HomeMy WebLinkAbout1979-02-06 PZC MINUTES• CITY OF ENGLEWOOD PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
February 6, 1979
I • CALL TO ORDER.
The regular meeting of the City Planning' and Zoning Commission
was called to order at 7:00 P. M. by Chairman Draper.
Members present: Draper, Lathrop, Pierson, Smith, Tanguma,
Williams, Becker, Bilo, Carson
Wanush, Ex-officio
Members absent: None
Also present: Assistant Director Dorothy Romans
Associate Planner Alice Fessenden
Mr. Draper welcomed Mr. Carson to the Commission.
II. RE-ORGANIZATION OF COMMISSION.
Mr. Draper stated that the Commission must elect a new Chairman
and Vice-Chairman, and declared the floor open for nominations
for Chairman.
Mrs. Pierson asked Mr. Draper if he would accept another term
as Chairman? Mr. Draper stated that he would rather not at
this time.
Mrs. Pierson nominated Mr. Eddie Tanguma as Chairman.
Mr. Carson nominated Martin Lathrop as Chairman.
Pierson moved:
Bilo seconded: The nominations be closed.
AYES: Bilo, Carson, Draper, Lathrop, Pierson, Smith, Tanguma,
Williams, Becker
NAYS: None
The motion carried.
Mr. Tanguma was elected Chairman by written ballot, and assumed
the Chair. He stated that he would like to thank members of
the Commission who voted for him, and pledged to serve the Com-
mission to the best of his ability.
Mr. Tanguma called for nominations for Vice-Chairman.
Mr. Smith nominated Mr. Lathrop for Vice-Chairman.
Mr. Williams nominated Mr. Draper for Vice-Chairman.
-2-
Mrs. Becker nominated Mrs. Pierson for Vice-Chairman. Mrs.
Pierson stated that she would have to decline the nomination
for Vice-Chairman.
Smith moved:
Bilo seconded: The nominations for Vice-Chairman be closed.
AYES: Becker, Bilo, Carson, Draper, Lathrop, Pierson, Smith,
Tanguma, Williams
NAYS: None
The motion carried.
Mr. Lathrop was elected Vice-Chairman by written ballot.
III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES.
Chairman Tanguma stated that Minutes of January 3, 1979, were
to be considered for approval .
Lathrop moved:
Bilo seconded: The Minutes of January 3, 1979, be approved
as written.
AYES: Lathrop, Draper, Pierson, Smith, Tanguma, Williams,
Becker, Bilo
NAYS: None
ABSTAIN: Carson
The motion carried.
IV. HAMPDEN HILLS BAPTIST CHURCH
Lot 1, Block 2, Hampden Hills
Baptist Church Subdivision.
CASE #3-79
Mr. Tanguma stated that Mr. Linton from the firm of Banta,
Eason, Hoyt & Malone, had indicated that he might be unable
to be present if this case were to be considered early on the
agenda. Mr. Tanguma suggested that perhaps the agenda could
be taken out of order to allow Mr. Linton time to return to
the meeting.
Pierson moved:
Carson seconded: That Item No. VI be moved forward on the
age~da for consideration at this time.
AYES: Williams, Becker, Bilo, Carson, Draper, Lathrop, Pierson,
Smith, Tanguma
NAYS: None
The motion carried.
•
•
VI. HANDICAPPED ACCESSIBILITY CASE #4-79
Mrs. Romans stated that Associate Planner Alice Fessenden
would give the report on this matter.
-3-
Miss Fessenden stated that the study was undertaken in response
to a request from the Planning Commission during the summer of
1978. She stated that the staff first tried to define the
need for a ramp system at intersections, and in this report
the emphasis is aimed toward "wheelers" in particular --persons
who are confined to wheelchairs. Craig Rehabilitation Hospital
was contacted to determine how many handicapped individuals
they serve, and the staff was given the figure of 750 per year.
