Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1979-10-16 PZC MINUTES• • CITY OF ENGLEWOOD PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION OCTOBER 16, 1979 I. CALL TO ORDER. The regular meeting of the City Ilanning and Zoning Commission was called to order at 7:05 P.M. by Chairman Tanguma. Members present: Draper, Lathrop, Pierson, Smith, Tanguma, Williams, Becker, Bilo, Carson Romans, Acting Ex-officio Members absent: None Also present: Associate Planner Alice Fessenden II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES. Mr. Tanguma stated that the Minm ... es of October 2, 1979, were to be considered for approval. Lathrop moved: Williams seconded: The Minutes of October 2, 1979, be approved as written. AYES: Carson, Draper, Lathrop, ~ierson, Tanguma, Williams, Becker, Bilo NAYS: None ABSTAIN: Smith The motion carried. III. WEST QUINCY PLACE Right-of-way Vacation CASE #23-79A October 2, 1979 Mr . Tanguma stated that this mat~er was carried over from the last meeting. He asked Mrs. Rom n ns to give a run-down on the request. Mrs. Romans stated that at the meeting of October 2, 1979, the Planning Commission considered a request by Mr. Jerald Hughes, property owner at 4240 South Lipan Street, to vacate the right- of-·way on West Quincy Place whicl!. extends from South Lipan Street east to the Jason Park bo1 :.ndary. This right-of-way has been used by the Parks Departmen·..; maintenance crews and by pedestrians for access to the Park from the west side. The right-of-way also provides access to the garage at 4240 South Lipan Street; and to a lesser degree, to the carport on property at 4260 South Lipan Street . • -2- The Commission asked that the st:;:ff get in touch with the Parks and Recreation Department to clal ·ify the need for the vehicular and pedestrian access to Jason Park from the west on West Quincy Place. Pursuant to this request, the staff got in touch with Parks and Recreation Director Romans and Assistant Director of Parks Kuhn. Both Mr. Romans and Mr. Kuhn have stated that they do use this . means of access to the park for their maintenance equipment, and that the access s h ould be retained. Mrs. Romans pointed out that Jason Park has :-10 paths traversing it, an<l maintenance equipment would have to be driven across the grass from the ·south or east to cut weeds or do other maintenance work on the west and north sides of the park if the western point of access were eliminated. Mrs. Romans stated that the Parks and Recreation staff have r eported that on at least one occasion, the pedestrian gate ha $ been padlocked by someone other than Parks Department personnel and complaints have been received in the Department that pedestrians wishing to get into the Park have been unable to use the west access gate. It was necessary on this occasion to cut the padlock off. It is the opinion of the staff that the access from the west is an important feature, and Mrs. Romans emphasi~~ed that Jason Park is a public "neighborhood" park developed to serve the residents of this neighborhood. These residents sllould have convenient access to this Park. Mrs. Romans reported that the Director of Parks and Recreation told her that when application was made to HUD for federal funds to develop the Park, the p l ans showed that there would be access on th~ west side of tht;· Park to serve those families living on South Lipan Street and for the Parks maintenance personnel. Mrs. Romans stated that she felt the matter was up to the Planning Commission to determine whether or not there is a need for access for pedestrians and maintenance :Jersonnel at this point, and what. access would be adequate. Mr. Smith noted that the Staff Re port Addendum indicates that Parks Director Romans "questions the infrequency of use", and asked if other information on the amount of use was available? Mrs. Romans stated that no specific figures on usage were sub- mitted. Mr. Bilo asked if the vacation we re to be approved, would there be a requirement to change the curb and gutter from the present alignment? Mrs. Romans stated that if the right-of- way were vacated, the curb and gutter line would have to be adjusted. Mr. Bilo asked if this would be at the expense of the property owner? Mrs. Romans stated that she understood ~hat it would be. Mr. Tanguma stated that he felt ~t was too bad that someone from the Parks and Recreation Department was not in attendance to fully explain the need for the right-of-way. He noted that equipment is driven across the grass in other parks, such as at Cushing Park. -3- Mrs. Becker stated that some con8ideration was given at the last meeting to signing the accessway to prevent parking along the right-of-way if the 16 feet is retained. She asked if this was possible. Mrs. Romans state d that it can be signed to pro- hibit parking along the right-of-way. Mrs. Romans noted that there have been complaints about the use of the west side of the park from the neighbors in the area, and some of the soccer games have been relocated because of these complaints. Mr. Smith stated that he felt peo ple parked in this area now because it looks like a mini-par l ~ing lot, and not like an "alley". If this looked more like an aJley, people might not be as apt to park there. He felt that signing to prohibit parking in the alley would be sufficient, or that it could be designated as a "tow-away zone". Mr. Tanguma noted that Mrs. Hughe s was in the audience, and asked if she wanted to address t .e Commission? Mrs. Geraldine Hughes 4240 South Lipan Street -pointed out that she and her husband "didn't ask for this on their own doing; it was offered to them by Joe Plizga. He came out and checked it, and he said what the City could do is give them the property and he said there was no reason they couldn't have it. He said he talked to the Parks Department personnel and was told they didn't use the gate." Mrs. Hughes stated that in her opinion, the maintenance crews only use the gate once a year or so; she stated that the crews have used it more in the last few weeks ·than they have be f ore. Mrs. Hughes stated that they have gone through several y e ars of problems with this right-of-way and getting in and out of their garage which has the entrance from this right-of-way. Mrs. Hughes stated that she and her husband have not said that they wanted the pedestrian gate and access closed; she has a son in the second grade who uses this access into the Park. She does not feel, however, that the City uses the right-of-'>lay and there is no need for the City to retain it. She stat e d that her neighbors wanted t o put in a garage --they now have a