HomeMy WebLinkAbout1980-08-03 PZC MINUTES•
•
CITY OF ENGLEWOOD PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
SEPTEMBER 3, 1980
I. CALL TO ORDER.
The regular meeting of the City Planning and Zoning Commission was called
to order by Chairman Pierson at 7:00 P. M.
Members present: Carson, McBrayer, Senti, Barbre, Draper, Pierson, Tanguma
Romans, Ex-officio
Members absent: Becker, Williams
Also present: Acting Associate Planner Barbara Young
II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES.
Mrs. Pierson asked for consideration of the Minutes of the July 22, 1980
meeting.
Carson moved:
McBrayer seconded: The Minutes of July 22, 1980, be approved as written.
AYES: Barbre, Carson, Draper, McBrayer, Pierson, Senti, Tanguma
NAYS: None
ABSENT: Becker, Williams
The motion carried.
Mr. Don Williams entered the .meeting at 7:04 p.m. and assumed his place with
the Commission.
III. SWEDISH MEDICAL CENTER
Parking Structure
Alley Vacation/Perpetual Easement
Mrs. Pierson asked for the staff presentation.
Case 1121-BOA
Case ll22-80A
Mrs. Romans stated that she would like to first introduce Mrs. Barbara Young,
the Acting Associate Planner. Mrs. Romans stated that Mrs. Young has been
with the Department of Community Development for approximately 10 years, and
was one of the staff persons assigned to work with the Commission on the Com-
prehensive Plan Review Committees. Mrs. Young has done much of the graphic
work in the Department, and has written staff reports, and has specialized
in environmental-related projects and the Census Reports along with other
duties •
-2-
Mrs. Romans stated that the plan before the Planning Commission is an amend-·
ment to the plan for the parking structure which was considered at the meeting •
of July 22, 1980, and there is also a change in the plans for the alley vaca-
tion through the parking structure and in the access to the street: The
initial proposal considered at the meetin g o f July 22, 1980, was for the
vacation of the north 200 feet of the Pearl/Washington alley south of East
Hampden Avenue, and for an alternate access to be dedicated to South Washington
Street. Temporary access to the alley from South Pearl Street was to be
worked out for the period of construction, inasmuch as the parking structure
would have extended under that area proposed to be dedicated for the new
alley to South Washington Street. The Medical Center ran into some problems
in attempting to provide the alternate access from the west; the property
owner of the Scandia Apartment Ho us e apparently was not available to grant
temporary rights across his property, wh i ch led to the redesigning of the
parking structure and the po i nt o f access to the alley. The proposal now
is that the new access to the alley will be run to the west to South Pearl
Street by a Perpetual Easement; t h e parking structure will not extend under
this portion of the Swedish Medica l Center property, and the access can,
therefore, be accomplished by means of a Perpetual Easement rather than a
dedication by Quit Claim Deed. Th is pro posed accessway will serve during
the period of constr uction als o, i n asmuch a s it will n o t be disturbed by the
construction of the parking structure. The staff feels that this proposal
is an improvement over that which was proposed and considered at the meeting
of July 22, 1980. Mrs. Romans suggested that inasmuch as the matters of the
parking structure and the alley vacation/perpetual easement were so closely
related, that they be considered simultaneously.
Discussion ensued.·
Draper moved:
Carson seconded: That Case #21-80A, the Parking Structure for Swedish
Medical Center, and Case #22-80A, the vacation of the
alley and an alternate access way by means of Perpetual
Easement, be considered simultaneously.
AYES: Carson, Draper, McBrayer, Pierson, Senti, Tanguma, Williams, Barbre
NAYS: None
ABSENT: Becker
The motion carried.
Mrs. Romans stated that Mr. Cliff Johnson of the Swedish Medical Center was
present and might want to address the Commission.
Mr. Cliff Johnson stated that one of the reasons for the change in the plans
came about because of a change in elevations. Mr. Johnson agreed that this
proposal would be much more ef f icient, because the alley can be left open
during the period of construction of the parking ramps and the parking
structure itself. Mr. Johnson stated that the watering system would be in-
stalled to maintain the landscaping that they proposed on the perimeter of
the site.
Mr. McBrayer asked if t he turning radius from the Perpetual Easement into
the alley was sufficient for the fire equipment? Mr. Johnson stated that
it is, and discussed the dimensions of the proposed Perpetual Easement. •
•
•
-3-
Mrs. Romans further discussed the Perpetual Easement; this was discussed with
City Attorney Berardini and Mr. John Criswell, attorney for Swedish Medical
Center. It is the opinion of City Attorney Berardini that the granting of a
Perpetual Easement to the city in this instance in lieu of a dedication of
the alley will be perfectly adequate, binding and legal. One advantage
would be that if, in the future, the Medical Center determines it is desirable
to add additional stories to the parking structure, the setback could begin
at the south line of the Perpetual Easement rather than the north line of
the alley if it were to be dedicated. This would give greater flexibility
to th~ Medical Center and provide better use of the site.
