Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1979-03-06 PZC MINUTES• CITY OF ENGLEWOOD PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION March 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 Tanguma. Members present: Becker, Bilo, Carson, Draper, Lathrop, Pierson, Tanguma Romans, Acting Ex-officio Members absent: Smith, Williams Also present: Associate Planner Fessenden II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES. Mr. Tanguma stated that Minutes of February 21, 1979, were to be considered for approval. Lathrop moved: Draper seconded: The Minutes of February 21, 197~, be approved as written. AYES: Becker, Bilo, Carson, Draper, Lathrop, Pierson, Tanguma NAYS: None ABSENT: Williams, Smith The motion carried. III. RIGHT-OF-WAY VACATION South Acoma Street north of West Jefferson Avenue CASE #8-79 Mr. Tanguma asked Mrs. Romans for the staff report on this request. Mrs. Romans stated that this is a re-application for vacation of the South Acoma Street right-of-way which lies just north of West Jefferson Avenue. The property on both sides of this right-of-way is owned by Mr. and Mrs. William Davis. The zoning classification on this property is B-1, Business, and has been since 1963; previous to that it was C-1, Commercial. 5 c Mr. and Mrs. Davis purchased the property almost two years ago, and in 1978, requested that the Planning Commission vacate the right-of-way. Mr. and Mrs. Davis were in Alaska at that time, and were unable to represent themselves before the Commission; they have now moved back to Englewood, and are living in the house on West Jefferson Avenue which was converted to a real estate office several years ago. Strout Realty, former occupants of the property, has relocated, and Mr. and Mrs. Davis were c oncerned about vandalism to the vacant structure, and their occupancy in the house is essentially that of "caretakers" un- t i l they deter mine what they are going to do with the property. ;' -2- Mrs. Romans stated that at one time, this right-of-way was ·used as an off-ramp from U.S. 285 to East Jefferson Avenue and then to South Broadway. When the present Broadway/U.S. 285 interchange was reconstructed, this right-of-way was no longer needed. Mrs. Romans stated that at the time of the initial request from Mr. and Mrs. Davis in 1978, the discussion on the one- way couplet was based on U.S. 285 and Jefferson; this has now centered on U.S. 285 and Ithaca Avenue; however, there is still no design on the actual couplet or the interchange, and it can- not be determined what property will actually be needed for these improvements. Mrs. Romans stated that Mr. Davis has talked to Mr. Brasher, District VI Highway Engineer, and he has indicated there is no need for this right-of-way as part of the couplet. Mrs. Romans stated that she understood Mr. Gary Diede of Engineering Services was also in contact with Mr. Brasher, and was told that this would be a "local matter because there are no funds available to do anything", and Mr. Brasher didn't know when funds would be available. Mrs. Romans stated that the recommendation the staff received from Kells Waggoner, Director of Public Works, and from Gary Diede, Director of Engineering Services, is that the vacation not be approved at this time. There is no design for the Ithaca couplet or for the interchange, and the staff is taking the position that until a firm design is prepared, this right-of-way should not be vacated. If the Commission determines that the right-of-way should be vacated, the procedure would be to forward such recommendation to City Council. Mrs. Romans stated that she would suggest that a communication also be sent to City Council if the Com- mission determines that the right-of-way should not be vacated, so that City Council would be aware of proceedings should Mr. Davis decide to appeal the decision of the Commission to City Council. Mr. Tanguma asked Mr. Davis if he had anything to add to Mrs. Romans' presentation? .. Mr. Davis stated that he has talked to Mr. Brasher. Mr. Brasher told him there was no need for this right-of-way for the one-way couplet, and in fact showed Mr. Davis drawings that were at the State Highway Department which does not in- clude this property as part of the couplet. Mr. Davis stated that following his conversation with Mr. Brasher, he discussed the matter with Mr. Waggoner and Mr. Diede of the City. They indicated they were going to talk to Mr. Brasher also, and would be back in touch with Mr. Davis prior to the meeting with the Planning Commission; he stated that he has heard nothing further from either Mr. Waggoner or Mr. Diede. Mr. Davis stated that he is a union surveyor in Alaska, and cannot see how this right-of-way could possibly be needed in any de-• sign of the one-way couplet. , -3- Mr. Davis stated that Mr. Brasher quoted a figure of $8,000,000 for this project, if it is ever built, and reiterated that he was told by Mr. Brasher there would be no need for this portion of South Acoma Street to be used for the couplet or interchange. Mr. Davis stated that prior to their purchase of the land nearly two years ago, they checked with different persons in the City Hall, and "no one gave us any reasons why the right- of-way could not be vacated." He noted that the off-ramp