Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1960-01-21 PZC MINUTESI I Page 457 There being no further business to come before the P l anning & Zoning Commission, the meeting was adjourned at 11:00 P. M. Approved J.M. Lacy ~~~~~~--='---~ Respectfully submitted, Jewell M. Banfield Recording Secretary MEMORANDUM TO THE ENGLEW OO D CITY COUNCIL REGARDING ACTION OR RECOMMENDATION OF THE CITY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION. Date: January 7, 1960 Subject: Master Plan No. 1, Drainage Parkway Requesting Confirmation from the City Council of their intent as previously directed to proceed with the application. Respectfully submitted, By order of the City Planning and Zoning Commission Jewell M. Banfield Recording Secretary * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * CITY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSI ON JANUARY 21, 1960 The meeting was called to order by Chairman Jones at 8:00 P. M. Members Present: Jones, Kelley, Kreiling, Schmitt, Lacy, Ex-officio Members Absent: Martin, Romans Kelley moved: Schmitt seconded: That the minutes of January 7, 1960, be approved as written. Ayes: Kelley, Kreiling, Schmitt, Jones Nays: None Absent: Martin, Romans N. Fout & 4 others Subdivision Approximately Three Blocks N. of Quincy and W. of Jason Hearing No. 38-59A (Also see minutes from Feb. 16, 1956 to Sept. 28, 1956) December 3, 1959 December 17, 1959 The Planning Director reported on contacts with subdividers as to the possibility of a joint effort by City and Builder to acquire park and building sites in the subject area. He said that Mr. Glen Wilson had examined the area and stated that it was a practical move from a subdivider's point of view. His estimate of land costs was $5,000.00 per acre. After s o me discussion, it was agreed that the Planning Director should contact Mr. Norvell Fout to determine whether he would be silling to sell or option his property according to the park site plan. If Mr. Fout is agreeable, Planning Commission will consider a recom- mendation to the City Council that a joint land acquisition effort be made by a subdivider and the City. Robert P. Anderson 7777 E. Iliff Subdivision Large Area Southwest of Durox Property Bounded by W. Harvard Ave., S. Tejon St., W. Bates Ave., extended, and the C & S R.R. Hearing No. 27-59D July 9, 1959 September 10, 1959 October 8, 1959 The Planning Director presented a tentative plat of the subject area. He stated that the developer had b een working with the City Water and Engineering Departments and that a final plan would be prepared shortly. No action was required by the Planning Commission. Herbert M. Cole 572 S. Gaylord Drainage Problem & Building Permit Lots 41-42 and 43, Block 58, S. Broadway Hgts. (4600 Blk. S. Sherman west side) Hearing No. 4-60A January 7, 1960 The Planning Director presented a written opinion from the City Engineer's Office as re- quested by the Planning Commission as follows:· Page 458 TO: Mr. Joe Lacy , Planning Director "INTER-OFFICE MEMORANDUM FROM: Mr. Neil Barde, Asst. City Engineer DATE: Jan. 14, 1960 SUBJECT: RE: Drainage Lots 41-42-43; Blk. 58; So. Broadway Heights Reference is made to my memo dated Jan. 5, 1960. Reference Minutes of Planning Commission of Jan. 7, 1960. Hearing No. 4-60. The pipes referred to are 18 inch in both cases. Reference is also made to Ripple & Howe Map showing a large pipe running East and West Union Ave., South of subject block, which would pick up the major portion of the water the Southeast of the drainage area. If this were done as shown, the present 18" pipes would be adequate for local drainage. in to Since the above plan cannot be instituted immediately, or any other feasible plan that would be economically sound to by pass the major portion of the drainage water around this area. The area will have to be maintained in its present status until it can be rectified in the overall drainage plan. Reference is made to Resolution adopted by City Council March 5th, 1956, "in the opinion of- or the City Engineer such construction would either contribute to flo od conditions along such course." As stated before, the subject ar~a ponds with run offR ofdhi~h i£density. The further filling in o f this property which would /~au~ecasR~gKet 0 !188M tg~eI 1 gfiw£He East side o f Sherman. Based on above, building on thi'S site would "contribute to fl ood conditions along such courses" --and no building permit should be issued. As to an easement, there seems to be no practical reason for such, since under present con- ditions it is the owners obligation to maintain the drainage thru his property. As to future, Ripple and Howe Plan would require none. If further information is desired as to actual conditions it is suggested the following people in the immediate area be contacted: NB /ct Mr. & Mrs. Tom Ritchey 4624 So. Sherman Mrs. Julia M. Williams 4636 So. Sherman Mr. 0. M. Hutchison 4643 So. Sherman Mr. Robert Rounds 