Mr. Johnson stated that there is a retaining wall in the area that will be
used for the Perpetual Easement, which will have to be removed.
Mrs. Pierson inquired what controls the Commission would have over the land-
scaping; how could it be required to be installed as shown on the drawing
displayed by Mr. Johnson? Mrs. Romans suggested that the Commission could
ask for a copy of the plan .and that it be included as part of the record of
the approval. Mr. Johnson pointed out that a couple of the "trees" indicated
in the landscape plan were to be planted on the lower level; he pointed out
that he could not guarantee actual trees in this location. He stated that
they will do something on the landscaping, but reiterated that he could not
make that guarantee.
Mrs. Romans pointed out that Mrs. Young is a Landscape Architect. Mrs. Young
discussed the plans for landscaping as shown by the Medical Center. She stated
that the proposal to eliminate the parkway between the curb and sidewalk,
moving the sidewalk next to the curb, will give a wider planting strip next
to the building.
Mr. Draper asked about the lighting on the main level? Mr. Johnson stated
that this is not indicated on this plan; it was on the original plan. He
stated that as he recalled, there were three lights of 20 feet in height.
Mr. Johnson indicated the approximate location of the lights.
Mrs. Pierson asked if there was further discussion? Mrs. Romans stated that
the landscaping plan presented by Swedish Medical Center is dated June 23,
1980.
McBrayer moved:
Barbre seconded: The Planning Commission approve the Parking Structure
for Swedish Medical Center subject to the following con-
ditions:
1. That a 16-foot Perpetual Easement be given to the City
of Englewood for access between South Pearl Street and
the Pearl/Washington alley and that a five-foot ease-
ment be given on the east side of the alley across
Lots 42 through 45, Block 2, Higgins Englewood Gardens
Subdivision, for a greater turning radius. These
easements will be given in lieu of the vacated portion
of the alley adjacent to Lots 1 thru 5 and Lots 46 thru
50 of Block 2, Higgins Englewood Gardens Subdivision,
Arapahoe County, Colorado.
-4-
2. The alley should be designated for one-way traffic
southbound south of the parking structure toward U. S. •
Highway 285. "Do Not Enter", and "Right Turn Only"
signs should also be installed at the south end of
the alley.
3. A pedestrian crossing should be designated and properly
signed across East Hampden Avenue from the parking
structure at mid-block to the medical office building
entrance.
4. Landscaping must be provided as shown on the plan from
Swedish Medical Center dated June 23, 1980, and an auto-
matic sprin k l ing system installed to maintain the plant
material.
AYES: Carson, Draper, McBrayer, Pierson, Senti, Tanguma, Williams, Barbre
NAYS: None
ABSENT: Becker
The motion carr i ed.
Carson moved:
Tanguma seconded: The Planning Commission recommend to City Council that
the north 150 feet of the alley in Block 2, Higgins
Englewood Gardens Subdivision be vacated, and that the
City accept the 16 foot wide Perpetual Easement . to be
given by Swedish Medical Center along the south property
line between the alley in Block 2, Higgins Englewood
Gardens, and South Pearl Street.
The reasons for this recommendation are as follows:
1. The Perpetual Alley Easement will provide adequate
access from South Pearl Street to the remaining
dedicated portion of the alley for property owners
in the block south of the proposed parking structure.
This right-of-way can be used during the construction
of the parking structure inasmuch as the lower level
will not extend into this area because of the loca-
tion of the City Ditch.
2. The five foot easement on the west property lines
of Lots 42 through 45 will widen the existing 15 foot
alley dedication to 20 feet for adequate turning radius
from the 16 foot alley easement.
3. The alley and the alley easement will be able to be
used during construction.
AYES: McBrayer, Pi erson, Senti, Tanguma, Williams, Barbre, Carson, Draper
NAYS: None
ABSENT: Becker
The motion carried . •
•
•
IV. PROPOSED ANNEXATION
Osage Street Annexation
-5-
CASE 1123-80
Mrs. Romans stated that this matter is being referred to the Commission as
a point of information; several years ago, the city attempted to annex a
rather large area around Tufts and South Windermere, and West of South Santa
Fe Drive. Property owners brought suit against the City's annexation, and
the annexation was declared null and void. Following this court action, the
City did receive individual petitions for annexation from the Mardesen prop-
erty, the Friedman Paper Company, the properties at 1470 West Tufts Avenue
and 1~85 West Tufts Avenue, from Mr. Anderson and Mr. Oakley on South Mariposa
Drive, and the Norling Property at West Tufts Avenue and South Windermere
Street. These petitions were accepted, the properties annexed to the City of
Englewood, and with the exception of properties owned by Mr. Anderson and
Mr. Oakley, the properties were zoned for I-1, Light Industrial. Mr. Oakley
and Mr. Anderson requested and received an R-1-C, Single-family Residence,
zone classification on their properties.