Officials at Craig Rehabilitation Hospital could not give
routes used by the handicapped, however, but did indicate that
the real problems did not necessarily occur on the "route",
but at the point of destination --buildings that are not
accessible to the handicapped because of no ramps, doorways
that are too narrow to accommodate wheelchairs, no elevators
to reach upper floors, etc. Officials at Craig Rehabilitation
Hospital did point out that many wheelchair patients are capable
of driving a special.ly equipped vehicle, which means they do
not necessarily experience the frustration of getting over
curbs at the intersections. The inability to conduct normal
business is the frustration. Miss Fessenden stated that
Arapahoe County is doing a study on accessibility of buildings
identifying structures that are not accessible to the handicapped,
and that this study should be completed by mid-summer, 1979.
Miss Fessenden stated that all curbs must be ramped wherever
curbing is replaced, and all new construction must be made
available for the handicapped access. She pointed out that
an application for $59,570 in Urban Systems Funds has been
submitted to DRCOG for funds to construct ramps along Girard
Avenue.
Miss Fessenden stressed that the staff feels it is important
at this point to define the problems of the handicapped more
clearly; the staff hopes to conduct a survey of handicapped
to more nearly define these problems. She stated that this
survey might be done through the Englewood Citizen , and that
handicapped resource people might be used to develop the
questions to be asked on the survey.
If, indeed, building accessibility proves to be more of a problem
to the handicapped than the route barriers --curbing, etc. --
methods to solve these problems should be investigated. In-
centives to businessmen to encourage them to provide access
for the handicapped individual might be investigated, and the
community service clubs might be of help on this matter •
-4-
Mr. Williams asked if the application for the Urban Systems
money had been approved, or just submitted? Miss Fessenden
stated that the application has been submitted; there has been
no determination on approval or denial.
Mr. Wanush stated that the original question of the Commission
centered around the "route" that handicapped individuals were
using, but at this point it is not determined that there is a
particular "route". Mr. Wanush stated that he agreed all new
construction should be required to provide accessibility for
handicapped, but questioned how to correct this deficiency in
existing structures.
Mr. Tanguma noted that there are estimates up to $7,000 to
ramp curbs; he asked if this was just to cut and replace the
curb with a ramp? Mr. Wanush pointed out that the more ex-
pensive intersections have existing drainage problems which
need to be corrected in addition to the ramping work that would
have to be taken care of.
Mrs. Pierson stated that she felt we should get a firm idea
on the number of people who need this service; while perhaps
10% of the population may be handicapped, there may be a
smaller portion of those handicapped who are actually confined
to wheelchairs. Miss Fessenden stated that this could be one
of the matters more clearly defined by the survey the staff
hopes to do.
Mrs. Romans pointed out that the people the staff hopes to
reach are people who may not be connected with the Craig Re-
habilitation Hospital, but who may be living independently.
She pointed out that she felt some of the impetus for this
study initially came from a member of one of the Comprehensive
Plan Review Committees, who was concerned about the number of
people she saw around the Craig Rehabilitation Hospital trying
to maneuver their wheelchairs up and down curbs. Upon investigation
by the staff, a great deal of this may be part of a training
program devised by the hospital for these individuals.
Mr. Smith asked what would be done with single-family residences
to make them accessible to handicapped? Miss Fessenden stated
that if a handicapped person were to purchase a single-family
home, there would have to be ramps installed, and the width of
doors would have to be increased to accommodate the wheelchairs,
etc. Miss Fessenden stated that Chief Building Inspector Pittman
stated that this would be required in "all" new construction.
Mr. Draper stated tha~ in considering this program, he felt
the ramping should be limited to corners with traffic signals
if possible, in an effort to keep the wheelers away from con-
gested intersections that are unprotected by signalization.
He questioned how the Federal law requiring ramping would •
apply to Englewood? Miss Fessenden stated that if Federal
funds are used, the replaced curb must be ramped. Mr. Wanush
.·
•
-5-
stated that Mr. Waggoner, Director of Public Works, has in-
dicated that ramps would be required by State Law when curbing
at any intersection is replaced.