4644 So. Sherman /S / Neil W. Barde Neil Barde Asst. City Engr." After considering the opinion in light of City Council's drainage resolution, the Planning Commission members agreed that there was not justification for granting a building permit in the subject area. Kelley moved: Schmitt seconded: That after examining the record and further investigation, Planning Commission finds no sound basis for recommending the issuance of a building permit at 4600 S. Sherman. Ayes: Kelley, Kreiling, Schmitt, Jones Nays: None Absent: Martin, Romans Mr. Robert Starkloff 3087 W. Grand Zoning Ordinance Amendment Authority for Board of Adjustment to grant 50-ft. buil ding sites, 4636 S. Pennsylvania. Hearing No. 2-60A January 7, 1960 The Commission read and discussed a tentative amendment to the Zoning Ordinance to allow con- struction on 50-foot building sites under certain conditions. The Planning Director reported that the Board of Adjustment had discussed the amendment and agreed to it as written. The Board of Adjustment considered the possibility o f including the amendment in the R-1-C zone district as had Planning Commission initially, but the Board agreed that there was virtually no 50-foot frontage property available in the R-1-C district. Schmitt moved: Kelley seconded: That the Planning and Zoning Commission redommend to City Council that the zoning ordinance be amended as follows: "Amend the zoning ordinance Article IV, Section 5 'R-1-D Zone Districts', paragraph 13, by adding sub-paragraph (c) as follows (16) : I I I I I I (c) Where vacant ground exists in an R-1-D zone district, and such ground is already subdivided into 25-foot lots, a maximum of three building · sites with 50-foot frontage may be permitted by action of the Board of Ad~ustment and Appeals after a public hearing. The Board may grant building permits on such lots after said public hearing if all of the following conditions are found to exist. (1) The subject area is bounded on each side by either existing buildings or a public right-of-way. (2) No building site so granted is less than 50 feet in frontage and 6000 square feet in area. (3) No more than three adjoining building sites can be located in the subject area. (4) The granting of building permits on such sites facilitates development consistent with existing housing and fosters a general improvement in the neighborhood." Page 459 Ayes: Kelley, Kreiling, Schmitt, Jones Nays: None Absent: Martin, Romans It was suggested that the Planning Director provide the City Attorney a copy of a pro- posed amendment in order that he might prepare an ordinance for the next Council meeting if he sees fit. Richard Simon, Atty. 3311 S. Broadway , Rezoning Southwest Corner of Hwy. #70 &·S. Clarkson Hearing No. 34-59F October 8, 1959 October 22, 1959 November 5, 1959 November 19, 1959 January 7, 1960 The Planning Director presented the City Attorney's opinion as requested by Planning Com- mission concerning two rezoning requests on the same property. The City Attorney feels that the consideration of either or both of the requests is up to the discretion of the Planning Commission. Planning Office City Master Plan No. 1 Drainage Parkway Hearing No. 20-591 May 21, 1959 June 4, 1959 July 2, 1959 August 20, 1959 September 10, 1959 October 8, 1959 October 22, 1959 December 17, 1959 January 7, 1960 The Planning Director presented a memorandum from the City Manager on behalf of the City Council indicating their desire to proceed with the request for a drainage plan loan from the Federal Government. Planning Commission City Master Plan No. 4 Financial and Population Forecas+ Hearing No. 36-59E October 22, 1959 November 5, 1959 November 19, 1959 December 3, 1959 December 17, 1959 The Planning Director presented a memorandum from the City Manager on behalf of the City Council indicating their willingness to provide funds in the amount of $2,500.00 for the land economics study being done by Watson A. Bowes ax the request of the Cou ncil and the Planning Commission. Planning Commission City Master Plan No. 6 Downtown Development Hearing No. 6-60 The Planning Director presented a memorandum from the City Manager containing a r esolution by the City Council as follows: Councilman Martin introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption. Seconde d by Councilman Braun. RESOLUT.I ON Whereas, the nee d for o f f-street parking facilities in the commercial areas of the Ci ty a ppe a rs to have increasing significance, and is be- coming a mat t e r of g eneral interest and concern; and Page 460 Whereas, there have been several independent surveys and studies, but no concentration of reliable data on the sub- ject has been made available; and Whereas, there is need for a rather comprehensive report on present facilities, probable future requirements, costs, equitable financing plan, and other pertinent factors, be- fore the City Council can proceed effectively and make reasonable determinations