carport --but that they cannot do it if the 16 foot right-of-way were to be retained. She and her husband wanted to extend their yard to the south and possibly put in a garden; again, the 16 foot right-of-way would preclude this possibility. Mr s. Hughes stated that she feel:; the statement in the "letter" they received implies that she is the one who placed the lock on the pedestrian gate. She stated that she did not. Mrs. Hughes stated that Mr. Plizga told her that the Parks personnel placed the lock on the gate. Mrs. Hughes emphasized that they are not trying to get the pedest J ~ian gate closed; she pointed out that there are 11 36 kids in t h is block" that can be expected be use this access. Mrs. Hughes noted that South Lipan Street is subject to high-speed traffic, and that "cars go 80 miles per hour down the street." Mrs. Hughes stated that much of the parking problem is caused by soccer teams from the City -4- of Littleton who use the Park for practic:e. These people park in front of the residences and along the right-of-way to the park, blocking driveways for the· residents of the area. Mrs. Hughes stated that they wanted t0 "do this right and are now being acused of putting the lock 'on the gate, and she didn't do it." She stated that she has lived in Englewood for 33 years, and has two daughters who are graduates of Englewood High School, plus a son in Maddox Elementary School. Mr. Smith asked Mrs. Hughes what "letter" she was referring to that indicates she put the lock on the pedestrian gate? Mr. Tanguma stated that he felt Mrs. Hughes was referring to the Staff Report Addendum. Mr. Lmith stated that if this is the case, he does not get that interpretation from the Addendum. Mrs. Hughes stated that she showed this "letter" to three persons who reside in the block, and it was their feeling that this would indicate she was trying to keep people out of the Park and that she put the lock on the gate. Mr. Smith reiterated that he did not feel this Adden&lm reflects this interpretation. Mrs. Hughes stated again that Mr. Plizga said that the Parks personnel put the lock on the gate because the teams tore up the grass, but it didn't stop the use of the Park or stop the people parking in the right-of-way. Mr. Smith stated that if the vacation is approved as recommended by the staff, leaving a 16 foot right-of-way, it would look more like an "alley" and might discourage persons from parking there. Mr. Smith stated that if the vacation were to be approved with the 16 foot alley, this would provide each property owner with an additional 22 feet of property; he asked why this additj~nal 22 feet could not be developed and be of benefit to the prc.•perty owner? Mrs. Hughes stated that she and her husband would be paying extra in property taxes and the City would still have access across the land. Mrs. Hughes also stated that the boundary lines of their properties are 10 feet further out than they had thought, and that the property owners would only be getting an extra feet more than they havt· right now. Mr. Smith emphasized that the property owners would be legally acquiring another 22 feet of land if the 16 foot right-of-way were to be retained; they would acquire an additional 30 feet of land if no right-of-way were to be retained by the City. He asked why this additional eight feet is important to Mrs. Hughes? Mrs. Hughes stated that the City does not need it. Mr. Smith asked Mrs. Hughes if she would be willing to give a "life-time easement" through the property to provide access and if they would grant the City the right to go through there at any time? Mr. Williams stated that he felt this was an unfair question, and that Mrs. Hughes should have legal counsel before answering such a question. I I , -5- Mr. Smith explained to Mrs. Hughes that if the property is vacated to Mr. and Mrs. Hughes and Mr. and Mrs. Villnow at 4260 South Lipan Street, and no easement or right-of-way is retained by the City, they are under no obligation to let anyone through that property to get to that gate unless they grant an easement across the land for access. This easement would have to be granted to the City. He stated that any decision the Planning Commission makes must look at the future. The idea is, does Mrs. Hughes know if she and her neighbor would be willing to give a pedestrian easement that would go with the title to their land granting such access to the City of Englewood? Mrs. Hughes stated that she felt they would be willing to grant access for pedestrian purposes, but not for use by the Parks and Recreation maintenance crews, because these main- tenance crews have other ways to get into the Park and do not use this means of access at the present time. Mrs. Hughes reiterated that "this letter seems to state that she is trying to keep people from using the Park." Mr. Smith asked "you would be willing to give such an easement?" Mrs. Hughes stated "yes". Mr. Williams again stated that she felt this was an unfair que!stion of Mrs. Hughes, and that she needed legal counsel prior to answering. Mr. WilliamE; stated that he would ask for postponement of consideration on this matter. He stated that he feels the Commission needs to talk to Traffic Engineer Plizga and Parks and Recreation Director Romans. Williams moved: Carson seconded: The matter of t he right-of-way vacation on West Quincy Pl~ce be postponed until November 7th. Mrs. Pierson questioned the need for postponement; she stated that she felt the issue before the Commission is: Does the City government and citizenry have a use for this access? At both meetings, the Commission ha s heard there are people who need and use the access to the Pa rk; this has been heard from both the applicants and from the City staff. She stated that she felt there was nothing further that the Commission needs to address, and that t he facts are before the Commission to make a decision at this time. Mr. Williams disagreed with Mrs. Pierson. He stated that Chairman Tanguma had stated that it was unfortunate that Mr. Romans was not present to clarify the need for the right-of-way and that he has questions that he feels Traffic Engineer Plizga should answer. Mr .. Tanguma stated he felt there was a need for clarification. He stated that he did not recall .that Mrs. Hughes said they were "promised" the right-of-way would be vacated. Mrs. Hughes I I , -6- stated that Mr. Plizga "offered" the right-of-way to them. Mr. Williams stated that he feels Mr. Plizga was "leading you astray; he has no right to offer you anything." Mrs. Pierson stated whether or not an employee of the City made such an offer is irrelevant at this