Mrs. Pierson asked what action the Commission is being aske d
to take? Miss Fessenden stated that the staff would like to
know if the Commission wants the staff to proceed with a survey
to determine the problems of the handicapped more clearly.
Mrs. Pierson stated that she was concerned this could be put
ahead of the work on the Comprehensive Plan, which she felt
is of great priority.
Mrs. Romans reiterated that she felt one of the main issues
is that the officials of Craig Rehabilitation Hospital have
indicated that the major problems are not at intersections,
but access to buildings. Developers of new buildings should
be encouraged to design their structures to provide accessibility
for the handicapped. The staff would like permission to take
the survey through the Citizen to determine the extent of the
problem.
Discussion ensued. Mrs . Pierson stated that she would like to
direct the staff to conduct this survey if it would not inter-
fere with the progress of the Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Williams
stated that he felt the handicapped were "forgotten people",
and that he felt the survey would be an important source of
information. He felt the staff should do this survey even if
it did take time away from the Comprehensive Plan.
Bilo moved:
Carson .seconded: The staff be asked to conduct a more compre-
hensive survey of the needs of the handicapped
in Englewood through an article or articles
in the Englewood Citizen.
AYES: Tanguma, Williams, Becker, Bilo, Carson, Draper, Lathro p,
Pierson, Smith
NAYS: None
The motion carried.
IV. HAMPDEN HILLS BAPTIST CHURCH
Lot 1, Block 2, Hampden Hills
Baptist Church Subdivision
CASE #3-79
Mr. Tanguma announced that Mr. Linton has returned, and that
the Commission would now consider the request for a Subdivision
Waiver filed by the Hampden Hills Baptist Church.
Mrs. Romans stated that the request is to waive the requirement
of filing a Subdivision Plat on Lot 1, Block 2, Hampden Hills
Baptist Church Subdivision. The Church membership has deter-
mined that this particular Lot is too large for church purposes
and it is their intent to divide the Lot into two parcels:
-6-
Parcel "A" and Parcel "B". The Subdivision Regulations require
that a Lot in excess of one acre in area must be resubdivided
prior to further division. Lot 1 in Block 2 of this particular
Subdivision is approximately 3.89 acres in area; thus requiring
the filing of a Subdivision Plat, or the issuance of a Waiver
to this requirement by the Planning Commission. The Church pro-
poses to retain ownership of Parcel "A" for use for church pur-
poses, and to sell Parcel "B". The prospective purchaser of
Parcel "B" also proposes to purchase the "Brown House" presently
situated on Parcel "A", and relocate it to Parcel "B" for use
as a single-family residence. Mrs. Romans noted that this site
is zoned R-1-A, Single-family Residence, and the surrounding
area in Englewood is also zoned R-1-A. The property in Denver
is zoned for single-family use also.
Mrs. Romans stated that if the Planning Commission determines
there is no need for the filing of a Subdivision Plat, they
are being asked to approve the Waiver to that requirement to
allow the division of Lot 1, Block 2, as indicated on the dis-
play before the Commission. Conditions may be imposed on the
approval of the Waiver, which would be by Resolution and re-
corded with the Arapahoe County Clerk and Recorder.
The staff recommends approval of the request for a Subdivision
Waiver, but does suggest that an 8 foot easement on the west
side of Block 2 should be shown on the recorded plan. Mrs.
Romans reviewed the other conditions which are suggested by
the staff to be imposed on the granting of the Waiver.
Mrs. Romans stated that the subject property was annexed to
the City in 1946. The Church subdivided their property in
1965, developing five residential building sites to the west
and retaining Lot 1, Block 2 for Church purposes. In 1966,
an old residence and shed on Lot 1, Block 2, were removed.
Mrs. Romans stated that this matter has been referred to City
Departments, and that no objections have been given to the
proposed Subdivision Waiver, although certain conditions to
the Waiver have been suggested. She asked that the staff re-
port be included as a part of the record of this Case before
the Commission.