Mr. and Mrs. McGirr contacted Mrs. Romans several months ago about the possi-
bility of annexing their property to the City of Englewood; they find it
necessary to hook onto the City water line on West Tufts Avenue, and to obtain
water service, they must annex to the City of Englewood. Mr. and Mrs. McGirr's
property is at 1501 West Tufts Avenue, and property at 4545 South Osage Street,
which is just to the north of the McGirr property, is owned by a Mr. and Mrs.
Vette. Several years ago when the City's attempted annexation was finalized
and the land was within the City for a short period of time, the City had
issued a Building Permit to Mr. and Mrs. Vette, which was transferred to
Arapahoe County when the annexation was nullified. Mr. and Mrs. Vette have
joined in the annexation petition with Mr. and Mrs. McGirr·which was presented
to the Department of Community Development earlier on this date. The petition
for annexation to the City will now go to the City Council. Mrs. Romans
pointed out that the property must be zoned within 90 days from the date the
annexation is finalized, Mrs. Romans then reviewed the zoning classifications
that are in existence in this area; that land that has been annexed to the
City of Englewood is zoned I-1, Light Industrial; the County has given some
of the properties in this area the designation of I-2, Heavy Industrial.
Mrs. Romans stated that the proposed zoning cannot be determined at this
meeting, but suggested that the Commission might want to keep this in mind.
Mrs. Romans suggested that possibly this could be considered about October
1st, either at a special meeting, or incorporated into a regular meeting
agenda. Mrs. Romans suggested that it would be appropriate, if the Commission
agrees with the staff, to recommend to City Council that the annexation petition
be accep_ted and approved.
Mrs. Romans discussed the benefits that property owners would realize by
annexing to the City of Englewood, namely being removed from the special
assessment districts such as the Arapahoe Library District, the Littleton
Fire Protection District, Arapahoe County Law Enforcement District, etc.
Discussion ensued. Mr. Draper asked if South Osage had been dedicated as
a street? Mrs. Romans stated that some maps show it as a dedicated right-
of-way, and others do not; it is the only point of access to the property
owned by Mr. and Mrs. Vette. It is designated as South Osage Street at the
post office, and has been there for a number of years.
-6-
Tanguma moved:
Carson seconded : Th e Planning Commission r ecommend to City Council that the
South Osage Street Annexation be approved. The Planning
Commission has studied t his in t h e past and has recommended
the area be annex ed on prev ious o ccasions. The annexation
of this area is in compliance with the Comprehensive Plan,
and should be approved.
AYES: Pierson, Senti, Tanguma, Williams , Barbre, Carson, Draper, McBrayer
NAYS: None
ABSENT: Becker
The motion carried.
Mr. Draper asked i f it would be proper for the Planning Commission to recommend
to City Council that a determinatio n be made on South Osage Street --whether
it is a dedicated right-o f -way or not . Mr s. Romans stated that she would
discuss this wi th the En g i neer i n g Service s Department and try to get a deter-
mination from t h em and report back to t he Commission.
V. FINDINGS OF FAC T
4700 South Bannock Street
R-1-C to R-2 -C
CASE #19-80
Mrs. Pierson stated that the Commission members had received copies of the
Findings of Fact, and asked if there was a n y discussion on the Findings as
written by the starf?
Tanguma moved:
Carson seconded: The Planning Commission approve the Findings of Fact for
Case #19-80, the rezoning of the 4700 block South Bannock
St reet, from R-1-C, Singl e-family Residence, to R-2-C,
Two-family Residence; the Findings of Fact to be referred
to City Council.
AYES: Senti, Tanguma, Williams, Barbre, Carson, Draper, McBrayer, Pierson
NAYS: None
ABSENT: Becker
The motion carried.
VI. PUBLIC FORUM
Mrs. Pierson asked if any member of the audience would wish to address ·the
Commission?
No one addressed the Commission under Publi c Forum.
VII. DIRECTOR'S CHOIC E
•
Mrs. Romans p r e sent ed Comm ission members with the Housing Policy Plan, and ~
noted that forme r Associa te Planner Al ice Fessenden began work on this report
several months ago. To fulfill on e of the goa l s of the Comprehensive Plan,
•
•
-7-
a detailed study of the housing stock in Englewood was needed, and this report
is a very thorough analysis of the housing within the City. Mrs. Romans pointed
out that graphic work in the report was done by Mrs. Barbara Young, and Jed
Goldstein has done much of the research and writing. Mrs. Romans stated that
about a year ago, the Code Enforcement Inspectors and Housing Inspector did an
external survey of the condition of housing in Englewood, noting structural
damage, roof damage, electrical insufficiencies, etc., anything that would
need repair in order for that structure to comply with the Code. This informa-
tion is incorporated in the report •
.