from U.S. 285 to Broadway is considerably below this site, and stated that there would be room to widen or improve the inter- section and leave the ramps as they are. Mr. Davis stated that Mr. Brasher did state that the couplet would be "choked down" in the center at the Broadway bridge. Mr. Davis quoted from a letter signed by Mr. Brasher on behalf of Mr. Haase of the State Highway Department, which was addressed to Mrs. Romans, dated February 20, 1979. It is stated in the letter that ''the proposal for the U. S. 285/Ithaca one-way couplet has changed to the point where Acoma Street is no longer needed. Therefore, the Department of Highways has no objection to Englewood vacating South Acoma Street north of West Jefferson." Mr. Davis stated that in his conversation with Mr. Brasher, tt was indicated that their previous opposition to the request in 1978 was based on a drawing they had which showed South Acoma Street going through. The Plans they have now do not show Acoma being used at all. Mr. Carson asked Mr. Davis what use he proposed to make of the land? Mr. Davis stated that he would like to construct a professional building on the site --something pleasing to the eye that would be acceptable to the community. He sug- gested doctors, lawyers, and other professional people as possible tenants. Mr. Carson pointed out that the property to the east of the right-of-way is rather narrow; he asked what use would be made of this? Mr. Davis stated that it could be used for parking, or the structure could be designed so that parking would be directly in front of the building. Mr. Bilo asked who owned the land north of the City Ditch? Mrs. Romans stated that the State Highway Department owns this land. Mr. Lathrop stated that at the present time, there are no plans for the couplet or interchange, and he would hesitate to do anything with the property between Jefferson and U.S. 285 until there is some concrete idea of .what is needed. Mr. Davis stated that the State Highway Department is responsible for the design of the couplet and interchange, and they have said there is no need for this portion of South Acoma Street, and have no objection to the requested vacation of the right- of-way. He stated that he felt the City Engineering Services Department should be more aware of what is going on, and what is planned by the Highway Department. -4- Mrs. Becker noted that Mr. Davis had indicated he wanted to construct a professional building on the site; she asked if this building would be constructed on the vacated right-of- way, or would it be situated on the property owned by Mr. Davis to the west of the right-of-way? Mr. Davis indicated that he wanted to leave the structure that is on the western parcel where it is, and construct the professional building on the vacated right-of-way and the parcel to the east of the right-of-way. Mrs. Pierson stated that as long as there was any chance the right-of-way might be needed in the future for the couplet or an improved interchange, she felt this was not the time to vacate the right-of-way. She pointed out that the Commission will be involved in the determination on the location of the couplet. Mrs. Pierson pointed out that there are uses to which Mr. Davis can put his property without the vacation of this right-of-way; that by denying the request, he is not denied the use of his property. Mrs. Pierson stated that she might be more amenable to the vacation of the right-of-way if Mr. Davis filed a Planned Development on the property which included the vacation request, but which P.D. would show the location of the building and if the total development and vaca- tion were tied together in one package. Mr. Davis stated that the City Ditch must be covered, that it is a hazard to children at the present time. He stated that he cannot pursue covering the Ditch until he has enough ground to be able to do what he wants to do. Mr. Tanguma asked Mr. Davis if he had any preliminary plans for building? Mr. Davis stated that he did not at this time. He stated that he would have to have some idea of the amount of land he could use before going to the expense of having plans for the building drawn. Mr. Tanguma pointed out that something is going to have to be done to handle the traffic volume, and that if the Commission could see concrete plans for development of the site they could then more fully weigh Mr. Davis' proposal against the problems that could result from the vacation of the right-of-way. Discussion ensued. Bilo moved: Carson seconded: The Planning Commission recommend to City Council that the requested vacation of the South Acoma right-of-way north of West Jefferson Avenue not be approved at this time. AYES: Tanguma, Becker, Bilo, Carson, Draper, Lathrop, Pierson NAYS: None ABSENT: Williams, Smith The motion carried. .. -5- Mr. Davis stated that by the Commission decision he is left with a "worthless piece of property"; he reiterated that Mr. Brasher has said this is an $8,000,000 project that may never be built. He stated that since he has returned from Alaska, his "dealings with the City of Englewood have left much to be desired", and cited problems with water and complaint he made on a theft from the house on West Jefferson by a former tenant, which has yet to be