Mr. Smith stated that he understood one of the conditions sug-
gested by the staff is to prohibit further construction on or
division of these sites without further approval of the Planning
Commission. Mrs. Romans stated that this is correct. Mrs.
Pierson asked how many lots could be developed on the site if
it were to be further subdivided? Mrs. Romans stated that a
roadway through the site would have to be devised, but possibly
six or seven building sites could be realized.
Mr. Paul Linton
Banta, Eason, Hoyt & Malone -stated that he represents the
Church in this matter before the
Commission. The Church does not have use for the entire site •
•
-7-
and wishes to divide Lot 1 into two Parcels: Parcel "A" and
Parcel "B" as previously noted by Mrs. Romans. There are no
plans on the part of the Church to develop the area, and in
fact they are planning to sell Parcel "B", and the purchaser
of Parcel "B" will relocate the "Brown House" to this parcel.
He stated that he knew of no plans on the part of the prospective
purchaser to divide Parcel "B" further, but that the purchaser
did ask that this be clarified.
Discussion followed.
Smith moved:
Lathrop seconded: The Planning Commission approve the Waiver
to the Subdivision Regulations as they would
apply to Lot 1, Block 2, Hampden Hills Baptist Church Subdivision,
for the following reasons:
1. There are no substantial benefits to be gained by the City
or by the public from requiring the resubdivision of this
large lot for the purposes of dividing it into two parcels.
2. Both parcels will have access to public streets, the church
property to South University Boulevard, and the residential
proper ty to East Dartmouth Avenue.
3. Zoning for the subject property permits a Religious Institution
on a minimum area of 15,000 square feet. After the division,
the church property will be approximately 1-1/3 acres. The
remaining parcel will more than meet lot requirement for the
proposed use of a single-family house.
The Planning Commission recommends that the Subdivision Waiver
be approved subject to the following conditions:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
The eight (8) foot easement along the west property line
of Lot 1 which is shown on the original subdivision plat,
shall be retained and any new easements shown on the re-
corded survey.
If any major regrading is to be undertaken, contours are
to be provided and drainage shown before a Building or
House Moving Permit is issued.
Curb, gutter, and sidewalk along the South University
Boulevard and East Dartmouth Avenue frontages of both
parcels is to be installed to City specifications at
the owner's expense within a reasonable time after the
development of Parcel "B".
A street design shall be submitted and the area between
the curb and existing asphalt shall be paved to City
specifica tions at the owner's expense.
Fire lanes shall be provided on both parcels subject to
approval of the Fire Marshall.
Water and sewer service to any use on Parcel "B" is to be
obtained from the City of Englewood.
-8-
7. There shall be no further division of Parcel "A" and
Parcel "B", a division of Lot 1, Block 2, Hampden Hills
Baptist Church Subdivision, Arapahoe County, Colorado,
without the approval of t~ City Planning and Zoning
Commission.
Mr. Linton asked if this could be reworded to make the division
of the property and the approval of this Resolution contingent
upon the sale of Parcel "B" by the Church? Mr. Wanush stated
that he would question this procedure. Discussion ensued.
It was pointed out to Mr. Li nt on that if this proposed sale of
Parcel "B" did not go through, or if a different division of
the property were to be proposed, the Church could come back
to the Commission at that time. The approval of the Waiver
indicating this particular division in no way affects the
continued use of the land by the Church just as it is using
it now.
The vote was called:
AYES: Smith, Tanguma, Williams, Becker, Bilo, Carson, Draper,
Lathrop, Pierson
NAYS: None
The motion carried.
V. TRAFFIC IN CBD CASE #5-79
Mrs. Romans stated that the staff was asked by City Council
and the Planning Commission to do a study on traffic in the
Englewood Central Business District, particularly around
Cinderella City. In preparing the report, some background
information was included. When the decision was made to re-
locate the Cinderella City Shopping Center to its present site
from the former KLZ Site where it was initially proposed, the
concern was basically on keeping the shopping center located
within the City of Englewood and was not focused on access and
traffic patterns. Mrs. Romans stated that it is interesting
to note the difference of opinion expressed by individuals as
to where Cinderella City "begins"; a Broadway businessman has
said that Cinderella City starts at South Cherokee Street,
while the developer of the shopping center, Mr. Von Frellick,
says it starts at South Elati Street. This difference becomes
very apparent when discussions on ways to tie the Cinderella
City area and the Broadway area together occur.