Mrs. Romans then discussed the fact that the Planning Division does the planning
for the Housing Division, and noted the areas of cooperation between the three
divisions of the Community Development Department.
Mrs. Romans stated that the Rehabilitation Loan Program is moving steadily;
it is the hope of the Housing Division to have another 20 loans approved and
construction in progress by the end of the year. The rent subsidy program to
aid families is also operated through the Housing Division, as is the Simon
Center for the elderly, and the new Public Housing project which will be 100
units for elderly and 10 family units.
Mrs. Romans stated that several months ago, members of the Commission were
given copies of a report on Mortgage Revenue Bonds. A feasibility study is
underway, which study is being done by Fox and Company. Mrs. Romans stated
that City Council passed a resolution of intent earlier this year; the amount
of the bonds issued will not exceed $25,000,000, and will be used to aid low
and moderate income families in the purchase of homes. Mrs. Romans stated
that Fox and Company is working with E. F. Hutton on the f~asibility study,
and have had a meeting with the lending agencies within the City, and will
also contact lending institutions outside of the City that have loaned money
for purchase of houses within Englewood. Participating institutions will
share in the $25,000,000 bond money in proportion to the loans they have
made within Englewood. Mrs. Romans stated that the banks which have par-
ticipated in the Rehabilitation Loan Program would also be included in the
participation, these Banks being the Continental National Bank, First National
Bank of Englewood, Republic National Bank, and the new Community Bank. The
administration would like to have the Commission make a motion approving the
City's participation in the Mortgage Revenue Bond Program. She pointed out
that the City will not be administering the program, but will be asked to
set the guidelines for the program. Mr. Wanush, the Assistant City Manager,
suggested that if the Planning Commission did agree with the City's participa-
tion in the Program, that they might wish to make a recommendation in support
of the City Council.
Mr. Draper asked if he understood that the bonds would be sold to the public,
and the proceeds would go to the banks? Mrs. Romans stated that it is a
tax-free program, and the City does stand back of the bonds. She pointed
out that a Bill has been introduced by Congressman Ullman of Oregon in an
attempt to limit this program. Local officials have been advised that the
success of a program would depend more on the market than on anything the
Congress will do. Mrs. Romans reiterated that the City's responsibility will
be to approve the guidelines of the program, setting the pricing of the
houses and .the income which may not be exceeded for participation in the pro-
gram.
-8-
Mr; Draper asked if the City budgeted the feasibility study, or if this would
come out of the bond funds? Mrs. Romans stated that she understood it would •
be out of the administrative costs. Mrs. Romans sta ted that the program is
designed for single-family ownership, and would probably not apply-to renters.
Mr. Draper asked what rate of interest would be charged the borrowers? Mrs .
Romans stated that she could not say what it would be at the time the program
is implemented.
Mr. McBrayer asked if this would be the time to ask what restrictions and
limitations there would be on the individuals participating in the Program?
Mrs. Romans stated that the basis for these decisions will be provided in
the feasibility study which is due within the next couple of weeks.
Mrs. Pierson stated that i f the Commission made a recommendation supporting
the Mortgage Revenue Bond Program, she would urge that it be a philosophical
approval rather than a blanket endorsement. Mr. McBrayer agreed, stating
that he hated to give an endorsement of some plan when he doesn't really know
what it is.
Mr. Draper asked if the program would apply to new construction as well as
to existing housing? He stated that he felt it might be the ideal way to
bring some of the substandard homes up to standard at the time of purchase.
Mrs. Romans stated that she understood the Program would apply to new con-
struction as well as existing homes, and that she further understood they
would like to stay away from condominium and duplex purchases where possible.
Mrs. Romans stated that this program is a tool to comply with one .of the goals
of the Comprehensive Plan, that being increased home ownership in Englewood.
Mr. Tanguma stated that he felt it is commendable of the City to be involved
to the extent that they are in helping people to purchase homes. He stated
that he personally doesn't think programs such as the Mortgage Revenue Bond
Program has ever hurt anyone.
Mr. Draper asked if there would be points charged by the lending institutions
making the loan; he noted that this is done on VA loans, for instance. Mrs.
Romans stated that she understood this is not the case. Mr. Senti stated
that it would be a conventional loan at a lower interest rate. He stated
that this Program has been done all over the metro area; he stated that he
personally didn't know that the City needed this program, or that it is
necessary.
Mr. McBrayer stated that he couldn't see why the Commission should get in-
volved.
Mr. Draper commented that it's almost subsidized banking.
Brief discussion ensued . No action was taken by the members of the Commission.