in the matter; Therefore, Be It Resolved, that the City Planning and Zoning Commission be requested to assemble a report of factual data on the subject, to make recommendations in keeping with proposed applicable sections of the Master Plan, and to outline a plan of equitable procedure com- mensurate with the recommendations; and that the City Manager be requested to furnish departmental assistance to the Commission wherever possible. The Planning Director stated that most of the basic data is already collected for the subject study and that the material will be analyzed and presented for Planning Com- mission consideration shortly. ICRPC Meeting Report The Planning Director reported that the regular monthly meeting of ICRPC was held on January 19th at the State Capitol Building. The members participated in a hearing on the Metropolitan Sanitation District plan. In a short business meeting after the hearing, the Commission authorized a board by the Regional Planning Commission for doing an elaborate study in north Jefferson County. Planning Conference The program for the third annual Institute for Planning Officials to be held in Boulder on February 5th and 6th was presented. The Planning Director and Mr. Jones urged all members who could attend to do so. The Planning Director stated that all members would receive a telephone call to make arrangements. There being no furtherbusiness to come before the Planning and Zoning Commissbn, the meeting was adjourned at 9:50 P. M. APPROVED /S / Jewell M. Banfield Jewell M. Banfield Recording Secretary MEMORANDUM TO THE CITY COUNCIL REGARDING ACTION OR RECOMMENDATION OF THE CITY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION. Date: Subject: Recommendation: January 21, 1960 Zoning Ordinance Amendment That the zoning ordinance be amended as follows: "Amend the zoning ordinance Article IV, Section 5 'R-1-D Zone Districts", paragraph 13, by adding sub-paragraph (c) as follows (16) : (c) Where vacant ground exists in an R-1-D zone district, and such ground is already subdivided into 25-foor loots, a maximum of three building sites with 50 foot frontage may be permitted by action of the Board of Adjustment and Appeals after a public hearing. The Board may grant building permits on such lots after said public hearing if all of the following conditions are found to exist. (1) The subject area is bounded on each side by either existing buildings or a public right-of-way. (2) No bu~lding site so granted is less than 50 feet in frontage and 6000 square feet in area. (3) No more than three adjoining building sites can be located in the sub j ect area. (4) The granting of building permits on such sites facilitates development consistent with existing housing and fosters a general improvement in the neighborhood." Respectfully submitted, By order of the City Planning and Zoning Commission Jewell M. Banfield Recording Secretary I I I I I I _CITY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 4, 1960 Page 461 The meeting was called to order by Chairman Jones at 7:30 P. M. Members Present: Jones, Hill, Kreiling, Martin, Romans, Lacy, Ex-officio Members Absent: Kelley Chairman Jones introduced Mr. Sam Hill who had been appointed to the Planning Commission by the City Council on February 1. Mr. John Schmitt, former Commission member, was present and Mr. Jones commended him for his efforts on the Planning Commission. Howard Nies, Acting Planning Director, was introduced to the Commission and will assume his duties February 9, 1960. - --·-- - - -- Romans moved: Martin seconded: That the minutes of January 21, 1960, be approved with the correction suggested by the City Engineer to show that Planning Commission's action on not recommending the building permit be- cause of a drainage problem in the 4600 block of South Sherman Street show the actual legal description rather than"4600 South Sherman". Said legal description is as follows: "Lots 41, 42, and 43, Block 58, South Broadway Heights." Ayes: Hill, Kreiling, Martin, Romans, Jones Nays: None Absent: Kelley R. H. Simon Rezoning 3311 S. Broadway Southeast Corner of Highway #70 at South Logan Street Hearing No. 5-60A January 7, 1960 Chairman Jones announced that the hearing was open for rezoning the subject area from R-2-A and R-2-B to a C-2 and P zone classification. The Planning Director read the request for rezoning which had been submitted to the Planning Commission previously. He presented photographic slides of the subject area and explained the apparent land use. Mr. Richard H. Simon, Attorney for Mr. Donalm Drinkwine, presented his case as follows: He stated that the applicant has made arrangements to purchase this site with a contingency which is subject to rezoning all property in order that h e may proceed with plans for a mortuary and adjacent parking. Mr. Simon stated that Highway #70 is a natural course for commercial zoning and this is the proper place for the purpose for which