point. Mr. Smith stated that there is a question of vacation of right- of-way before the Commission. He pointed out that we have gotten comments from the Parks and Recreation Department twice; testimony has been received from Mr. and Mrs. Hughes twice, and it is now up to the Commission to decide whether there should be vehicular access retainod on West Quincy Place. Mr. Williams pointed out that at the last meeting both Council- men were unable to sit through the entire meeting because of a special City Council meeting. Mr. Williams again moved to postpone consideration until November 7th, and that he wanted Parks and Recreation Director Romans and Traffic Engineer Plizga present to answer questions. Mrs. Hughes stated that in all the "arguments" that she has had with the City, Mr. Plizga is the only one who has been able to give any help to them at all in regard to the parking problem. Mr. Williams asked "but how can he make you the of fer of the land?" Mr. Tanguma stated that he felt t i1ese questions could be answered even atter the Commissio b makes a decision on the case. Mrs. Pierson again stated that the issue is: "Does the City have a need for the land? Any or all of it?" Mrs. Becker called for the question on the motion. AYES: Bilo, Carson, Lathrop, Williams NAYS: Draper, Pierson, Smith, Tanguma, Becker The motion failed. Mr. Williams announced that he was leaving the meeting and going home to watch the baseball g ame; he felt that Mrs. Hughes was led astray by Mr. Plizga's offer of the land, that the matter of an easement across her land was being "shoved" down her throat and this was not right; Councilman Smith was not a lawyer, and questioned Mrs. Pierson's legal capabilities. Mr. Tanguma called for order, and Mrs. Pierson stated that she wanted all of the above remarks reflected in the record. Mrs. Hughes stated that she does not feel that something is being shoved down her throat, nor does she feel that she is in need of legal counsel. She stated that no matter what decision is reached, she wished to thank the Commission for hearing her out. • -'7- Smith moved: Becker seconded: The Planning Commission recommend to City Council the vac 1tion of the right-of-way along West Quincy Place be approv a d provided Mr. and Mrs. Hughes and Mr. and Mrs. Villnow, property owners at 4240 South Lipan Street and 4260 South Lipan Street, respectively, grant to the City of Englewood an easement in perpetuity for pedestrian right- of-way to the access gate located on the west boundary of Jason Park, said pedestrian easement to be eight feet in width. Mrs. Pierson stated that as long a s there is any chance the City government has any need to get in through this vehicular access gate, we should retain the full 16 foot right-of-way as suggested by the staff. Mrs. Pierson also stated that she felt the vacation and granting back of an easement by the property owners is too cumbersome , and suggested retaining the right-of-way rather than havin g the property owners grant an easement. Mr. Bilo stated that he understood from the Staff Report Addendum that part of the agreement with HUD was that nothing would be done to change the "character of the Park"; he asked if a change of access on the west side would a ffect a "change in character." Mrs. Romans stated that the Direc t or of Parks and Recreation had said that when the Park location was approved by HUD, that access was provided to the houses along the west side. Mr. Romans did indicate, however, that at this point HUD would not take money away from the City if the access were changed. It was his feeling that if .the Planning Commission and City Council felt the right-of-way should be vacated, that the Parks and Recreation Department maintenance personnel :::.t nd citizens using the pedestrian accessway would have to make adju$tments. Mr. Smith stated that he did not feel the vacation of the right-of-way would change the character of the Park in any way. He stated that he suggested the granting back of an easement only to give pedestrians the right to cross the property to the pedestrian gate. Mr. Smith emphasized that he does not see that the vacation of the right-of-way will cause any real change in the character of the Park. The vacation will alleviate the problems experienced by Mr. and Mrs. Hughes, which is that of people parking along this right-of-way and blocking the access to their garage. Mr. Draper commented that the City signed a statement that there would be no change in the character of the Park; he asked if HUD would have to be advised o .f this change in access, and could it possibly affect future funding from HUD for the City? Mrs. Romans stated that she questioned that HUD would do anything about it at this point. Mrs. Pierson stated that she felt this is another promise that has been made by the City that is being reneged on. She stated that from Mr. Smith's statements, she understands that the yards of properties at 4240 and 4260 South Lipan Street will -8- be extended to a common boundary; she as£ed where this easement would be --would the property owners want this easement which would allow people to cross through their "yard" to get to t his gate into the Park? She stated that the City has an obligation to see that people can get to this gate. Mr. Lathrop stated that it appeared to him that this right-of- way has been a nuisance and a detriment to the adjoining property owners. Mr. Lathrop stated that he would agree that the right-of-way needs to be vacated, and that not more than an eight ·foot pedestrian easement should be retained. He stated that he felt if the 16 foot right-of-way were to be retained as suggested by staff, this would be wide enough to allow the parking of cars, which would then have to back out to the street .. The eight foot easement would not be wide enough to get a car in there. Mr. Lathrop stated that he felt the vacation and retention of the eight-foot pedestrian easement would solve the problems for the adjoining property owners, but he questioned that the City could ask for a "life- time easement" because future pro perty owners would have to live up to this easement also. Mrs. Becker asked if the Commission was discussing an "easement" or "right-of-way"; if "right-of-way" was retained, this would belong to the City for use by the pedestrians and would not be considered a part of the propert y owned by the adjoining owners. Discussion ensued. Smith moved: Carson seconded: The motion be amended to change the eight- foot easement to requirement of a six-foot pedestrian right-of-way that wou l d be a concrete sidewalk 1~th to the pedestrian gate. Mr. Smith