Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1982-06-15 PZC MINUTES• • ' I. CITY OF ENGLEWOOD PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION June 15, 1982 CALL TO ORDER. The Special Meeting of the City Planning and Zoning Commission was called to order by Chairman McBrayer at 7:05 P.M. Members present: Carson, Gilchrist, McBrayer, Senti, Stoel, Tanguma, Barbre Members absent: Also present: Powers, Ex-offi~io Allen, Becker Assistant Director D. A. Romans City Attorney DeWitt Special Counsel George Zoellner and Brad Breslau Fire Chief James Broman Utilities Director Stu Fonda II. COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE Amendment by Addition of §22.1-8 CASE lfll-82 Mr. McBrayer stated that this is a special meeting called for the purpose of considering a proposed amendment to the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance. He reminded members that this proposed amendment would apply to any public utility owned by the City, and not to a specific utility under considera- tion at the present time. Mr. DeWitt introduced Fire Chief Broman and Utilities Director Fonda, and Special Counsel Zoellner and Breslau. Mr. DeWitt stated that while Mr. McBrayer's remarks to the Commission to not be caught up in the emotion of a particular case is wise, he felt that unless the members lived in the particular neighborhood most affected by low water pressure they would possibly not fully understand the need for the public utility under consideration. Mr. DeWitt stated that he would ask Mr. Fonda to explain more fully the ramifications of the water pressure problem and what has been done to alleviate this problem. Mr. Fonda discussed the water pressure problem in the southern part of Englewood, and noted that at times when the taps are opened, it would suck air back into the lines because there was no water pressure at all. Mr. Fonda stated that the City had been ~}erved from tanks, and that the height and depth of the water dictated the pressure to the users. This pressure would vary a great deal. When improvements to the system were proposed it was determined that the best system would be designed to handle the problem. Mr. Fonda stated that there are two pressure zones in the City, the higher zone being that area south of Tufts Avenue on the west side of South Broadway and ·south of Oxford or Princeton Avenue to the east of South Broadway. It is this area which would be served by the water tower south of Belleview Avenue and east of South Broadway. The re- mainder of the City would still be served under the present system of tanks. Mr. Fonda stated that by expanding the pumping capability the pressure in the southern part of Englewood has been improv~~ however, it is not the full solution to the problem, and explained pro(lems that could occur I -2- during power outages when the pumps would not be working. Mr. Fonda stated that the water tower would eliminate the problem during power outages, and would offer more time lag in variation of pressure. Mr. Fonda discussed the possibility of converting to a "closed system", but noted that conversion of the pumps could cost several hundered thousand dollars. Mr. Carson asked if the water tower that has been constructed would solve the entire problem of low water pressure in this area, or is it possible that another tower would have to be constructed? Mr. Fonda stated that he does not anticipate construction of another tower; that the capability to increase pressure could be expanded by expanding the pumping system at the treatment plant. Mr. Gilchrist asked what affect a power outage would have on the water pressure with the water tower? Mr. Fonda stated that it would take approxi- mately 40 minutes to drain the tower down; he noted that if a fire had to be fought during a power outage, this could draw down on the supply in the tower considerably. Further discussion ensued. Mr. Tanguma asked the capacity of the water storage tanks? Mr. Fonda stated that the elevated tank holds 200,000 gallons; the ground storage tanks hold 12,000,000 gallons. Mr. Tanguma stated that he understood there was some law that permitted construction of public utilities and public buildings, churches, etc. without complying with the requirements of the local zoning ordinance. Mr. DeWitt acknowledged that there are exemptions on some uses, for in- stance, school properties are exempt from zoning codes and regulations, and are just now being required to comply with Building Codes. Mr. DeWitt stated that on a special district, the improvement could be built without approval of the local governing body; however, this is not a special water district and this provision does not apply. Mr. Zoellner pointed out that the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance does not specifically exempt the City from meeting the regulations of the ordinance on construction of public utilities. Discussion followed. Chief Broman addressed the Commission on the concerns of the Fire Depart- ment and the low water pressure. He stated that they are concerned with the reliability of the existing system; what would happen if a fire occurred during a power outage and there was no water pressure with which to fight the fire? He stated that the Department does carry some water in their pumpers, but it is a limited amount and would be insufficient to fight a blaze of any particular size. He also pointed out that the Drive-Operator- Engineers on the pumpers are schooled to work down to 20# pressure. He stated that on the flow-testing the Department is doing on the system, the pressure can drop from 60# to 20# immediately