investigated. Mrs. Romans stated that the ·Commission's determination would be forwarded to City Council at the earliest possible opportunity. I V. DIRECTOR 'S CHOICE. Mrs. Romans stated that the DRCOG annµal banquet is scheduled f or March 28th at the Cherry Creek Inn. The City will pay f or the attendance of the Planning Commission member; the Com- mis s ion member would pay for the attendance of a guest. If anyone is interested in attending, please notify the office so that reservations may be made. Mrs. Romans discussed three revised sections of the Comprehen- sive Plan summaries, those being Downtown, Commercial and Housing. These revisions hopefully incorporate suggestions made by the Commission during their earlier considerations of these summaries, such as recommending a search committee, a design review com- mittee, and landscaped parking areas. Mrs. Romans stated that the Housing section has been reworded to broaden possible methods of dealing with deteriorated structures. She stated that the Comprehensive Plan should be general and not specific and she felt that possibly the suggestion of the Bonus District was getting too specific. The rewording has attempted to work around this to give a more general interpretation. This would allow a bonus on density, tax incentive, or some other method to encourage replacement of deteriorated structures. Mr. Lathrop stated that he liked the broader statement which would give more flexibility in ways to handle the problem. Mr. Bilo stated that he felt there is a clash between the goal to strengthen the existing neighborhoods, and between the Course of Action which could increase density in single-family districts. Mr s. Romans stated that it is the opinion of the staff that the deterioration of structures is actually down- grading the neighborhoods; it was felt that by encouraging re- development the neighborhood would be strengthened. Mr. Bilo stated that he felt if an increase in density were to be allowed, it would result in the "breaking up of the residential areas"; he stat e d t h at he could possibly go along with a Bonus District in a small specific area, but as proposed, this would encompass almost the entire R-1-C Single-family zoned area. Discussion ensued. Mr. Tanguma pointed out that the intent of the proposal is not to limit the redevelopment process to what we have now. Mrs. Becker stated that she felt residential use is residential u se, and sees t h e Course of Action as a way to realize the goal -6- to make the City attractive to family living. Mr. Bilo stated that he disagreed; there is a difference between single-family and medium-density residential useo Mro Lathrop pointed out that a five-story apartment house could go in and "you can call it residential"; he brought up the possibility of such density spreading like "cancer" and ruining the single- family neighborhoods. Mrs. Pierson pointed out that the goals and course of action set forth in the Comprehensive Plan do not hand people a "free ticket" to do what they want; she pointed out that zoning regula- tions would have to be changed to allow such an increase in density if that is the way the Commission determines to go. Mr. Bilo reiterated that he sees this as "marring the purity of the single-family residential areaso" Mr. Draper stated that it appeared to him that if a single- family residential area is deteriorating, the neighborhood is being improved and strengthened by putting in new structures, even though it might be a duplex or a triplexo Discussion en- sued. It was determined that the last line of the suggested Course of Action should be strickeno Mrs. Romans orally reviewed changes that would be made in the remaining sections of the Comprehensive Plano She noted that these summaries will have to be submitted to the Englewood Citizen within the next weeko It was determined that the Public Hearing on the Comprehensive Plan should be set for April 17tho V. COMMISSION'S CHOICE. Mr. Carson asked about the oil rig that is in the industrial area. He stated that several people have seen it in "operation". Mrs. Romans stated that this would be checked out again. Mr. Tanguma noted that there will be a meeting on March 20th, at which meeting the plans for development of the remainder of the Larwin Site will be considered. He noted that this is not a Public Hearing; however, as a matter of courtesy a letter has been prepared to send to the adjoining property owners notifying them of the date and time of the meeting. Mr. Tanguma read the letter to the Commission and asked if there were any changes or suggestions to be made. The letter was approved as preparedo The meeting adjourned at 8:20 P.M. t , • -7- MEMORANDUM TO TIIE ENGLEWOOD CITY COUNCIL REGARDING ACTION OR RECOMMENDATION OF THE CITY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION . DATE: March 6, 1979 SUBJECT: Request for Vacation of Right-of-Way RECOMMENDATION: Bilo moved: Carson seconded: The Planning Commission recommend to City Council that the requested vacation of the South Acoma Street right-of-way north of West Jefferson Avenue not be approved at this time. AYES: Tanguma, Becker, Bilo, Carson, Draper, Lathrop, Pie1·son NAYS: None ABSENT: Williams, Smith The motion carried. By Order of the City Planning and Zoning Commission.