Mrs. Romans reviewed the fact that shortly after the sale of
the Park was approved by the voters, the City Council had ap-
pointed an "Action Committee" chaired by Richard Graham. This
committee recommended that a consulting firm be brought in to
do a traffic study, and Small-Cooley & Associates was retained.
At one of the meetings held to discuss the report, Mr. Small
indicated that the intent of the Study was to provide "adequate
•
•
' I
-9-
ways and means of entrance and exit at as low cost as possible
with as few changes as possible, and at the same time attempting
to keep as much of the traffic as possible off residential streets."
Mrs. Romans noted that this still appears to be the course of
action the City is pursuing. Mrs. Romans stated that Mayor Love
instituted the "Mayor's Coffees", and invited property owners
and residents in to discuss the ramifications of the shopping
center among other interests. Particular attention was paid
to the treatment of Floyd Avenue, and the affect on the people
who lived between Floyd and Dartmouth Avenues. It was made
very clear from the beginning that the primary point of access
from Dartmouth Avenue into the Shopping Center would be on
South Fox Street. South Fox Street had been used as the route
to Dartmouth Avenue even when the City Park was at this location
and would intersect at the center of the shopping complex. It
was pointed out at these discussions that South Galapago and
South Huron Streets would both bisect the proposed Dartmouth
Park, and other streets would be too far removed from the center
of the shopping center to provide the proper access. The truck
traffic access was to be from U.S. 285. The matter of a Floyd
Avenue buffer was discussed, and islands were installed at the
Elati/Floyd and Cherokee/Floyd intersections to prevent through
traffic on these streets. Cherokee was eventually opened to
through traffic by the removal of this traffic island; however,
the island is still in place at Elati and Floyd.
Mrs. Romans reviewed suggestions made in the Small-Cooley
study as it pertained to State Highway 70 (U.S. 285), to
South Broadway and to Hampden Avenue, Girard Avenue, Santa
Fe Drive, parking, traffic signals and street lighting. She
noted that the Broadway/U.S. 285 underpass is still a "bottle-
neck", and that the Highway can carry only as much traffic as
can be handled at this point.
Mrs. Romans then reviewed the Voorhees & Associates study on
traffic in Western Arapahoe County, which study was done in
1972. This study advocated tying the Broadway business area
and Cinderella City business area together by· virtue of a mall
along West Girard Avenue. This study strongly supported the
separation of local and through traffic, development of a
transit plan that would include internal bus circulation, and
an improved parking plan.
The Centennial Engineering, Inc. company was retained to do a
Hampden Avenue Capacity Study for the Colorado Division of
Highways in 1975. Mrs. Romans reviewed suggestions made in
this report, such as construction of a raised barrier median
in u. S. 285 from Santa Fe to Bannock with protected left-turn
bays, revision of signal timing, and changes in signing and
geometrics in key locations.
-10-
Brooks Taylor, former City Traffic Engineer, submitted two
reports to Public Works Director Waggoner pertaining to traffic
in the CBD, and Gary Diede, Director of Engineering Services,
also submitted a report to the City Manager. The emphasis of
these reports is that the Elati/Floyd intersection should be
opened to carry through traffic that doesn't want to go to
Cinderella City. Mrs. Romans pointed out that the removal of
the traffic island has been considered by the Planning Commission
on several occasions in the past, and the people in the neigh-
borhood have been invited to these meetings to give their input.
It was the concensus of the residents, and of the Commission
following these meetings, that the Elati/Floyd intersection
should not be opened.