once the tap is opened. Chief Broman stated that this indicates to the Fire Department that they would not have the resources --water and water pressure --to successfully combat a blaze. He stated that with a power outage, the area could be seriously jeopardized if a fire broke out. Mr. Carson inquired whether the people who have filed suit regarding the water tower experience the low pressure? Mr. DeWitt stated that these residents are outside the City of Englewood, and are on the Denver Water system. Mr. Fonda stated that Denver has a ground storage system quite • • I • • -3- a bit further south; the natural flow of the water provides adequate pressure to these homes. Chief Broman stated that this area is also in the Cherry Hills Fire Protection District. Mr. DeWitt stated that the reason for the proposed ordinance amendment is that the Court has ruled that the water tower cannot be used because it is not in compliance with the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance, and the City was not exempt from complying with the provisions in that ordinance. Mr. DeWitt asked Mr. Zoellner to bring the Commission up-to-date on the status of the case. Mr. Zoellner stated that there were three points in the suit regarding the water tower: (1) request for a preliminary injunction to stop use of the tower and require the removal of the tower; (2) nuisance; and (3) inverse condemnation because of damage tq surrounding property values. Mr. Zoellner stated that the City legal staff is still of the opinion that the basic tenents of the case are in error; however, the judge did not agree and granted the preliminary injunction stopping use of the water tower. This is the point that has been appealed by the City. Mr. Zoellner stated that the legal staff does not feel that the complainants have a case on the points of inverse condemnation or nuisance. Mr. Zoellner stated that the City legal staff is confident the City will win the appeal, but it is a time-consuming process. Mr. Zoellner pointed out that if the City is successful at the Appeal Court level, the complainants could then appeal to the Supreme Court, which could mean further delay in the matter. Mr. Zoellner stated that if the appeal on the temporary injunction is deter- mined in favor of the City, the tower would be put into operation, and the case would then be tried on the merits of inverse condemnation and nuisance. He stated that the legal staff is very confident that there is no basis for these two claims by the complainants. Mr. Zoellner discussed the thrust of the case, that being that insufficient land was purchased by the City initially, and the setback requirements were not met. The City did acquire additional land to meet requirements as the City interprets the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance. However, it was the determination of the Court that the water tower was still not in compliance with City ordinances, and the injunction was granted. Mr. Zoellner stated that the proposed ordinance amendment is one way to remove the City from complying with the regulations in this par- ticular case, and might prove helpful in other instances. Mr. Zoellner noted that Denver has a provision similar to what is proposed by the legal staff, and that Denver has the right to construct public utilities without complying with the zoning restrictions. Mr. Breslau stated that he agreed with Mr. Zoellner's recap of the case; the Court ruled that the City was not in compliance with the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance; the City felt that the District Court was in error on the ruling, and appealed to the Court of Appeals. If this proposed amend- ment to the Ordinance is approved, it would render this point of the case moot, and the City could then proceed on the points of "nuisance" and "inverse condemnation". Mr. Gilchrist stated that he understood Mr. Breslau was representing the insurance company on the case; is this correct? Mr. Breslau discussed his connection with the law suit, and stated that he is affiliated with the insurance company. Mr. Breslau stated that a point of law in Colorado is that compensation for loss of aesthetic value is not paid. -4- Mr. Tanguma asked for clarification of a "necessary public utility". Mr. DeWitt stated that the only utilities that are city-operated are the water and sewer services. He stated that he would say these would be very necessary public utilities. Mr. Gilchrist asked if there had been any attempt to settle this case within the policy limits? Mr. DeWitt stated that the complainants want the tower removed. The third point of the case is the matter of inverse condemnation and damages to the property or removal of the water tower. Mr. Zoellner pointed out that the matter of inverse condemnation is not covered bv the insurance policy. Discussion ensued. Mr. DeWitt cited §22.5-7a(3) of the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance, which section provides that such fac:ilities as water towers may exceed the height limitation within the Zone District which is imposed by the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance, if an additional foot of setback from each property line is provided for each foot of height the limitation is exceeded. Mr. DeWitt stated that the City legal staff feels that this section of the Ordinance has been complied with. Mr. DeWitt asked Mr. Fonda if any other use of this land for a public utility has been contemplated? Mr. Fonda stated that use of the land for a water tower is the only use that has been contemplated. Further discussion on the proposed amendment ensued. Mr. Zoellner stated that this same procedure has been used by other municipalities; this is an attempt to prov·e this issue of the case moot, because it may be another year before the law suit itself is heard. Also, the City needs to get the water tower into operation. Mr. DeWitt pointed out .the importance of public utilities to a City, and stated that he felt the Fire Chief, the Utilities Director, and the resi- dents of Englewood have made a point that the water tower is needed for the welfare and safety of a part of the City. Discussion ensued. Mr. Fonda stated that this proposed amendment could be of assistance in the negotiations underway with the Corps o~ Engineers regarding the pumping station at West Union Avenue and the South Platte River. Mr. Tanguma questioned whether the Court had considered · §22.57a(3) of the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance as cited by Mr. DeWitt? Mr. Breslau stated that it was the interpretation of the Court that these uses are accessory to other principal structures, and would not apply in this instance where the water tower is the only use on the land. Mr. Stoel noted that Councilman Fitzpatrick had entered the meeting during some of the previous discussion; he asked whether this proposal has been discussed by the City Council? Mr. Fitzpatrick stated that the City Council has discussed the proposal. He pointed out that logic would dictate where utility plants that are owned by the City would be located. He stated that studies indicated the water tower should be located where it has been lo- cated to give the maximum benefit to those areas with low water pressure. Discussion ensued. Mr. Tanguma stated that he felt the City was covered by Colorado Connnon Law, and did not feel that this amendment was needed; however, if it will expedite this particular case the amendment should be approved. • • • Carson moved: Stoel seconded: -5- The Planning Commission schedule a public hearing on the proposed amendment of the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance, §22.8-1, for July 13, 1982, at 7:00 P.M. AYES: Carson, Gilchrist, McBrayer, Senti, Stoel, Tanguma, Barbre NAYS: None ABSENT: Allen, Becker The motion carried. Mr. DeWitt gave a brief up-date on the suit against the City and Commission by Rocky Mountain Acquisitions; it is scheduled to be heard July 26th, and the legal staff is trying to quash the subpoenas of the Commission members. III. RESOURCE DATA COLLECTION. Mr. McBrayer stated that one of the goals of the Commission for this year was to establish resource data on the City of Englewood to be used for promotional purposes to attract businesses to the City. Mr. McBrayer stated that the staff had submitted some information to the Commission at the last meeting, and that Mr. Haviland, Executive Director of the Englewood Downtown Authority, and Mr. Richard Harrison, Executive Vice President of the Centennial Chamber of Commerce, have been invited to attend this meeting to discuss what information these two organizations have available. Mr. Harrison stated that he has been with the Chamber of Commerce roughly one month, and is not that familiar with the program of the Chamber yet. He stated that he would like to learn ·what the Commission has in mind and what they want in promotional information. Mr. McBrayer explained that the Commission wants to be of assistance wherever possible, and also to initiate some programs --not just to ap- prove or disapprove something that is referred to it. He explained the process the Commission used to arrive at the work goals for 1982, and noted that the data resource project had the Number 1 priority on the list. Mr. McBrayer referred to informational brochures that he has seen available in municipalities such as Estes Park and Atlanta, Ga. He stated that he feels strongly there should be some technical data available on Englewood to encourage prospective businessmen and home owners to locate in Englewood. Mr. Stoel stated that he felt with the downtown redevelop- ment project under consideration, that "we are building a new Englewood", and that it is very critical to have an inviting atmosphere and strong promotional efforts to encourage and assist the redevelopment efforts. Mr. Harrison pointed out that the Commission must keep in mind that this City does not have features such as the Royal Gorge or the Rocky Mountain National Park to build a promotional program on; he asked when they speak of economic growth and development, are they referring to office buildings, light industrial, heavy industrial, or residential development? Exactly what is the aim of the program? ~r. McBrayer stated that he felt the low tax base was a good selling point for both residential and business prospects. Discussion ensued. -6- Mr. Tanguma asked what was available on the City of Englewood, and how one went about compiling the data that is needed? Mr. Harrison stated that he was not sure the Chamber had a lot of data on Englewood at the present time, and he felt that perhaps he and the Commission were talking about two different kinds of information. He noted that the data base and criteria would differ depending on whether it was prepared for residential purposes, or for business and industrial purposes. He noted that Mr. Haviland has been working to get some information together for the business aspect of the proposed development, and he felt that coordination on the project was very important so that a duplication of effort is not done. Mr. Haviland stated that he is on the Business Development committee of the Chamber of Commerce, and he is trying to devise a plan that will serve as a clearing house for prospective businesses, and have a marketing pro- gram to solicit attractive businesses into the south metropolitan community which the Chamber of Commerce serves. Mr. Haviland stated that they are now collecting the data base for this project. He stated that he hoped the preliminary work would be done by August. This is a resource that would be available through the Chamber of Connnerce. Mr. Haviland stated that he is presently involved in three programs which may be of interest to the Commission; he has received a mandate from the EDDA Board to revise the slide show that was done this past year; he is incorporating some of the EDAW and Design Workshop slides into a presentation. Mr. Haviland stated that he is also on a committee which includes Mr. Senti, Mr. McCown, and Dr. Davidson of the Englewood Public Schools, working on ways to increase the enrollment in the schools and attract young families ~ to the community. Mr. Haviland stated that he is working on a slide show on this committee, also. He stated that they had a trial program shown to realtors, which was fo1lowed by a question and answer period with Mr. Mccown and Dr. Davidson. Mr. Haviland stated that they have researched the com- munity, have interviewed realtors and new home owners and asked similar questions of those they have interviewed, some of those questions being "why did you want to come here", "what is good about Englewood", "what is bad about Englewood". Mr. Haviland stated that he had thought that the small homes in Englewood would be an asset for the young people buying their first home and are being priced out of homeownership in other areas; but he found that other areas are offering larger homes for a very comparable price found in Englewood. He stated that Englewood housing is very expensive, and there is not a lot of turn-over in homeownership. The good points brought out in their research were city-owned water, the low tax base, and the fact that Englewood is a full-service city. · Mr. Haviland stated that Englewood is a small community with a strong sense of history and a low tax base; he felt these were strong elements of the City that should be emphasized in any promotional campaign. Mr, Haviland stated that this particular program has a specific target, that of homeownership. Mr. Haviland stated that he is also attempting to create for the City a specific marketing campaign. He stated that his background is in Planning and Marketing, and discussed some of his previous experience with the marketing aspect. Mr. Haviland distributed a page which outlines the City-wide marketing proposal. Mr. Haviland pointed out that there are four marketing objectives listed on this distribution sheet, these objectives being: ~ 1) Promote City pride and a positive community image and identity; 2) Strengthen the City's retail image; 3) Attract young home buyers to Englewood; 4) Create an attractive business investment climate. -7- Target audiences were listed as: 1) current residents and merchants; 2) potential home purchasers, and 3) the larger metropolitan area. Mr. Haviland stated that there is a need for the image of Englewood to be strengthened. Mr. Haviland proceeded to outline the elements he has proposed, which include preparation of brochures, slide shows, an annual poster, photo exhibit/traveling exhibit. Mr. Haviland presented the Com- mission with copies of a promotional brochure he had prepared for the University Community in Columbus, Ohio. Discussion ensued. Mr. Haviland discussed the need for a budget to finance such a promotional effort -- preparation of brochures, slides, etc. Mr. Haviland estimated that a nice color brochure such as Littleton has done could cost $20,000 by itself. He stated that a brochure with no color runs could cost $15,000. Further discussion ensued. Mr. Carson suggested that perhaps a committee should be designated to work with Mr. Haviland and Mr. Harrison on the compilation of the data information. Mr. Gilchrist stated that he felt the City did not do enough advertising or circulate such publications as the Englewood Citizen outside the City to let people who are not residents know about the City. Mr. Gilchrist stated that he would like to see some figures from Mr. Haviland as to how many of the Littleton brochures were sold; he would also like to know more on the reasons people have purchased homes in Englewood if this information is available. Mr. Gilchrist stated that he would hate to see the Commission try to take the compilation of data out of the "hands of experts", but that the Commission should offer assistance wherever possible. Mr. Stoel stated that it sounded like Mr. Haviland does have experience in this field, and he would like to see the City take advantage of Mr. Haviland's expertise. Mr. McBrayer stated that he felt the Commission should be the catalyst to make something happen, and on this project he felt the Commission would be acting as "project manager" on behalf of the Council to make sure that something does develop. Mrs. Romans discussed promotional efforts for specific projects that have been done in the past. such as for the development of the Cinderella City shopping center, the Fire/Police Center, adopting the City logo, and the annual reports that were done several years ago. Mrs. Romans stated that in conjunction with the adoption of the City logo, a metal display was de- veloped which was located in bank lobbies, in the Library and other places of general interest, on which pictures of City functions and amenities were displayed. However, the very shape of this display was an "attractive nuisance" to children, being on the order of a jungle-gym, and the children were inclined to try to climb on it. Mrs. Romans stated that this display element is in storage, but it could be used again, and the pictures up-dated. Mr. Haviland had suggested that possibly it could displayed in a vacant store front, which she felt was a good idea. Mr. Haviland stated that he would enjoy serving as a facilitator on such a project for the City; however, he does not have any "mandate" to do this from the City. Mr. McBrayer further discussed Mr. Carson's suggestion of a special committee to work on the data base collection; he suggested that possibly a representative of the EDDA (Mr. Haviland), the Chamber of Commerce (Mr. Harrison), a repre- sentative of the Planning Commission, a representative of the City Council, and a representative of the School Board could be designated to work on such a project. -8- Mr. Gilchrist asked for further information on the function of the Chamber of Commerce. Mr. Harrison stated that the Centennial Chamber o f Commerce serves the south metropolitan area, including Littleton, Cherry Hills Village, Greenwood Village, Englewood, Columbine and Sheridan. Discus sion ensued. Mr. Harrison stated that from the discussion this evening, h e d id not feel that the Commission was looking to develop new inform a tion; the basic information that is needed for their purposes is availab l e , but just needs to be pulled together and marketed to the best advantage of the City . Mr. Haviland stated that once the information is pulled together , he would recommend the hiring of a professional to package the basic informat ion and to do a high-quality job. He cautioned against relying on "vo l unt eers." Mr. McBrayer asked about participating in a document promoting t he en t ire south metropolitan area? Mr. Tanguma and Mr. Gilchrist stated that at this point they would be opposed to this suggestion. Mr •. Harrison d i scus s e d the fact that the efforts of the Chamber of Commerce are aimed primari l y toward business development in the south metro area; he pointed out t hat development of basic data for promotion aimed toward residential purpose s would be of second priority. Mr. Harrison stated that they do have some "generic" information for the overall area. Mr. McBrayer stated that per- haps the Commission and the special committee should be more concerned with residential data base, and let the Chamber of Commerce concentrate more on the business community. Mr. Fitzpatrick excused himself from the meeting; he stated that he wo uld like to encourage the Commission to keep on with this project, that i t i s a good idea and we have a need for it. ~ Further discussion ensued on the formation of the special comm i ttee to work on the data base collection. Mr. McBrayer asked for volunteers from the Commission to work on this project. Mr. Tanguma and Mr. Carson both volunteered; Mr. Carson then withdrew from consideration. Mrs. Romans stated that Ms. Powers identified several items t o b e considered in the promotional/marketing efforts, among them being: 1. Update of sli de show --City-wide; use with School District a n d Realtors. (City and EDDA). 2 . Brochure for City-wide publicity. (City and EDDA) 3. Dossier (Community Development Planning staff) 4. Downtown Sli de Show (EDDA and City) 5. Downtown handout to explain redevelopment project generally . (EDDA and City) 6. Monthly insert in Englewood Citizen to up-date on redeve l op ment. (City -Community Development Department). Discussion ensued. Mr. McBrayer suggested that the followi ng b e a dopted as a goal of this ad hoc committee: "To develop a plan for promoting the City of Englewood to potential resi- dents and businesses, including but not necessarily limited t o proposal o f l iterature, slide presentations, information centers, et c., and seek budgeting for implementing this plan." • -9- Mr. McBrayer asked that someone on the staff talk to the School District to ask that a representative of the Schools be appointed to this committee, and that the City Council be asked to appoint one of their members as a representative to the committee. Mr. McBrayer asked if a staff member would set the date and time for the initial meeting. Mrs. Romans stated that she would contact the City Council and the School Board. She asked if Mr. Haviland could pursue the idea of the display figure in a vacant store window; she pointed out that this is something that could be accomplished with little time or expense. IV. CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM. Mrs. Romans stated that the staff had initially planned that the Capital Improvement Program would be discussed with the Commission on June 22nd; however, information from the other Departments has been slow coming in, and because of this, the staff report and back-up information will not be ready for discussion on the 22nd of June. Mrs. Romans questioned whether the Commission would be averse to rescheduling the meeting to June 29th rather than June 22nd to discuss the Capital Improvement requests? Mr. McBrayer asked what else was scheduled on the agenda? Mrs. Romans stated that there are no cases scheduled involving the public; the Landscape Ordinance is slated for further discussion. Mr. McBrayer stated that he felt the meeting could be rescheduled for June 29th rather than June 22nd. The Commission agreed with this change in date. Further brief discussion ensued on the proposed amendment of the Comprehen- sive Zoning Ordinance. The meeting adjourned at 9:20 P.M. G rtrude G. Welty ecording Secretary ,/ I \ I I