Mrs. Romans brought the members up to date on the Prowswood plans for the
site formerly known a s the Country Club Joint Venture site. The Prowswood
representatives have me t with the residents of Kent Village and are pro-
ceeding with their plans f o r multi-story buildings on the site; there will
be no low-rise townhouse unit s. Mrs. Romans stated that Mr. Harding of
Prowswood will b e i n town on September 4, 1980, and will be bringing the
•
•
•
-9-
plans for the development with him. Mrs. Romans stated that the possibility
of going Planned Development has been discussed with Prowswood representatives;
it was their determination that they bought the land from Country Club Joint
Venture based on a plan that was approved by the Planning Commission with
the R-3 zoning. They did not want to do anything that might jeopardize that
approved plan, and therefore, chose not to go through the Planned Development
process. Mrs. Romans stated that it has been suggested that there be a Public
meeting wherein notification would be given to the adjoining property owners,
and Prowswood is agreeable to such a meeting. Mrs. Romans stated that assuming
the p~ans to be brought in by Prowswood are in order, we should be able to
have the Public Meeting sometime this month, and suggested either September
23, or September 30, which would entail a special meeting.
Mrs. Romans asked members if Ehey would be available on both evenings of
September 23 or September 30 ~or the Public Meeting? Mr. Senti stated that
he would not be available for ~a meeting on the evening of September 23rd.
The remainder of the members present stated that either evening would be
satisfactory to them.
Mrs. Romans stated that the Community Development staff was asked by the
Parks and Recreation Department to do a site survey for the proposed community
center. Mrs. Young and Mr. Jed Goldstein of the Planning Division staff have
compiled a study of 12 sites with commentary on advantages and disadvantages
of each site. A map has also been prepared indicating the proposed sites,
which map was displayed for the Commission members. It was suggested that
this map might be re~uced in size and reproduced for each member of the Com-
mission. Mrs. Romans stated that this would be done.
Mrs. Romans stated that the staff is working on amendments "to the Subdivision
Regulations and Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance, which will require parking
facilities for bicycles. She noted that these amendments will require Public
Hearings before the Planning Commission and City Council. Mrs. Romans re-
viewed the proposed amendments very briefly, and stated that this would be
available for Commission perusal at the next meeting of September 16, 1980.
V. COMMISSION'S CHOICE
Mrs. Pierson made reference to a letter from Swedish Medical Center which
had been delivered to the office for all members of the Planning Commission.
Mrs. Pierson stated that she and Mrs. Romans had gone to a presentation by
Mercy Hospital last Wednesday evening. This meeting pertained to the ex-
pansion of the Mercy Hospital facilities into the area of I-25 and C-470.
Mrs. Pierson stated that while the meeting was well thought-out and was a
good meeting, the only reason they advanced for this expansion into the
southern metro area was that it was "good competition". Mrs. Pierson stated
that she is opposed to "competition" in the matter of health care services.
Mrs. Pierson stated that the presentation did not show that any services
would be provided by Mercy that are not presently being provided by Swedish
Medical Center and Porter Memorial Hospital at the present time, or that
are not on the drawing board for these two medical facilities. Mrs. Pierson
stated that she admittedly has a rather biased attitude on this matter, and
asked Mrs. ·Romans to give a report on the meeting .
~rs. Romans stated that Mercy Hospital is talking about a 125-bed facility
in the vicinity of I-25 and C-470. She pointed out that for years, Sweqish
-10-
Medical Center has talked about "satellite facilities" throughout the southern
metro area, and does, in fact, have such a facility at the Ken Caryl Ranch and •
in Castle Rock. She stated that she feels that Swedish Medical Center/Porter
Memorial Hospital have covered the medical service needs of the south metro
area. She pointed out that the representatives of several fire services were
in attendance at this meeting, and were' concerned about the para-medic services
inasmuch as they have a good working relationship with Swedish Medical Center.
Mrs. Romans stated that she would have to agree that the entire premise of the
presentation was that of "competition" and that the patients should have a
"choice of hospital". She pointed out that she felt it is usual for a patient
to go to the hospital where their physician practices.
Mr. McBrayer stated that he feels most people are of the opinion that Swedish
Medical Center is a good institution to have within the City, and that they
are providing good service to the south metro area. He asked why the members
of the Planning Connnission would condone competition for a "home-town business."
Mr. Tanguma asked why there is opposition to competition in the medical field?
Mrs. Pierson stated that competition in the medical field does not drive down
costs; if beds in any medical facility are vacant, this means that fewer people
must pay more to meet the costs of the medical facility. Mr. Tanguma stated
that a hospital will not go into a given location unless they know they will
make money. Mrs. Pierson stated that she believed they will have to have a
Certificate of Need before they can build the hospital. She understood that
it will" not be a full-service hospital at that location; some of the services
will have to be provided by the main hospital downtown or from a iocal hospital.