the rezoning is asked. Mortuaries are normally placed on main thoroughfares for dignity of their business and advertising purposes. Mr. Drinkwine presented drawings of the proposed mortuary and adjacent parking area, ex- plaining that driveway and parking are so situated that there would not be an excess of traffic entering Highway 70. The chapel has a seating capacity of 150. An average number of cars for each procession is 10 to 20 and the procession is controlle d by escorts. Mr. Simon presented the four reasons for the 1·requested zoning change and explained each reason as follows: 1. That the general conditions of this area within which the above described land is situate have changed stnce the zoning ordinance of the City of Englewood was adopted November 7, 1955, justifying a change in the zoning classification from R-2-B residential and R-2-A residential to C-2 Business and P-off-street parking respectively. He stated that this is a question of what is the highest and best use for that particular area since the great change caused by Highway #70. This land has been zoned for two-family dwellings since 1955 and there has not been a demand for this purpose. 2 ·. That the public necessity,, convenience, general wel f a r e and good zoning practice justifies and requires such change of zoning classification. As a result of the highway going through this area, the homes have not been kept in proper repair because they are undesirable for residential use. 3. That such change of zoning classification will encourage the most appropriate use of the subject land. Substantially the same as 2 above. 4. That said change of zoning classification will not alter the essential character of the district in which the property is located nor will such change substantially or permanently injure the appropriate use of adjacent property. Adjacent homes are now near a fast-moving highway and with the new interchange at Santa Fe and-extension of· Highway .70 to the east and wes.t, the traffic will be greatly increased, thereby making the area a less desirable place in which to live. The building of a mortuary will be a large investment and will pro- vide a high tax base which is badly needed in this area. Chairman Jones asked that anyone present favoring the rezoning state their views at this time. Page 462 Those favoring the rezoning were: Howard Noller 3616 South Logan Jerry Hersey 3639 South Logan Arthur W. Moore 3637 South Pennsylvania (These owners will sell their property to Mr. Drinkwine if it is rezoned) The Chainnan then asked for comments from those opposing the rezoning. Those opposed to the rezoning were: Romans moved: Hill seconded: Mervin Johnston for Elsie Johnston Highway #70 & Pennsylvania - A mortuary would be damaging and restrictive to other businesses; Ralph Bivens 3629 South Pennsylvania -He is opposed to 2 /3 of the block being sold, leaving the other 1 /3 in which his house is located which cannot be sold for any use. Mr. Herzog 3625 South Pennsylvania -He has rental property at this address and his renter will not stay if a mortuary is built because it is undesirable to live near a mortuary. Harry Sales 3601 South Logan Standard Service Station -It is his opinion that funeral processions Robert Kramer would create traffic h a zards. He believes there would be restrictions on his business as to noise that is normal for filling stations. He spoke for Mr. Covert who owns an auto body business at 3594 South Logan who also feels that his business operations would be restricted. 3628 South Pennsylvania -He believes that a mortuary at this location would lower the value of surrounding land. Processions would also create a traffic hazard for children of the area. That the hearing be closed. Ayes: Hill, Kreiling, Martin, Romans, Jones Nays: None Absent: Kelley Mr. Jones explained that Planning Commission members would need time to study a land economics survey in the subject area which had just become available today. He stated that all persons are welcome to stay and hear the survey contents but that it would be very unlikely that any decision could be r e ached tonight. Richard Simon, Atty. 3311 s. Broadway Rezoning Southwest Corner of Highway #70 & S. Clarkson Street. Hearing No. 34-59G October 8, 1959 October 22, 1959 November 5, 1959 November 19, 1959 January 7, 1960 January 21, 1960 At the request of the Chairman, the Planning Director summarized the report by Mr. Watson A. Bowes which considered the economics of land use in the subject area as a part .of an area bounded ·by Highway #70, South Clarkson Street, South Logan Street and Little Dry Creek. The Planning Director stated that Mr. Bowes recommended a new zone which would allow multiple- family dwellings and non-retail commercial uses. He also recommended R-3-A zoning for the entire area as a temporary zone to allow the redevelopment to occur between the present time and the time when a new classification might be