stated that with an actual pedestrian walkway to the Park gate, any possibility of vehicles parking along this right-of-way would be eliminated. Mr. Bi lo stated that he felt thei·e should be a right-of-way retained. He pointed out that t h e Planning Division staff reiterated the recommendation that the 16 foot right-of-way be retained. He stated that he does like the idea of the pedestrian walkway being delineated even if the 16 foot right- of-way is retained. He pointed out that if the walkway is put through, Mrs. Hughes will ha v e to go to the expense of putting in a driveway on her own property. He emphasized that the City wants to have vehicle access to that side of the park and anything less than the 16 foot right-of-way would not accomplish that purpose. Mrs. Pierson stated that the Commission is assuming that the 16 foot right-of-way would conti1iue to allow parking. If the 16 foot right-of-way were to be J:etained and if the adjoining property owners were allowed to ~ence right up to the 16 foot line, she questioned that people would be parking in this area. She said that the matter still comes back to the question of -9- whether the City does have a nee <. for the right-of-way and the Parks and Recreation Department has stated that there is a need for this right-of-way, which position has been supported by the Engineering Services Department and by the Planning staff. To vacate the total right-of-way but for an eight foot easement or a six foot sidewalk would be t o disregard the evidence in front of the Commission. Mrs. P i erson stated that she feels the problem can be solved for Mrs. Hughes without giving away the land the City has. Mr. Tanguma stated that the right-of-way the City has requested be retained for access to the Park is, in his opinion, not needed by the City. He emphasiz e d that there is access to the Park from the east and south side s, and while the retention of the right-of-way and vehicle access gate is "desirable", it is not necessary. Mr. Tanguma agreed that a pedestrian right-of- way is needed, and that there are a lot of children in this block who use this means of access to the Park. Mr. Tanguma stated that he is very familiar with this area and agreed with Mrs. Hughes that the traffic doe s go quite fast on South L ~pan Street. Mr. Tanguma stated that he has lived in this gene r al part of town for almost eight years, and has had friends in this area for 15 years, and that he "hasn't seen a City truck drive through that gate yet." Mr. Draper suggested retaining the 16 foot right-of-way and setting two posts at the South L i pan Street end of this right- of-way with a chain across. Thif: would allow pedestrian access and would allow .use of the right-of-way by City vehicles upon removal of the chain, but would prevent use of the right-of- way by persons who would park their vehicles in this area. Mr. Tanguma reiterated that "if J~he City needed it, I would go along with it; Packy would like to keep the right-of-way but doesn't say they 'need' it; :i.t's a matter of convenience." Mrs. Hughes pointed out that if the 16 foot right-of-way is retained and ·chained as suggested by Mr. Draper, this would prevent her from using this right-of-way as access to her garage. Mr. Bilo stated that he would ha ,·e to disagree with Mr. Tanguma's interpretation of the statement from the Parks and Recreation Department; by stating that they would like to have the right- of-way, he feels that they do have a need for it and he would have to support the staff on the retention of a 16 foot right- of-way. Mr. Tanguma emphasized that the lJarks Department "said it would be nice; it would be convenient," but they haven't come up with any need for it. Discussion on access to the garage at 4240 South Lipan Street ensued. Mr. Carson stated that h e visited the site two weeks ago and talked to Mr. Hughes at t hat time; Mr. Hughes stated -10- he had no objection to the 16 foot right-of-way, and that this would give them plenty of room for ingress and egress to their garage. Mr. Tanguma again stated that he does not see that the City has to have this right-of-way. Mr. Smith stated that he felt the question is whether or not the Parks and Recreation Depart- ment need the right-of-way, and that he sees no evidence that the maintenance crews use it and the neighbors don't see tl·.at they are using it. He pointed O\'.t that the only time grass would be -damaged by driving vehicles over it is if it is wet. He reiterated that he does not see that the Parks and Recreation Department is using this means of access that much; if it was used once a month, the neighboring property owners would know. If a six foot sidewalk is instal ~.ed in this area, this would give the Hughes and Villnow's su :f ficient room to get into their garages and provide for pedestriLn access to the Park. Mr. Lathrop stated that he would have to agree with Mr. Williams' view point; if the Parks and Recreation Department felt that this right-of-way is needed, "why aren't they here to ask for it." He stated that Mrs. Hughes has stated that City people have told her there is no need f r the right-of-way, and that it can be vacated to her. The vote on the amendment to the motion was called: AYES: Becker, Bilo, Lathrop, Smith, Tanguma NAYS: Carson, Draper, Pierson ABSENT: Williams The motion carried. The vote on Mr. Smith's motion to vacate the right-of-way, ~etaining a six foot pedestrian ~idewalk through the area to the pedestrian gate, was called: AYES: Becker, Lathrop, Smith, Tanguma NAYS: Bilo, Carson, Draper, Pierson ABSENT: Williams The motion failed. Bilo moved: Pierson seconded: That the Planning Commission recommend to the City Council that the right-of-way along West Quincy Place be vacated, retaining a 16 foot right-of-way .in the center with a six foot walkway for pedestrians. The pedestrian walkway need not be o :~ concrete construction, but may be of gravel. · Mr. Smith stated that if the concrete sidewalk is used for vehicles to drive over, the sidewalk will be destroyed. Mrs. Pierson pointed out that "if the sidewalk is destroyed by vehicular traffic, it will prove the point there is heavy -11- vehicular traffic in the right-of··way and that the right-of-way is needed." If the Parks personnel only use this means of access two or three times per year the sidewalk should not be harmed. Mr. Tanguma stated that if a heavy truck drives over a sidewalk once, it would damage the sidewalk. Mr. Bilo pointed out that the pedestrian access need only be a gravel path and not a concrete sidewalk. Mr. Tanguma stated that he would have to vote against Mr. Bilo's motion. He again pointed out that Parks personnel have access to the park the entire length of the park on the east side and on the south end. He stated that he could not understand the reluctance of some members of the Commission to give u~ the right-of-way ex- cept for that portion that is needed by the pedestrian access. Mr. Bilo stated that he has to support the staff recommendation that a 16 foot right-of-way be retained; at the last meeting, the staff was asked to obtain further clarification of the case, and the departments involved have reiterated their stand that this right-of-way is needed. Mr. Tanguma stated that he did not feel the reason for the need has been clarified. The vote was called: AYES: Bilo, Carson, Draper, Pierson NAYS: Tanguma, Becker, Lathrop, Smith ABSENT: Williams The motion failed. Mrs. Romans pointed out that it is not customary for staff members of other departments to appear before the Commission unless asked to do so in advance. The Planning Commission asked for clarification of this case; the Planning Division staff did get in touch with the Parks Department personnel, which personnel have stated that there is a need for this 16 foot right-of-way to be retained. It does serve a public park; the staff position is that we now have public access to this public park, and public access should be retained. Mrs. Romans pointed out that at the meeting of October 2nd, the Commission had before them statements from two departments that stated there was a need for this right-of-way. She felt that the City has stated their case; they have stated that there is a need for the right-of-way. If the Commission wants staff people to come to the meeting, they should so state in advance of the meeting. Mrs. Ro~ans emphasized again that the Parks and Recreation Department and the Engineering Services Department have submitted written statements on the need for the right-of-way, and that she pe~sonally contacted these people for further "clarification" on the need as requested by the Commission. Mrs. Romans stated 1hat Jason Park is now a "passive" park, but there is no guarantee that it will remain solely for passive recreational pursuits in the future. Further develop- ment might dictate a greater need for vehicular access from the west, which would not then be available were the entire right- -·12- of-way to be vacated with the exception of the pedestrian access- way. Mrs. Romans stressed that if members of the Commission want staff members of other departments present at their meetings, they should ask in advance of the particular meeting so that these individuals may set their schedules accordingly. ; Pierson moved: Bilo seconded: The Planning Commission recommend to City Council that the right-of-way vacation along West Quincy Place be approved, retaining a 16 foot right-of- way for vehicular and pedestrian access to Jason Park. Mr. Smith stated that he did not if eel retention of a 16 foot right-of-way would correct the pr'oblems experienced in the area. He noted that the Staff Report Addendum places the emphasis on access for pedestrians, not vehicular access. As to future development of the park, he did not feel that vaca- tion of the right-of-way and denying vehicular access from the west would be a problem. He stated that he did not feel that vehicular access to the park from the west is that .important, and pointed out that Director of Parks and Recreation Romans does not seem to know how often the maintenance crews use it if he "questions the infrequency of use." Mr. Smith stated that he was not questioning the professionalism of the staff, a.nd he does not question their recommendation. He does not agree with the recommendation and feels that the City has right-of-way that is not used for vehicular traffic. He feels that the purpose of this request was to alleviate the parking problem experienced by Mr. and Mrs. Hughes along the right-of- way creating an ingress/egress problem to their driveway, and to assure pedestrian access to the park. By providing for the pedestrian accessway the one point of the problem is being answered, and by limiting the wi~th of the pedestrian access- way, the parking problem is also eliminated. He stated that he failed to see where the 16 foot right-of-way would accomplish anything. Mrs. Pierson stated that she did not feel the issue at question is the parking problem, even though that is a facet of concern to the Commission; the issue is the "need for the right-of-way." She pointed out that "everybody says there is no need for the 60 foot right-of-way, and that the 16 foot right-of-way will suffice." She stated that she felt it is a very simple matter before the Commission, and that by vacating all but the 16 foot right-of-way the problems will be solved. Mr. Draper pointed out that the 16 foot right-of-way can be regulated with no parking signs, a chain across the accessway to be removed when parks personnel need ~ccess, or some other means. Mrs. Becker stated that she really did not have much faith in "No Parking" signs. She stated that if this 16 foot right-of- way looks like an "alley", it will still look like parking would be permissible; if it were to be landscaped so that it would not appear to be for vehicular access she would have no problem with retaining the 16 foot right-of-way. • -13- Mr. Smith stated that if the 16 f oot right-of-way were to be retained, both adjoining land ow J ers could use it as access to their garages, and he does not see any problem with this; otherwise, they would both have to construct driveways to their garages. Mr. Bilo emphasized that personnre l from Parks and Recreation, Engineering Services and the Pla n ning Division have all recom- mended that the right-of-way not be vacated unless 16 feet is retained. The vote was called on the motion: AYES: Smith, Becker, Bilo, Cars o n, Draper, Pierson NAYS: Tanguma, Lathrop ABSENT: Williams The motion carried. Mr. Tanguma called a recess of t ~1e Commission at 8:40 P.M. The meeting reconvened at 8:55 P .M., with the following members present: Pierson, Smith , Tanguma, Becker, Bilo, Curson, Draper, Lathrop. Mr. Williams was absent. IV. 3100 BLOCK SOUTH CLARKSON STREET Excessive Right-of-way vaca T.ion CASE #25-79 Mrs. Romans stated that Miss Fes;;enden was giving the members of the Commission a copy of a letter which was submitted to the office asking that the excessive right-of-way on the west side of South Clarkson Street in the 3100 block south be vacated, and also a map of the block, on which map those persons signing the letter of request have been · ndicated. Mrs. Romans stated that this request is very