Mr. Taylor also advocated access on Floyd Avenue west to South
Zuni Street from South Huron Street; he felt this would improve
circulation in the area, and that some shoppers coming from the
west and northwest could use this route into Cinderella City
rather than having to come in on Dartmouth and south on Fox
through the residential area. Mrs. Romans noted that the Master
Street Plan also shows the extension of Floyd Avenue west to
South Zuni Street.
Mr. Diede's report also recommends that the Elati/Floyd traffic
island be removed, and the median strip cut back to fac~litate
traffic movement. Fire and Police vehicles would have a more
direct route to the residential area north of Floyd if this
intersection were to be opened.
The Broadway/Floyd intersection is a problem that Mr. Diede
feels should be corrected, as is the right-turn radius from
northbound Cherokee to eastbound Girard Avenue. Mr. Diede
also advocates making South Bannock Street two-way between
Dartmouth Avenue and Quincy Avenue. Mrs. Romans stated that
the matter of Bannock one-way vs. two-way traffic was discussed
when Mr. George B. Lee was Assistant City Attorney, and it was
his determination that this had been enacted by a vote of the
people, and that it would have to be repealed by a vote of the
people.
Mrs. Romans stated that it would be possible to extend a route
south from Dartmouth Avenue along the east side of the former
cannery property and along the east side of the north Cinderella
City employee parking lot. This route would have to be one-way
southbound because of a median located in West Dartmouth Avenue
at this point; northbound traffic could still be routed on South
Fox Street to Dartmouth Avenue. Mrs. Romans pointed out that
if this route were to be developed, there are only two property
owners that would be involved.
Mrs. Becker asked if there would be a way to determine the
number of properties that have changed ownership since Cinderella
City op~ned.
•
-11-
A recess of the Commission was called at 8:45 P. M. The meeting
reconvened at 9:00 P.M., with the following members present:
Pierson, Smith, Tanguma, Becker, Bilo, Carson, Draper, Lathrop.
Absent: Mr. Williams.
Mr. Tanguma asked Mr. Waggoner, Director of Public Works, if
he wanted to add to Mrs. Romans' report.
Mr. Waggoner stated that he would agree that there are a lot
of traffic signals along U. S. 285, and that this does create
problems in the movement of traffic. Mr. Waggoner stated that
a signal was recently installed at South Fox Street in an effort
to reduce the accidents at this intersection --23 broadside
accidents within one year. Mr. Waggoner stated that if the
U.S. 285/Ithica Avenue one-way couplet could be realized, the
number of traffic signals could be reduced along U.S. 285.
This would necessitate some realignment of the points of access
to Cinderella City, but he felt this could be done, and that
it would improve circulation and movement of traffic.
Mr. Waggoner stated that in the area north of Floyd Avenue to
Dartmouth Avenue, there is a need for a street to be opened
through the residential area to provide another route for
traffic in this area. He acknowledged that the extension of
Floyd Avenue west to tie into South Zuni Street would give
relief to the matter of traffic circulation; however, it would
be very expensive. He stated that he personally favors opening
South Elati Street by removing the traffic island and modifying
the median strip. Mr. Waggoner stated that he has seen people
go around the traffic island who live in the 3200 block of
South Elati Street.
Mr. Waggoner stated that he felt Bannock should revert to a
two-way street; he stated that he did not feel the volume of
traffic necessitated a one-way street.
Mrs.Pierson asked how much additional traffic could be carried
if we did get the U.S. 285/Ithica Avenue couplet; would the
volume be doubled or tripled? Mr. Waggoner stated that the
couplet would probably be designed to carry the six lanes of
traffic that are now carried on U.S. 285, but that it would
be carried more efficiently. Mr. Smith stated that be under-
stood the development of the couplet ·would enhance the handling
of traffic going in and out of Cinderella City. He asked if
there was anything that the Cinderella City management could
do now to facilitate the traffic flow on U.S. 285? Mr, Waggoner
stated that they have discussed some proposals with the Cinderella
City management, but no action has been taken.
Mr. Tanguma expressed the appreciation of the Commission to
Mr. Waggoner for his attendance at the meeting.