instituted. Mr. Ray Ludwig and Mr. Walter Jorgenson were present and questioned quare footage land figures cited b y Mr. Bowes. In the discussion which followed, the Planning Director explained that this was the only criteria for comparing land sales throughout the subject and adjacent areas. It was agreed that the selling price for property in the subject area was something more than $2.00 per square foot but that the amount of such price occasioned by improvements could not be compared. Mr. Bowes' study specifically recommended against a gasoline service station use in any part of the area and likewise against any commercial zoning. Further discussion indicated that a mortuary use might well be allowed but that if such was allowed, the zoning ordinance shuld be properly amended to make mortuaries a pennitted use in an R-3-A zone as well as the present commercial zones, much in the same way that doctor's clinics are now allowed. Planning Commission members agreed that they would need more time to study the Bowes survey. The Planning Director indicated th a t copies were now being prepared and could be delivered to the homes of the Commission members on Friday evening. I I I I I I Page 463 It was agreed that a special meeting to consider this study and a needed rec ommendation to the City Council should be held on Tuesday evening, February 9, 1960 at 7:30 P . M. in the Council chamber. Mr. James Turre 3011 S. Broadway Zoning Amendment Mobile Homes Expansion Cherrelyn Trailer Court Hearing No. l-60A January 7, 1960 At the request of the Planning Commission Chairman, the Planning Director summarized a report titled "Reconsideration of Mobile Home Parks Zoning Ordinance" dated February 1, 1960. He pointed out that since mobile home parks are in fact a residential use that this must be considered in setting up locations f or them if they are to operate soundly. He noted that a tentative solution requiring that the mobile home parks be located adjoining a residential area and that a public hearing be held before the City Council might fill the demand for mobile home park spaces and still af f ord adjacent property owners every opportunity to pro- tect their interests through the public hearing. He also pointed out that if the tentative solution were followed, mobile home parks might be located in many areas which do not now have such parks such as the light industrial area be- tween Hampden and Tufts Avenue east of the railroad tracks and the Evans Avenue frontage in Scenic View. Mr. Hill questioned whether the Cherrelyn Mobile Home Park could not already expand under the present zoning provisions. It was pointed out that the existing provisions allow only an expansion of land area but in no case an increase in mobile home spaces (see Ordinance 27, Series of 1958). Mr. Martin agreed with Mr. Hill that he understood the number of spaces could be increased under the 1958 amendment. The Planning Director explained that the intent in 1958 had been to allow expansion only to meet the needs of mobile home parks regulations but not to allow the expansion of non-conforming uses such as mobile home courts in any way. In further discussion, it was agreed that although mobile home parks do not generate as many school age children as single-family uses, the State tax procedure sti ll does not allow them to carry any part of the school costs they generate. Therefore, the City should not facilitate any more mobile home parks than now exist. It was also considered that the area to the east of the Cherrelyn Mobile Home Park is vac:amt and presents a land use problem. If the residential property interests to the farther east were afforded an opportunity to express their views via a public hearing, an expansion of a mobile home park use might be a very reasonable use in this area. It was noted that there is only one mobile home park in the City of Englewood which is lo- cated adjoining a residential zone. It was pointed out that this park, the Cherrelyn Park, is the only one which has met the minimum regulations of the mobile home parks ordinance; in fact, this park has exceeded these requirements in many aspects. Mr. Jones commented that undoubtedly some other mobile home parks owners would view a provision conditioning an ex- p a nsion program possible location adjacent to a residential area as an attempt to favor only one mobile home park in Englewood. He noted, however, that the proximity of a residential use to a mobile home park which itself is a residential use is certainly the only practical way ot considering human needs, land values and the welfare of the community in determining how mobile home park demands might be met without increasing school costs. Martin moved: Hill seconded: That the Planning Office prepare a tentative amendment to allow the expansion o f existing mobile home parks whi ch abut residential zones and providing a public hearing at which the compliance with certain criteria can be determined. Such hearing would be held be- f ore the Planning Commission with recommendations made to the City Council which would have the sole authority to grant such permits. Ayes: Hill, Kreiling, Martin, R0mans, Jomes Nays: None Absent: Kelley Planning Commission City Master Plan No. 6 Downtown Development Hearing No. 6-60 The Planning Director presented a base map and three overlays picturing the results of the survey of existing and potential off-street parking, its usage and building t o which it is committed, if any. He explained that the results of the maps had been tabulated and analyzed in preliminary form and that this study would be prepared within the next two weeks. He noted that this is part of the base study needed to fulfill the City Council's request for a suggested off-street parking plan. The traffic circulation study which led to the one-way street system and an evaluation of that system is another major element needed before the Planning Commission can realistically recommend a plan f or the acquisition of off-street parking. Mr. Hill noted that the Chamber of Commerce off-street parking committee should be advised of this movement on behalf of the City in order that the two groups might pool their efforts toward the same goal. Mr. Nies stated that. he would be glad to present the study and its results to the Chamber Committee . Planning Office City Off-Street Parking Amendment Zoning Change to Bring Off- Street Parking Provision into Compliance with Supreme Court Rulin g. Hearing No. 7-60 The Planning Director read a memorandum to the Planning Commission from the City Manager on behalf of the City Council as f ollows: Page 464 "Inter-Office Memorandum TO: City Planning & Zoning Commission DATE: February 3, 1960 FROM: L. R. Rudd SUBJECT: PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO ZONING ORDINANCE TO ELIMINATE THE UNCONSTITUTIONAL OFF-STREET PARKING AND NON-CONFORMING USE PROVISIONS AS DECREED BY THE COLORADO STATE SUPREME COURT The City Attorney has advised the City Council that the City can no longer enforce any zoning ordinance provisions which are contrary to the recent Supreme Court decision, and therefore, they are asking that the Planning Commission prepare a tentative amendment so that the objectionable features will be eliminated from our present ordinance. It is my own obs ervation that this matter be expeditied as much as possible so as to clear the atmosphere for the benefit of the Building Inspector and all others concerned. /S / L. R. Rudd L. R. RUDD City Manager" In the discussion which foll owed , it was agreed that the Planning Commission must first know what the City Attorney feels are the specific contrary provisions in the City zoning ordinance at present. Only with this information could the Planning Commissi o n suggest amendments to change the existing provisions. The Planning Director was asked to arrange that the City Attorney attend the Planning Commission meeting on February 18. Mr. Jones stated that Denver is attempting to move their requirements for off-street parking into the building code instead of the City zoning ordinance in order to ~keep them active and still comply with the Supreme Court ruling. He suggested that this might be a wise move for Englewood to consider. Planning Of fice City Revision of Zoning Ordinance Frontage in R-3 -B Zone ":""' --- Hearing No. 8-60 The Planning Director reported that the recent amendment requiring 100-foot frontage for apartment houses in the R-3-B zone did not further restrict building of apartment houses fronting on side s ites. The trouble has arisen because the 6,000 square foot lot requirement still exists for all other uses in the R-3-B zone and there was no statement indicating that multiple-family uses must have 12,000 square feet minimum. He suggested that this could be clarified by amending the ordinance to provide that multiple- family dwelling uses in the R-3-B zone must have a minimum of 12,000 square feet. This pro- vision would be in addition to the existing 6,000 square feet provision for other uses in this zone. He noted that there may be some difficulty in side-yard setbacks. The Building Inspector has more information on this technicality. It was agreed that the Planning Office sh ould p repare a tentative amendment to the z oning ordinance to clarify this problem. Planning Commission City Master Plan No. 4 Financial and Population Forecast Hearing No. 36-59E October 22, 1959 November 5, 1959 November 19, 1959 December 3, 1959 December 17, 1959 January 21, 1960 The Planning Director presented copies of part of the basic research for Master Plan Section No. 4, Financial and Population Forecast, titled "Projecte d_ Development Valuation for School Costs in Scenic View Area of Englewood." He explained that the thirty-three page study had been underway since September of 1959 . Its primary purpose was to provide data to local authorities charged with the