Mr. Tanguma reiterated his belief that when there is competition in services
it tends to stabilize the prices; he stated that he felt this is part of the
problem with the economy today --government is keeping competition from
doing what it is supposed to do, which is to keep the prices down. Mrs.
Pierson strongly disagreed with Mr. Tanguma, pointing out that people do not
have a choice in whether or not they will go to the hospital. Mr. Senti
stated that vacant beds in hospitals is one of the problems in driving up
the costs of medical services today.
Mr. Draper pointed out that with the advent of Mission Viejo, we would be
looking at a great population increase and questioned whether there would
be need for increased medical facilities over and above what the Swedish
Medical Center and Porter Memorial Hospital could provide. Mrs. Romans
stated that Mercy is requesting funds to do a feasibility study to show
that need.
Mr. Cliff Johnson of Swedish Medical Center stated that Swedish is taking
into consideration potential growth in planning their medical facilities and
services. He stated that he felt future growth could be handled by th~
Swedish Medical Center/Porter Hospital facilities. He stated that hospitals
do not get together on their costs, but Mrs. Pierson is correct; the cost
of operation do have to be covered whether beds are filled or not.
Mr. Tanguma stated that with competition, he felt the medical facilities would
be forced to manage their resources properly and cut down on waste. Mr. Johnson
stated that he would strongly disagree with this statement. Mr. Johnson cited •
the decrease in the number of days patients are staying in the hospital, and
the number of patients per 100,000 population which has risen. Mr. Johnson
stated he unders tood that Mercy wanted to build a medical office building
in the I-25/C-4 70 area first, and that he did not know of any doctors who
were interested in locating in that particular area.
-11-
The Cotmnission asked that they be kept posted on this matter.
~ Mrs. Pierson suggested that the matter of Bicycle Facilities could be dis-
cussed a little further.
•
Mr. Williams left the meeting at 8:45 P. M.
Mrs. Romans stated that copies of the proposed changes were not made for the
Connnission, but that she would run through them very quickly. Following a
synopsis of the proposed changes, Mrs. Romans stated that copies of the pro-
posed changes would be available at the next meeting.
Mrs. Romans noted that the staff is also working on a "smoking vehicle" ordinance,
which will not come before the Connnission, but will require a Public Hearing be-
fore the City Council.
Mrs. Pierson asked if there was anything else to come before the Conunission?
There being nothing further, the meeting was adjourned at 8:55 P. M.
Secretary
-12-
MEMORANDUM TO THE ENGLEWOOD CITY COUNCIL REGARDING ACTION
OR RECOMMENDATION OF THE CITY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION.
DATE: September 3, 1980
SUBJECT:
RECOMMENDATION:
Carson moved:
Tanguma seconded:
Alley Vacation in Block 2, Higgins Englewood Gardens
and Acceptance of Perpetual Easement.
The Planning Commission recommend to City Council that
the north 150 feet of the alley in Block 2, Higgins
Englewood Gardens Subdivision be vacated, and that the
City accept the 16 foot wide Perpetual Easement to be
given by Swedish Medical Center along the south property
line between the alley in Block 2, Higgins Englewood
Gardens, and South Pearl Street.
The reasons for this recommendation are as follows:
1. The Perpetual Alley Easement will provide adequate
access from South Pearl Street to the remaining
dedicated portion of the alley for property owners
in the block south of the proposed parking structure.
This right-of-way can be used during the Gonstruction
of the parking structure inasmuch as the lower level
will not extend into this area because of the loca-
tion of the City Ditch.
2. The five foot easement on the west property lines
of Lots 42 through 45 will widen the existing 15 foot
alley dedication to 20 feet for adequate turning
radius from the 16 foot alley easement.
3 . The alley and the alley easement will be able to be
used during construction.
AYES: McBrayer, Pierson, Senti, Tanguma, Williams, Barbre, Carson, Draper
NAYS: None
ABSENT: Becker
The motion carried.
By Order of the City Planning and Zoning Commission.
•
•
•
•
-13-
MEMORANDUM TO THE ENGLEWOOD CITY COUNCIL REGARDING ACTION
OR RECOMMENDATION OF THE CITY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION •
DATE: September 3, 1980
SUBJECT:
RECOMM~DATION:
Tangllllla moved:
Carson seconded:
OSAGE ANNEXATION PETITION
The Planning Commission recommend to City Council that the
South Osage Street Annexation be approved. The Planning
Commission has studied this in the past and has recommended
the area be annexed on previous occasions. The annexation
of this area is in compliance with the Comprehensive Plan,
and should be approved.
AYES: Pierson, Senti, Tangl.llila, Williams, Barbre, Carson, Draper, McBrayer
NAYS: None
ABSENT: Becker
The motion carried.