Mr. Wanush stated that it was apparent that one of the "givens"
when the shopping center was developed was that South Fox
-12-
Street would be the main point of access and the main traffic
carrier between Dartmouth and the shopping center. He pointed ~
out that when one looked at the quality of housing along South ~
Fox Street, and at the up-keep of the properties, he questioned
that the volume of traffic is that much of a problem in this
area. The block is not deteriorating. He suggested that per-
haps these residents could be invited to meet with the Commission
to further discuss the traffic through the residential area.
Discussion ensued. Mr. Smith stated that perhaps it is not the
volume of traffic that is of primary concern to the South Fox
Street residents, but rather the lack of traffic control and the
speed of the traffic. Also, there is a lot of truck traffic on
this street, and this is supposed to be prohibited.
The matter of the U.S. 285/Ithica Avenue couplet and access to
Cinderella City was further discussed. The possibility of
constructing ramps over U.S. 285 to points of access into
Cinderella City was discussed, as was the possibility of re-
stricting left-turns. Mr. Waggoner emphasized that the shopping
center was built on the premise that South Fox Street would be
the logical entrance to the shopping center from the north.
He did feel, however, that if South Elati Street were to be
opened, it could relieve some of the traffic on South Fox Street.
It was determined that further discussion of the traffic pattern
in conjunction with the Comprehensive Plan was warranted.
VII. DIRECTOR'S CHOICE.
Mr. Wanush stated that a proposed schedule for review of the
Comprehensive Plan has been submitted to the Commission. Two
proposals are contained, one of which sets forth a time element
with special neighborhood meetings, and the second option sets
forth a time element if the Plan were to be published in the
Englewood Citizen. Mr. Wanush stated that the neighborhood
meetings as a rule do not attract a large turn out, and it is
the feeling of the staff that more citizens would be reached
through the publication of the Plan in the Englewood Citizen
which is delivered to every resident in the City. Mr. Wanush
stated that the staff supports the second option.
Discussion ensued. Mrs. Pierson stated that she preferred the
second option. Mr. Smith asked why the second option shows no
action in March? Mrs. Romans stated that if the Plan is to be
published in the Englewood Citizen, it must be to the publishers
by the first of March for publication in the April issue.
Becker moved:
Bilo seconded: The Pfanning Commission choose Option 2 on
the review of the Comprehensive Plan, that of
having the Plan published in the Englewood
Citizen. •
•
-13-
AYES: Lathrop, Pierson, Smith, Tanguma, Becker, Bilo, Carson,
Draper
NAYS: None
ABSENT: Williams
The motion carried.
Mr. Wanush stated that he wanted to bring the Commission up-
to-date on the "Regan Site". He stated that there has been no
formal application submitted at this time, but it does appear
that the applicants would prefer to pursue the amendment to
the Subdivision Waiver, which procedure would not require a
Public Hearing. Mr. Wanush stated that the staff is inclined
to recommend that the applicants apply for Planned Development
approval, but this does not appear to be the procedure they
want to follow. Mr. Wanush stated that the latest plans the
staff has seen indicate eight buildings 13 stories in height.
The staff is checking the matter of height exception out with
the City Attorney's staff.
Mr. Wanush gave a brief summary o f progress of the Downtown
Development Authority; they have had three formal meetings,
and are still in the formative stage. They have made a basic
decision to hire a Director, and the City has offered their
personnel services in the matter of advertisement, etc.
The staff has been discussing the possibility of the Planning
Commission, Housing Authority, Board of Adjustment meeting to
discuss mutual problems. The staff is suggesting that the
Planning Commission invite the Board of Adjustment to a dinner
meeting on February 27th. It was the concensus of the Commission
that an invitation should be extended to the Board of Adjust-
ment to meet with the Planning Commission at 5:30 P. M. on
February 27th.
VIII. COMMISSION'S CHOICE.
There was nothing discussed under Commission's Choice.
The meeting adjourned at 9:40 P.M .