedo Mr. Lyon thanked the Commission for their consideration, and excused himself from the meetingo IV. ENGLEWOOD HOUSING AUTHORITY CASE #12-79 Sites for Elderly and Family Units Mro Wanush stated that the Englewood Housing Authority has been awarded 100 units of elderly housing, and 10 units (five duplexes) of family housing. He stated that Mr o Reddy, Executive Director of the Housing Authority, is p:i::__esent to discuss the site selection process and to bring the Commission up-to-date on the progress of this projecto Mr. Smith asked if there has been anything prepared in writing; he noted that people are inquiring of City Council what is going on, and Council does not have anything in writing to refer to. Mro Lathrop agreed that there needed to be some written information available; he noted that he had received numerous phone calls from concerned people who had the Target Areas confused with the proposed public housing project" Mr. Wanush emphasized that the Target Areas and "sites" for housing are two separate matters, and stated that such callers should be referred to the Housing Divisiono Mr. Tanguma commented that he felt a thorough Public Relations campaign should be conducted on the different programs that the Housing Authority has goingo He stated that he felt this is very important to alleviate possible problems down the roado Mr o Reddy stated that several sites have been considered for the elderly high-rise units, and the site which seems to meet the criteria the best is a site just south of the Malley Recrea- tion Center on East Girard Avenueo Mro Reddy pointed out that criteria that must be considered in selecting a site for elderly housing is access to transportation, proximity to shopping, medical facilities, grocery store, recreation facilities, etc. All the sites were weighed in relation to these criteria, and the site on East Girard Avenue was rated first. Mr. Reddy stated that he has secured an "agreement" with Security Pacific, owner of the site on East Girard Avenue, that they will hold the property until the Housing Authority can get clearance from HUD. He pointed out that this is not an option, but an agree- mento Mr. Reddy stated that the Housing Authority is going to have "pre-selected sites" on this project; the Authority will give the developer a list of the particular sites that are to be developed, and the developer will submit his bid based on those siteso -5- Mr. Reddy stated that he is now working on locating sites for the five duplexes which will be for families. These units should not be concentrated in any one area so as to "impact" the area; they must be dispersed thToughout the community. He stated that sites that are zoned R-2, Medium Density, and that are vacant, are being considered. They are not considering sites in need of redevelopment, because demolition costs would come out of the funding that has been approved, and every ef- fort is being made to conserve these funds for the construction costs. Mr. Reddy stated that the Housing Authority did send letters to property owners of vacant sites asking if they were interested in selling their property to the Housing Authority, and if they have questions to call him, Mr. Reddy. He stated that response from some of the property owners has been favorable, and others have indicated they want to develop their property. Mr. Reddy noted that 32 sites have been indicated as being "available" --in that they are zoned R-2, and are vacant. He emphasized that the Housing Authority is interested in five building sites and he felt confident that these five sites could be secured. Mr. Reddy acknowledged that some of the property owners have expressed concern that their land might be condemned if they do not sell, and he has assured them that the Housing Authority wants to avoid condemnation proceedings. Mr. Reddy stated that once an agreement on a building site has been reached between the property owner and the Housing Authority, HUD would be contacted, and a HUD appraiser would view the site and submit an appraisal figure. If the property owner agrees to sell for this amount, an option would be secured on the land; if the property owner does not agree to this figure, the Authority would look for another site. Mr. Reddy emphasized that the Authority wants to avoid "heavy-handed tactics" and that if a property owner indicates they are not interested in selling their land, it is not pursued. Mr. Reddy stated that once the property is secured, it would be turned over to the developer to develop, and then purchased by the Housing Authority once the development is completed. Mr. Smith asked who gives final approval on the sites selected? Mr. Reddy stated that final approval would be given by the Englewood Housing Authority . Mr. Reddy stated that Miss · Fessenden has prepared a slide show on the site selection process. Miss Fessenden presented the slides and narration on the process of site selection. Mr. Reddy stated that he has one site for the family housing lined up for an agreement, and two other sites look very promising. He would h ope to secure agreements on these sites by the end of this week. Mr. Tanguma asked if there was any way property owners could be guaranteed there would be no condemnation proceedings in- stituted by the Housing Authority to gain the sites? Mr. -6- Reddy stated that he felt this would put the entire allocation to Englewood in jeopardy. Mr. Wanush stated that he felt there ~ were three options that could be followed if all the sites for ~ family housing could not be secured: (1) The site selection could be opened to the developer; (2) Institute condemnation proceedings; or (3) Don't build . He agreed with Mr. Reddy that HUD would probably disapprove a statement that condemna- tion proceedings would not be used, and that the entire grant could be lost. Obviously, the Authority does not now envision using condemnation and will exhaust every option to insure that condemnation does not take place. Discussion ensued. Mr. Reddy noted that the sites must be selected and the loca- tions submitted to the HUD local office by June 15th. Mr. Draper suggested that possibly rather than pursuing con- demnation, the Housing Authority should look at sites that are developed and sell the existing structures; he felt this could be done and that enough could be realized from the sale of the houses to finance the clearing of the property for ~e­ velopment by the Housing Authority. Further discussion en- sued. Mr. Smith suggested that there should be more communication on the programs, and suggested that a press release on the negotiations on vacant land for the duplexes be issued. He also suggested that this press release might indicate that a tentative agreement on the site for the high-rise has been reached. Discussion ensued. Mr. Bilo stated that he felt the general public is scared to see the government get into the housing business. Further discussion followed. Mr. Lathrop stated that he would agree there should be more publicity on the negotiation for the sites. He stated that people are confused between the Target Areas for the rehabilita- tion program and the sites for public housing . Mr. Smith stated that he did not think the press release should try to cover too many programs, that it would be better to concentrate on one facet of the Housing Authority Programs at this time, namely, the negotiations for vacant R-2 zoned sites. Mrs. Becker stated that she felt when "public housing" is mentioned, that people automatically think of "project", and that it won't matter that the units are to be dispersed through- out the community. People do have an image of "project" housing, and this will be difficult to combat. Mr. Bilo asked if these five sites was just a beginning of more "public housing"? Mr. Smith stated that City Council would have to approve any application for grants for more housing. Mr. Reddy stated that HUD wanted the Englewood Housing Authority to take 60 or 70 units, but the Englewood Housing Authority and staff felt it would be better to go with • -7- ten units and see that it is "done right." Mr. Bilo asked if this was a "pilot program?" Mro Reddy stated that it is not; he stated that the Housing Assistance Plan goals state that a specific number of housing units should be provided to meet the needs of the community. Mr. Bilo stated that land is scarce in Engle~ood, and 1eels that the majority of the land should be available for private development and not developed by the Housing Authority and governmento Mr. Wanush stated that it is well and good to encourage private development, but this results in the $65,000+ single-family homes, which do not encourage young families with children. Discussion ensued. The possibility of purchasing developed lots and selling the existing structures was further discussed. Mro Wanush pointed out that demolition and removal costs would come out of the $3.7 million, as would relocation costs for families that might have been occupying the structures; these relocation costs could run as much as $150,000 per site. He stated that it will be difficult to do the elderly units and the family units for the $3.7 million without incurring such expenses as relocation fees, demolition and removal costs. Mrs. Becker asked if a priority rating has been established on the tenants for the units; is there someway that Englewood residents could be given the right of first refusal? Mr. Reddy stated that for the Simon Center, two lists are maintained, one for Englewood residents and the second for citizens who do not live within the corporate limits of the City. Englewood residents are given priority, but we cannot refuse to put any- one's name on the list. Mr. Reddy stated that while no policy has been determined on the new units, the same procedure might well be followed. Mr. Smith expressed concern over the fact that City Council set the policies for the Simon Center, and the Housing Authority is now assuming the right of setting the policies for the new unitsa He stated that citizens are concerned because there is "no way they can get to the Housing Authority like they can City Council." Mr. Smith stated that he feels if the Housing Authority is allowed to set the policies, they would be contrary to the general policy of the City Council in that the City Council has respo.nsibili ty to set "policies", and there will be "some unhappy people." Mr. Lathrop stated that he felt there would be more housing stock available after completion of · the 100-unit high-rise, because elderly residents would be selling their homes or renting them out and moving into the public housing. He noted that this had happened when the Simon Center was filled. Miss Fessenden pointed out that very few of the Simon Center tenants had sold property when they moved in. Further brief discussion ensueda -8- V. PUBLIC FORUM There was no audience present. VI. DIRECTOR'S CHOICE Mr. Wanush stated that at the meeting of May 21, 1979, City Council did approve the vacation of right-of-way on the west side of South Marion Street. Mr. Wanush stated that the Colorado Chapter of APA will have their annual meeting in Snowmass in June immediately after the Colorado Municipal League meeting. VII. COMMISSION'S CHOICE Mr. Draper discussed the parking lot across the street from his house, which parking lot is for Belleview Park. He stated that the usual use of this parking lot is no more than four vehicles, and is an attractive place for parking vehicles over- night, motorcyclists, etc. He suggested that perhaps the Parks Department and/or City could consider reducing this parking area to accommodate 12 vehicles or so, and landscape the remainder of the area. He stated that he felt a lot of the residents of • the immediate area would be much more satisfied if this were ~ made a part of the park, or at least landscaped and the parking ~ area was reduced. Don Smith asked that the parking layout at the Bates/Logan Park be studied. He noted that it is virtually possible to block the entire parking lot because of the layout and the street parking that is permitted. Mr. Bilo inquired about the fuel shortage, and whether City Council has discussed this matter at all? Mr. Wanush stated that the City is considering the matter of the gasol~ne short- age, and that the City has been told they will get no more fuel for the rest of the month; the June allocation will be 70% of the June, 1978, allocation. He stated that the biggest problem is the shortage of diesel fuel for the fire trucks. Mr. Bilo inquired about car pooling for Commission meetings, or possibly cutting down on the number of meetings. The proposed development of parking lots by Swedish Medical Center was discussed. Mr. Smith discussed ways that might be used to finance parking structures, and stated that while he feels the City should help Swedish Medical Center . in every way possible, he does not feel that the City should obligate itself financially. Discussion ensued. The meeting adjourned at 8:50 P. M. G. Welt~, R _corninQ SP.r.rAnarv