By Order of the City Planning and Zoning Commission .
-14-
MEMORANDUM TO THE ENGLEWOOD CITY COUNCIL REGARDING ACTION
OR RECOMMENDATION OF THE CITY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION.
DATE: September 3, 1980
SUBJECT:
RECOMMENDATION:
Tanguma moved:
Carson seconded:
Findings of Fact -Case #19-80
The Planning Commission approve the Findings of Fact for
Case #19-80, the rezoning of the 4700 Block South Bannock
Street, from R-1-C, Single-family Residence, to R-2-C,
Two-family Residence; the Findings of Fact to be referred
to City Council.
AYES: Senti, Tanguma, Williams, Barbre, Carson, Draper, McBrayer, Pierson
NAYS: None
ABSENT: Becker
The motion carried.
By Order of the City Planning and Zoning Commission.
•
•
•
•
CITY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
ENGLEWOOD, COLORADO
IN THE MATTER OF CASE NO. 19-80, )
FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS )
AND RECPMMENDATIONS RELATING TO )
AN APPLICATION FOR THE REZONING )
OF AN AREA FROM R-1-C, SINGLE-)
FAMILY RESIDENCE, TO R-2, MEDIUM-)
DENSITY RESIDENCE, WHICH WAS FILED )
BY M. L. COOPER, E. J. CRABBE, )
ET AL. )
-15-
A Public Hearing was held in connection with Case No. 19-80 on
July 22, 1980, in the City Council Chambers of the Englewood City Hall.
The following members of the City Planning and Zoning Commission were
present: Mr. Barbre, Mrs. Becker, Mr. Carson, Mr. Draper, Mr. McBrayer,
Mrs. Pierson, Mr. Senti, Mr. Tangtnna and Mr. Williams. No members were
absent.
FINDINGS OF FACT
Upon review of the evidence taken in the form of testimony,
presentations, reports and filed doctnnents, the City Planning and Zoning
Commission makes the following Findings of Fact:
1. That proper notice of the Public Hearing was given.
2. That the names of those persons signing the rezoning ap-
plication are as follows:
Lynne F. Smith
4700 South Bannock Street
Englewood, Colorado 80110
Michael L. Cooper
E. J. Crabbe
Charles R. Cooper
4710 -4720 South Bannock Street
c/o 3597 South Bannock Street
Englewood, Colorado 80110
William and Beatrice M. Becker
4732 South Bannock Street
Englewood, Colorado 80110
Joseph and Flossie V. Burr
4734 South Bannock Street
Englewood, Colorado 80110
-16-
Ted H. Rickard
4760 South Bannock Street
Englewood, Colorado 80110
Betty J. King
4768 South Bannock Street
Englewood, Colorado 80110
William J. and Betty Lou Bolis
4780 South Bannock Street
Englewood, Colorado 80110
c/o 7010 South Platte Canyon Road
Littleton, Colorado 80123
James Henry
4790 South Bannock Street
Englewood, Colorado 80110
Fannie Beshore
Kathleen Harris
4707 South Bannock Street
c/o 4647 South Lowell Boulevard
Denver, Colorado 80236
Harold G. and Carol J. Pickrel
4733 South Bannock Street
Englewood, Colorado 80110
c/o 9090 East Nassau Avenue
Denver, Colorado 80237
Paul R. and Beverly J. Yeager
4735 South Bannock Street
Englewood, Colorado 80110
c/o 6858 South Franklin Circle
Littleton, Colorado 80122
H. Carl and Florence H. Ayers
4779 South Bannock Street
Englewood, Colorado 80110
Larry Colpitts
201 West Layton Avenue
Englewood, Colorado 80110
and that those persons represent approximately 65% of the property owners
in the area.
3. That the applicants proposed to rezone the following described
property from R-1-C, Single-family Residence, to R-2, Medium Density Resi-
dence, pursuant to the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance of the City of Englewood:
Beginning at a point where the extended centerline of the
alley east of 4700 South Cherokee Street intersects the
centerline of West Union Avenue; Thence east along the cen-
terline of West Union Avenue to its intersection with the
extended centerline of the alley east of 4700 South Bannock
Street; Thence south along the centerline of said alley to
the centerline of West Layton Avenue; Thence west along the
center line of West Layton Avenue to its intersection with
•
•
•
•
-17-
the extended centerline of the alley east of 4700 South Cherokee
Street; Thence north along said alley to the point of beginning •
(Both block faces in the 4700 block south.)
4. That the area sought to be rezoned by this application was
annexed to the City of Englewood by Ordinance No. 5, Series of 1950, and
according to the information in the Planning Division files, was zoned for
Single-family Residential use. The area was zoned R-1-D, Single-family
Residential, in 1955 and remained in that classification until 1963 when
the subject property was zoned R-1-C, Single-family Residence, by Ordinance
No. 26, Series of 1963, at which time the R-1-D Zone District was repealed.