simila:c to a recent request by resi- dents in the 3200 block of South Clarkson Street, wherein the City was asked to vacate excessive right-of-way on the west side of the block. Mrs. Romans stated that there is 80 feet +/-of right-of-way in the 3100 block of South Clarkson Street, which is designated as a Collector Street in the Master Street Plan. Usually, a 60 foot right-uf-way is sufficient to carry the traffic on a Collector Street . The staff does recommend the vacation of the excessive right-of-way on the west side of the street, inasmuch as South Clarkson Street has been in an improvement district and there are no plans to widen South Clarkson Street to the full 80 foot right-of-way. There will be no physical change in the cha~acter of the street, but it be necessary to retain an easeme::-tt through the area that is recommended for vacation to faci :l.itate maintenance of utility lines. The adjoining property owners may extend their fences across this land, but no permanent structures may be erected thereon. There was one phone call to the office asking for clarification on the term "vacation", from a Mrs. Golus, property owner at 3195 South Cla:.·kson Street. No objections have been registered with the of :l'.ice, and more than 50% of -14- the people on the west side of the block have requested the vacation of the excessive right-o f-way. There was no one present in the audience to address the Com- mission on this matter. Carson moved: Smith seconded: The Planning Commission recommend to City Council the vac a tion of the following described right-of-way, retaining an easeme nt for utilities through 1his land: That land adjacent to the east side of Lots 25 -48, Block 4, Bank Addition, beginning at the Northeast corner of Lot 48, Block 4, Bank Addition, t h ence East 12.87 feet; thence South to a point 14.4 feet East of the Southeast corner of Lot 25, Block 4; thence West to the Southeast corner of said Lot 25; thence North along the East line of Block 4 to the point of beginning, containing 8385 squ are feet more or less. AYES: Lathrop, Pierson, Smith, Tanguma, Becker, Bilo, Carson, Draper NAYS: None ABSENT: Williams The motion carried. V. TIMBER LEA PLANNED DEVELOPMENT vacation of 8 Ft. Dedication CASE #24-79 Mrs. Romans stated that the vacation before the Commission is essentially a "clean-up detail". At the time the Timber Lea Planned Development and Subdivision Waiver were approved, there had been discussion of the possibility of the applicants giving a dedication to the City of eight feet for alley purposes. There is a driving lane in existance to the west of the sites, but not an actual dedicated alley. The applicants did agree to give an eight foot strip of l~.nd for alley purposes along the western boundary of their site, and their engineer prepared the deed for dedication, which was duly recorded. However, it was discovered that there was an error in the legal description and the dedication was eight feet too far to the east. Mrs. Romans stated that she had discu~sed the matter with County Clerk and Recorder Marjorie Page, who suggested that the original deed could be corrected and re-re•corded; this was done. Upon discussion with Assistant City Attorney DeWitt, he advised that a "correction deed" be prepared and filed; this was done. How- ever, the Title Company has stated that this is not satisfactory and has asked that the eight foot strip be vacated. The staff does recommend the vac&.tion of the eight foot strip at the rear of the Planned Develcpment. -1)- Smith moved: Lathrop seconded: The Planning Commission recommend to City Council that vacation of the following described property be approved: A part of the Southwest one- quarter of the Northwest one-qua ter of Section 35, Township 4 South, Range 68 West of the 6th P.M., City of Englewood, County of Arapahoe, State of Colorado, more particularly described as follows: Commencing at the Southwest corner of said Northwest one-quarter; thence Northerly along the West line of said Northwest one-quart~r 495.23 feet; thence on an angle to the right of 89°53'22 11 a nd easterly 189.00 feet to the point of beginning; thence C'>ntinuing Easterly along the aforesaid course 8.00 feet; thence on aP angle to the right of 90°06'38" and Southerly 250.00 feet; thence on an angle to the right of. 89°53'22 11 and westerly 8.00 feet; thence on an angle to the right of 90°06'38" and Northerly 250.00 feet to the point of beginning. AYES: Draper, Lathrop, Pierson, Smith, Tanguma, Becker, Bilo, Carson NAYS: None ABSENT: Williams The motion carried. VI. PUBLIC FORUM Mr. Tanguma suggested that before the traffic patterns around Cinderella City are discussed that Mr. Keller, Executive Director of the Downtown Development Authority, be asked to address the Commission. Mr. Keller stated that his purpose in being present this evening was to shepherd the proposal before the Commission concerning the parking lot development on South Lincoln, the ·Nalk-through, mini-park and mini~mall all proposed for the 3400 block. At the City Council meeting last evening, the Downtown Development Authority r .-,quested $135, 000 contribution from the City toward financing of the project, and this request was approved by the City Council. Mr. Keller stated that be- cause of the limited time available for the acquisition of the Public Service Company property, he urged that everyone "do their homework" so that when the public hearings are set bAfore City Council there will not be u n necessary delays. The op ~ion to acquire the Public Service property expires December 31, 1979. Mr. Keller stated that the DDA has invited all affected property owners to a meeting on Cctober 25th at 7:30 A.M., in- vitations having been sent by registered mail, return receipt requested. Mr. Keller stated that it was not his intent to have a hearing or discussion on ·~he project at the meeting this evening, but to bring the Commis:::ion up-to-date on the progress of the DDA. -16- VII. TRAFFIC PATTERNS. Mr. Tanguma asked Mrs. Romans to discuss the matter of the traffic pattern. Mrs. Romans stated that she has discussed the matter of the traffic pattern in the vicinity of Cinderella City with Public Works Director )~ells Waggoner and other people on the staff. The City has hire d a traffic consultant to study the traffic pattern throughout the City, including the subject area, and it estimated that this report will be completed within three weeks or so. Cinderella City Management has also con- tracted for a traffic study of access to the shopping center wi t h DeLeuw Cather and Company, a nd this study is not available at this time. Mrs. Romans state d that on discussion with other staff members, it was felt that u ntil these two studies are completed, there is no new information to be added to that which was made available to the Commission last February when the traffic pattern was discussed. It was felt that informa- tion contained within these two studies would have an impact on the traffic patterns, and tha ·c possibly further discussions on the traffic pattern should be delayed until the information from the two consultants is avai~able. Mr. Smith asked when the Cinderella City traffic study would be available? Mrs. Romans stated that she understood it would he a matter of weeks. She stated that Public Works Director Waggoner had met with the consul t ants on October 15th, and reported that the study is underway and should be available soon. Mr. Smith inquired if it would be possible to get a completion date by the next meeting of the Commission? He stated that if it is determined that the study hy Cinderella City will take a great deal of time, he felt the d iscussions should proceed . Mrs. Romans stated that the staf f would report back to the Com- mission as soon as possible. VIII. DIRECTOR'S CHOICE. Mrs. Romans stated that on September 18th she attended a meeting of the School Board, at which meeting copies of the Comprehensive Plan were made available to the members of the Board. Mrs. Romans stated that she had indicated to the Board that the Planning Commission would welcome an opportunity to meet with them to discuss the Comprehensive Plan. She has sin ce talked to School Board member Pool, but the School Board has not yet set a date for the s u ggested meeting. The Planning Commission and School Board meetj_ngs, as a rule, fall on the same evenings, and if a mutual date cannJt be worked out on a regular meeting evening, Mrs. Romans suggested that possibly something could be scheduled for an alternate Tuesday evening. The Commission was agreeable to this proposal. Mrs. Romans stated that the City Council would like to meet with the Planning Commission at 6:00 P.M. on November 19th to -17- discuss the Comprehensive Plan. This would preceed the regular City Council meeting scheduled for 7:30 P.M. Mr. Tanguma asked if newly-elected Council members would be included in this meeting? Mrs. Romans stated that she would assume that they would be. Mr. Draper asked if it was the in- tent of the City Council to cons~-der the Comprehensive Plan at their regular meeting of Novembe~'.' 19th, and to approve it at that meeting? Mr. Smith stated ~hat he could not say at this time; an agenda of that meeting is not yet available. Mr. Smith stated that he felt the members of the current City Council would approve the Comprehensive Plan; he did not feel it would be carried over to after January 1st for the new City Council to consider. Mr. Bilo asked if ~his would be an open meeting at 6:00 P.M. with City Council? He stated that he wondered if members of the Downtown Development Authority would be included in this meeting. Mrs. Pierson asked if the study session is still scheduled for November 17th? Mrs. Romans stat~d that it is. The Chamber of Commerce office is under conside:r ation as the location, bu·~ the staff has not discussed this witL the Chamber staff at thiH time. Mrs. Romans stated that on Novemter 7th, the Downtown Develop- ment Authority will present their plans to the Planning Commission for discussion. Mrs. Romans stated that the next quarterly zoning hearings have been scheduled for December 4th. There is one application for rezoning on file at this time. Mrs. Romans stated there has been no further contact from Mr. Regan of RPR Brothers on the devi :l lopment of the former Larwin site. Mrs. Romans stated that the Planning staff has been working with the staff from Swedish Medical Center. The Medical Center is considering the construction of a medical office building on the south side of their property to the west of South Clarkson Street. The .location of the pro:·:>osed building is now being considered more in the "middle" of the property rather than right at the corner of Clarkson and Hampden. The Medical Center personnel are also thinking about the construction of a parking structure on the south side of East Hampden Avenue where they now have surface parking. They have been told by the Planning staff that the parking structure will have to provide the number of parking spa ces they now have in surface parking, plus the number of park:.ng spaces that would be re- quired for the medical office building. An over-head crossing from the parking structure to the medical office building has been contemplated; it is felt that this might be a safety feature for those individuals using the parking structure, pa~ticularly during the evening ~nd night-time hours. The Planning Staff is providing what ·:~ver information they can to the personnel of the Medical Center. -18- Mr. Draper asked how many offices are proposed in the medical building? Mrs. Romans stated that she did not think the plans have progressed that far; at this time they are checking into zoning regulations and determinir1g what utility lines are in existance in the area that is presently devoted to parking which may have to be rerouted. The ratio of parking required was discussed. Mrs. Romans stated .that this is based on the square footage of rentable floor area, and one space per each 300 square feet of rentable area is required. An off-street parking space is figured at approximately 300 square feet for the parking and maneuvering space. The staff has discussed t~e provision of parking spaces for compact vehicles in the parking structure with the Medical Center staff. Mrs. Romans noted that it is not uncommon in the newer parking facilities to have areas provided which are strictly for the parking of compact and smaller vehicles. Mrs. Romans stated that she realized this is all very preliminary information, but wanted the Commission to know that the staff is working with the Medical Center personnel on this matter. Mr. Draper asked how many stories they have discussed for the parking structure? Mrs. Romans E:tated that this would depend a great deal on the size of the office building. Discussion ensued. Mrs. Pierson stated that she would hope it would be conveyed to the Medical Center personnel that some members of the Commission are very much concerned about the appearance of the finished plans; she noted that the grounds around the Medical Center are very attractive, and she would hate to see that visual quality destroyed. Mrs. Becker expressed her concern about parking structures; she stated that she had yet to see an above-ground parking structure that in her opinion "is anything but ugly." She stated that she could not believe that people will not use underground parking. She acknowledged the need for fans and lighting in underground parking structures and the added ex- pense, but reiterated her objection to above-ground parking structures. Height limitations were further discussed, as were costs of underground parking vs. parking structures above-ground. Mrs. Romans stated that the City Council did approve the 1980- 1981 State Highway Work Program requests as recommended by the Planning Commission, and these requests have been submitted to the Arapahoe County Commissioners. Mrs. Romans stated that the City Council has postponed con- sideration of the Acoma/Bannock alley vacation just north of West Jefferson Avenue. Mr. Davis, one of the applicants, is out of town and will not be back until late in November; the matter has been delayed until his return. -:.9- IX. COMMISSION'S CHOICE. • Mr. Tanguma stated that at the last meeting, the staff was requested to write a letter to t :1e property owners of the "Brown House", which has been re l ocated to the west of the original location, but on the sa1.1e site on the northwest corner of South University Boulevard and East Dartmouth Avenue. Mr. Tanguma read a draft of the letter, which was approved by the Commission and signed by Mr. Tanguma. Mr. Tanguma stated that the Comm i ssion had recently asked that the Police Department check traf f ic on South Lipan Street be- tween West Oxford Avenue and West Quincy Avenue. He asked if anything had been done about this? Mrs. Romans stated that there was a 30 MPH speed limit sign that was down for north- bound traffic; this has been re-installed. Whether Mr. Wanush has discussed the matter with Chief Holmes she does not know, but would assume that he has done so. Mrs. Romans pointed out that if South Navajo Street coul d be extended north to West Oxford Avenue, much of the traffic load from South Lipan and other residential streets in the area would be alleviated. Mr. Bilo discussed the noise pollution that his neighborhood experiences, which noise comes f r om the Meadow Gold plant be- tween the hours of 11 P.M. and 5 A.M. Mr. Bilo played a tape he had made of this noise betwee:1 4 A.M. and 5 A.M. this morning, October 16th; he noted that the noise almost "drowned out the noise of the train." He noted that this noise does not occur every night, but does happen several times a week. He stated that he has discussed the noise with Mr. Wanush, who has indicated that he would :iave it checked out. Mr. Bilo stated that he feels the matter o f noise pollution is something that should be taken into consid0ration when developing businesses and industrial uses in close proximity to single-family homes. He noted that his house is two blocks away from the Meadow Gold plant. Mr. Tanguma stated that he under il tood there was a noise con- trol ordinance. Mr. Smith stated that there is, but there is no one trained to enforce it on a full-time basis. Mr. Lathrop stated that the enforcement of the noise control ordinance is the responsibility of the Police Department; they have the equipment for determining the noise levels. Further discussion of the problem of noise pollutiou ensued. Mr. Smith asked Mr. Bilo if he could have use of the tape made by Mr. Bilo; Mr. Bilo submitted the tape recordin !~ to Mr. Smith, asking that it be returned. The meeting adjourned at 9:55 P.~l. Gertrude G. Welty, Recording Secretary • -20- MEMORANDUM TO THE ENGLEWOOD CI~Y COUNCIL REGARDING ACTION OR RECOMMENDATION OF THE CITY PLl 1NNING AND ZONING COMMISSION . DATE: October 16, 1979 SUBJECT: West Quincy Place -Right-of-way Vacation RECOMMENDATION: Pierson moved: Bilo seconded: The Planning Commission recommend to City Council that the right-of-way vacation along West Quincy Place be approved, retaining a 16 f oot right-of-wa y for vehicular and pedestrian access to Jason Park. AYES: Smith, Becker, Bilo, Carson, Draper, Pierson NAYS: Tanguma, Lathrop J\B~·ENT: Williams The motion carried. ~ By Order of the City Planning & Zoning Commission. Gertrude G. Welty Recording Secretary -21- MEMORANDUM TO THE ENGLEWOOD CI TY COUNCIL REGARDING ACTION OR RECOMMENDATION OF THE CITY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION Q DATE: October 16, 1979 SUBJECT: 3100 Block South Clarks on Street -Vacation of Excessive Right-of-way on West Side RECOMMENDATION: Carson moved: Smith seconded: The Planning Commission recommend to City Council the vaca tion of the following described right-of-way, retaining an easement for utilities through this land: That land adjacent to the east side of Lots 25 -48, Block 4, Bank Addition, beginning at the Northeast corner of Lot 48, Block 4, Bank Addition, thence East 12Q87 feet; thence South to a point 14Q4 feet East of the Southeast corner of Lot 25, Block 4; thence West to the Southeast corner of said Lot 25; thence North along the East line of Block 4 to the point of beginning, containing 8385 square feet more or less. AYES: Lathrop,. Pierson, Smith, Tanguma, Becker, Bilo, Carson, Draper NAYS: None ABSENT: Williams The motion carriedQ By Order of the City Planning & Zoning Commission. Gertrude G. Welty Recording Secretary • • • -22- MEMORANDUM TO THE ENGLEWOOD CITY COUNCIL REGARDING ACTION OR RECOMMENDATION OF THE CITY PIJ1NNING AND ZONING COMMISSION • DATE: October 16, 1979 SUBJECT: Vacation of Eight Foot Dedication RECOMMENDATION: Smith moved: Lathrop seconded: The Planning Commission recommend to City Council that vacation of the following described property be approved: A part of the Southwest one-quarter of the Northwest one-·quarter of Section 35, Town- ship 4 South, Range 68 West of the 6th P.M., City of Englewood, County of Arapahoe, State of Colorado, more particularly described as follows: Commencing at the Southwest corner of s<id Northwest one-quarter; thence Northerly along the West line of said Northwest one-quarter 495 .23 feet; thence on an angle to the right of 89°53 1 22 11 and easterly 189.00 feet to the point of beginning; thence continuing Easterly along the afor esaid course 8.00 feet; thence on an angle t o the right of 90°06 1 38 11 and Southerly 250.00 feet; thence on an angle to the right of 89°53 1 22 11 and westerly 8.00 feet; thence on an angle to the right of 90°06 1 3811 and Northerly 250.00 feet to the point of beginning. AYES: Draper, Lathrop, Pierson, Smith, Tanguma, Becker, Bilo, Carson NAYS: None ABSENT: Williams The motion carried. By Order of the City Planning & ~;;oning Commission. Gertrude G. Welty Recording Secretary