responsibility o f school district re-organization and annexa- tion policy within the City. The study attempts to project development in newly annexed areas in order to determine the relative cost versus revenue from each area at various stages. Planning Of fice City Revision of Zoning Ordinance Wrecking Yard Fences Hearing No. 8 (a)-60 The need f or requirements o fence wrecking yard industrial uses and other unsightly in- dustrial storage areas was discussed previously. It was agreed that the Planning Of fice should prepare a tentative amendment to require such fencing. Planning Conferences. The Planning Director asked each member of the Commission if they would be able to attaid the Boulder Conference. Mr. Jones said he would attend both daytime sessions. Mrs. Romans planned to attend the Friday daytime session. Mr. Nies and Mr. Lacy will attend the Friday session and Mr. Nies will attend the Saturday session. The Plannin g Director indicated that funds were available for transportation costs, registration and meals at the conference. - - - --- - ---- ----- -- I I I I I I Page 465 Mr. Joe Lacy , who has resigned as Englewood's Planning and Traffic Director to accept the position of City Manager for the City of Grand Junction, Colorado, was in final attendance in his capacity as Ex-Officio. Mr. Jones commended Mr. Lacy for his outstanding work as Planning Dir.ector, and further expressed the Commission's appreciation of his ef- forts in providing technical assistance in their planning problems. There being no further business to come before the Planning and Zoning Commission, the meeting was adjourned at 12:00 P. M. APPROVED Jewell M. Banfield Recording Secretary * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *·* * * * * * * SPECIAL MEETING OF THE CITY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 9, 1960 The meeting was called to order by Chairman Jones at 7:35 P. M. Members Present: Jones, Hill, Martin, Romans, Nies, Ex-Officio Members Absent: Kelley, Kreiling (34-59-I) Chairman Jones opened the meeting by stating that discussion was open to make a recommenda- tion to Council on the request by Mr. Simon for rezoning the southwest corner of Highway 70 and South Clarkson Street. He referred to the Land Utilization Study for the City of Englewood by A. G. Bowes and Son in considering the rezoning request. The following points of the Bowes Report were discussed: 1. The land values arrived at by the study. 2. The effect of the sale on the applicant and the adjacent and nearby property owners. 3. The fact that it is practically impossible to assemble the thirty-five ownerships studied in the report into one large integrated area that could be devoted to a well-planned commercial development. 4. Spot zoning and the undesirable commercial strip development that might follow. 5. The traffic and safety factors to consider. 6. The oversupply of the C zoned area in Englewood. 7. The fact that there are 174 families per filling station in Englewood whereas approximately 300 families are required to support each service station. Hill moved, Romans seconded: Under direction of City Council, Commission has made a complete and comprehensive study of the entire area with this particular area in mind and after such study, City Planning and Zoning Commission recom- mend to City Council that the request for C-2 zoning of the North 115 feet of property in NW quarter of Block 8, Higgins Englewood Gardens directly adjacent to south right-of-way line on Colorado Highway 70 be denied for the following reasons: 1. That this would constitute spot zoning and would not be g ood zoning practice. 2. C-2 zoning would establish a precedent for a beginning of a strip development that would in turn have a severe depreciating effect on the remainder of the property which would abut such development. 3. As it would be practically impossi b le to assemble all adjacent property into one ownership for commercial development, it would be unwise to create any commercial development in this area. 4. C-2 z oni ng of the subject property for a f illing station would have the effect of creating a safety problem at the intersection of South Clarkson 0 and East Jefferson Drive because of the large volume of traffic that is existing and will befurther increased by the develop- ment of the State Highway to the east and to the west. 5. Such C-2 zoning would tend to dilute the value of existing C-1 and C-2 land in the City of Englewood as our study indicates that there is an oversupply of these two zoning classifications. 6. Our studies indicate that there are 174 families per filling station in Englewood whereas approximately 300 families are re- quired to support each service station. There is no deficiency of service stations in the ~ity and no public need is shown for filling stations which has not already been satisfied by those presently existing in the City. A number of stations are presently located in the area.