5. That the property to the north and west of the subject site
is zoned R-1-C, Single-family Residence.
6. That the property to the east of the subject area is zoned
R-2, Medium-Density Residence.
7. That the property to the south on the east side of South
Banno ck Street, is zoned R-3, High Density Residence, and the property t o
the south on the west side of South Bannock Street, is zoned R-4, Resi-
dential-Professional.
8. That there is an intermix of duplexes and tri-plexes in the
medium density zone district to the east and south/southwest of the subject
area and also a high density residential development to the south/southeast
of the subject area.
9. That the subject area was identified as an Area of Concern in
the 1969 Comprehensive Plan and as a Target Area for the Home Rehabilitation
Loan Program in 1977.
10. That the block consists of single-family residences, most of
which were constructed prior to annexation to the City and that several of
these are basement houses or small houses, some of which are located on the
rear of the building lot, which would not meet the current zoning and building
regulations.
11. That the 1979 Comprehensive Plan identifies the subject area
as a Low-Density Residential Incentive Area, the intent of that designation
being that some type of an incentive may have to be given to owners within
the area to encourage the redevelopment of substandard property --possibly
through a density bonus, a tax incentive or a loan or grant to assist in
the clearance of the property and preparing it for new development.
12. That the applicants state in the application that "some owners
would like to build new dwellings or make additions, but the cost of de-
molishing, removing and rebuilding in the neighborhood under the R-1-C
zoning limitations seems prohibitive. .
"Rezoning to R-2 would permit the construction of two-family
dwellings which is considered economically feasible and practical in the
neighborhood. Rezoning to the R-2 designation would still be a reasonably
low-density use and compatible with the neighborhood generally and with
South Acoma Street which is currently zoned R-2."
-18-
13. That concern was expressed at the Public Hearing about the
feasibility of integrating structures with three or more attached dwelling
units into the block.
14. That the R-2, Meditnn Density Zone District, permits a maximtnn
density of 14 dwelling units per acre w1th either a one or a two-family unit
on a 50-foot frontage and for each additional 25-foot of frontage, another
attached dwelling unit may be constructed.
15. That the R-2-C, Medium Density Residence District, permits
the same density per acre as the R-2 District, but no more than two units
can be attached in the R-2-C Zone District, thus making this District more
restrictive than the R-2.
16. That having given proper notice of the Public Hearing at which
the rezoning of the area from R-1-C, Single-family Residence, to R-2, Medium.-
Density Residence, was considered, and after having weighed the testimony
given at that Public Hearing, the members of the City Planning and Zoning
Commission concluded that they may recommend to the City Council that they
consider the rezoning of the subject area to R-2-C, Medium-Density Residence,
which zone district permits the same density, but is more restrictive than
that zoning which was requested by the applicants.
17. That this concept was discussed at the Public Hearing with
those applicants in attendance and their Counsel, and with other persons
having an interest in the rezoning application.
CONCLUSIONS
1. That proper public notice of the Public Hearing was duly
given according to Section 22.3-4 of the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance,
2. That several of the properties within the subject area do
not meet the minimum standards or requirements of the present Comprehensive
Zoning Ordinance and Building Code, and that redevelopment of these properties
has not taken place under the present zoning.
3. That the Medium Density zoning would be an extension of similar
zoning on the east of the subject area.
4. That whereas the mass of three or more attached dwelling units
may not be compatible with single-family dwelling units in the subject area,
an admixture of two single-family attached dwelling units could be integrated
into the subject area without an adverse effect.
5. That the R-2-C Medium-Density Zone District is at the same
density as the R-2 Zone District, but is more restrictive in that no more
than two dwelling units can be attached.
6. That the proposed R-2-C, Medium Density Residence District,
will provide a tool by which the intent of the 1979 Comprehensive Plan can
be implemented, i.e., encouraging the redevelopment of properties on which
there are substandard structures.
•
•
•
•
-19-
RECOMMENDATION
Therefore, it is the recommendation of the City P lanning a nd
Zoning Commission to the City Council, that the above described property
which is the subject of a rezoning application filed by M. L . Cooper,
E. J. Crabbe, et al, be rezoned from R-1-C, Single-family Residence, to
R-2-C, Medium Density Residence.
. Upon the vote on a motion made at a meeting of the City Planning
and Zoning Commission on July 22, 1980:
Those members voting in favor of the motion: Mr. Barbre, Mr. Draper,
Mr. McBrayer, Mrs. Pierson, Mr. Senti and Mr. Williams.
Those members voting in opposition to the motion: Mrs. Becker,
Mr. Carson and Mr. Tanguma.
BY ORDER OF THE CITY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION