HomeMy WebLinkAbout1963-12-05 PZC MINUTESPag e 734
MEMORANDUM TO THE ENGLEWOOD CITY COUNCIL REGARDING ACTION OR RECOMMENDATION OF THE CITY
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION.
DATE: November 21 , 1963
SUBJECT: Enforcement of Ordinance.
RECOMMENDATION :
Love moved:
Miles seconded: In view of the fact there is a new Zoning Ordinance, the Commission
recommends that the City Council investigate the practicality and the
means of enforcing the Ordinance as it now exists.
The motion carried unanimously.
Respectfully .submitted ,
By Order of the City Planning
and Zoning Commission.
Gertrude G. Welty
Recording Secretary
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
I. CALL TO ORDER.
CITY OF ENGLEWOOD PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
December 5 , 1963
The regular meeting of the Englewood Planning and Zoning Commission was called to order at
8:10 p.m. by Chairman Rice.
Members present: Carlson; Hill; Love ; Miles; Touchton ; Rice
Romans, Ex-officio
Members absent: None
Also present: Wayne Monson, Planning Aide
II . APPROVAL OF MINUTES.
Mr. Love suggested the Minutes of November 21, 1963 be amended:
Page 3 , "D(2) Love moved:
Miles seconded: In view of the fact there is a new Zoning Ordinance , the
Commission recommends that the City Council investigate
the practicality and the means of enforcing the Ordinance
as it now exists."
Hill moved:
Miles seconded: The minutes of November 21, 1963 be approved as amended.
AYES: Carlson; Hill; Love; Miles ; Touchton
NAYS: None
ABSTAINING: Rice
The motion carried.
III. JOHN . -TETER-McFARLAND
3700, 3800, 3900 , and
4000 Blocks South Grant,
Logan , Pennsylvania ,
Pearl and Washington.
Miles moved:
Love seconded: The Public Hearing be opened.
The motion carried unanimously.
REZONING
R-1-C to
R-2-B.
Mr. Rice asked Mrs. Romans to give a summary of this particular case.
CASE #11-63
Mrs. Romans stated Public Notice had been given in the Englewood Herald November 18 , 1963.
The property has been posted .. The rezoning application and fee had been received by the
Planning Office on September 18 , 1963. The application was made by Mr. and Mrs . Ira John,
Mr. and Mrs. Noel Teter, and Mr. and Mrs. R. D. McFarland. It was pointed out that the
proponents had requested the change to be made when the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance was
being adopted. The Commission felt they could not recommend such a change at that time,
inasmuch as the change covered a large area, and had not been included on the Map which was
published in the Englewood Herald . It was felt this area should be considered at a separate
time.
I
I
I
I
I
I
Page 735
Mrs. Romans commented there were many two-family uses in the area . It was also pointed out
that the Building Code .will control the height of ceilings , size of windows , and the amount
of floor area, etc., of any new basement apartments.
Mr. Rice asked the proponents to present their case.
Mrs. Ira John
4075 S. Grant -stated a petition with a list of reasons requesting the rezoning had been
submitted and forwarded to the City Council at the time the Ordinance was
adopted. She briefly outlined these reasons:
1. The area is in close proximity to R-2 zoning , and to the schools.
2. Apartments would be available for teachers.
3. Most of the existing apartments are rented.
4. Elderly people are dependent upon the apartments for their livlihood.
Mr. Kolancy
3853 S. Logan -stated he had owned his home for 15 years. There is a small house in
the rear of the lot that is rented. He asked what effect this rezoning would
have on his property?
Mr . Rice asked if it was a registered use? A check was made of the list of registered uses
submitted by the Building Department, and it was found that Mr. Kolancy's property was a
registered non-conforming use. The proposed change, if approved, would not af f ect his
property.
Mrs.Dorothy Rich
4071 S. Pennsylvania stated she had a basement apartment and could not afford to s tay in
her home if it were not for this rental income.
Mr. Rice asked the opponents to present their case.
Dr. Mezen
3990 S. Pearl -felt the request was "totally unreasonable"; that just because there were
illegal uses in existence , there was no excuse for changing zoning. Dr.
Mezen felt it would depreciate property; the increased traffic would increase hazards on
the streets, and the schools would be overburdened.
Chalmerse Parker
3996 S. Grant -felt it was the fault of the City Council and Building Department that these
uses have gone in. He pointed out that in 1940 and 1941, information given
out by City Hall was that the area was zoned single-family. He f e 1 t the 50 foot minimum
frontage was too small an area for two families. Mr. Parker stated he felt people who
lived in duplexes and basement apartments were of a lower economic class. Mr. Parker also
stated the Statutes set forth that zoning should be for the health , safety , morals and
welfare of the community, and he did not feel any of these factors were represented in this
case.
Mr. Stan Lassiter
4100 S. Pearl -stated he felt the rezoning would only be legalizing the apartments, of which
few could meet Code requirements.
Mr. Kolancy
3853 S. Logan -stated he did not see how a change could be made that could force people to
sell or move.
Mr. Rice asked for further comments from the proponents.
Mrs. Ira John
4075 S. Grant -stated there were 247 signers of the petition that was circulated in the
area.
Mrs . Voight
3930 s. Pearl -stated she did not feel renters of duplexes and basement apartments were
"lower class" people.
Mr. John Katchur
3801 S. Grant -stated he did not feel it was a fact the rezoning would depreciate property;
that it was only one opinion. Mr. Katchur stated he was an appraiser by
profession.
Mrs. Ducker
3940 s. Grant -asked if separate kitchen facilities were installed for an elder member of
the family, if the residence would be considered a two-family use?
Mr. Rice replied that it would be.
Mr. Rice asked for further comments from opponents.
Mr. Duncan
4039 s. Logan -stated he had recently purchased his home on the assumption that the zoning
would remain single-family.
Mr. Brown
4030 s. Washington -stated he purchased his hone in March with the pre-requisite that the
area must be in a single-family classification.
Mr. Stan Lassiter
4100 S. Pearl -stated he felt the school population would increase and the schools were
filled to their capacity at present.
Mr. Miles asked for a show of hands of proponents and opponents. Twenty-one persons raised
their hands as being proponents; seventeen persons raised their hands as being opponents.
Mr. Hill moved:
Mr. Love seconded: The Public Hearing be closed.
The motion carried unanimously.
Page 736
Hill moved:
Touchton seconded: In view of controversy in the area and the additional information presented
at the Hearing, the action be tabled until the next meeting.
The motion carried unanimously.
IV . WALTER BOGGS
4600 Block South
Acoma , east side.
Love moved:
REZONING
R-2-B to
R-4
Carlson seconded: The Public Hearing be opened.
The motion carried unanimously.
CASE #12-63
Mrs. Romans gave a summary of this rezoning case, and of previous rezoning request including
the same block. Public Notice was given for this request on November 18, 1963 , and the
property has been properly posted ; the request is for R-4 zoning. The area was zoned R-2-B
under the 1963 Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance. In 1962, a Hearing was held on a Commission
initiated change of zoning from R-1-D to T , covering the 4400 , 4500 , 4600 , and 4700 blocks
of South Acoma. Mr. Wm. Hill was a proponent of this change, and indicated a desire to have
an off-street parking lot on his property on the east side of the 4600 block. The rezoning
was not recommended to City Council.
The present application was made by Mr. Walter Boggs on October 11, 1963. The permitted uses
in the R~4 zone district were listed and it was emphasized that no retail was permitted.
Mr . Rice asked the proponents to speak.
Mr. Robert Carr stated he was representing Mr. Walter Boggs. The property Mr. Boggs owns is
presently vacant. The street and alley that was in question in 1962 have been dedicated.
Mr. Boggs also wants an off-street parking lot on this property to serve the businesses on
Broadway. Mr. Carr did not feel it likely the area would develop as residential; there is
a drainageway across the property and he felt the only practical use would be a parking lot.
Mr. Rice asked the opponents to speak.
Mr. Johnson
4601 S. Acoma -asked what was the frontage of Mr. Boggs' property?
Mr. Carr replied that Mr. Boggs' property was 80 foot frontage.
Mr. Johnson pointed out that the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance sets forth that a parking
lot must have 100 foot frontage, and said the lot in question would accommodate only a sing le
or two-family residence without a variance. Mr. Johnson also pointed out that all other
properties would need a variance were they to be used for other than residential. It was
also stated that there was adequate parking to serve the businesses on Broadway.
Mr. George Wood
4611 S. Acoma -stated he did not think the lot would be used to park cars, but to store
trucks , etc., while they were repaired. He was against the rezoning.
Mrs. Caldwell
4631 S. Acoma -stated they owned property directly across the street from Mr. Boggs' property,
and they had not had any trouble with flooding.
Mr. Henderson
4680 S. Acoma -stated that if the area were paved for a parking lot, it would increase
whatever problems there were now in relation to the drainage and flooding.
Mr. Jack Rice
4675 S. Acoma -stated it was a residential area with no need for a parking lot.
Mr. Hugh Williams
4621 S. Acoma -stated he was opposed to the request.
Mr. Walitalo
4650 S. Acoma -stated he was opposed to the request.
Mr. J. Dodson
4620 S. Acoma -stated he felt the lot could be developed residentially, and was opposed to
the rezoning request.
Mr. Carr stated he felt it better to put the land to a use than to leave it vacant, as Mr.
Boggs does not feel it economically feasible to use it residentially.
Mr. Carlson asked if Mr. Boggs had asked the people on Broadway if they needed additional
parking? Mr . Carr stated that Mr. Wm. Hill has indicated he would like to use the proposed
parking lot to serve his businesses on Broadway.
Miles moved:
Hill seconded: The Public Hearing be closed.
The motion carried unanimously.
Love moved:
Miles seconded: In view of the history of the area and the strong opposition to the request,
the Planning Commission recommend to City Council the rezoning request be
denied.
The motion carried unanimously.
I
I
I
I
I
I
Page 737
V. OLD BUSINESS.
A. Fout Subdivision Case #10-63C
The Planning Director stated the preliminary plats had been sent to the various departments
f or review; not all plats have been returned.
No action was taken.
B. Action Committee.
I
The Planning Director stated a special meeting of the Committee had been called for
December 6, at 9:30 a.m. to discuss the proposed installation o ~ a left-turn signal at
Girard and South Broadway. Commission members were invited to attend.
VI. NEW BUSINESS .
A. Subdivision.
The .Planning Director ·stated the preliminary plat for an indust ial park subdivision be-
tween Yale and Bates had been received. No application has been made and the fee has not
been paid.
No action .was taken.
B. Fairley Rezoning
R-2-B to
I-1
Case #15-63
Mrs. Romans stated that a rezoning application has been received from Mr. William Young
for the Fairley's to rezone the land east of the I-1 zoning in the 3100 block to the center
line o f South Galapago and Lots 1, 2, and 3, of the Corder Subdivision.
Discussion ensued.
quarterly rezoning
Hearing as soon as
Hill moved:
Under the Rules and Regulations of the Plannling Commission, the next
hearings would be in March, 1964; however ~ th~ applicant would like the
feasible.
Love seconded: The application be tabled until an interpretation of the Rules and Regulations
is received from the City Attorney; Hearing Qate on the application to be
set at a subsequent meeting.
The motion carried unanimously.
It was moved, seconded, and carried the meeting be adjourned.
Respectfully submitted,
Gertrude G. Welty
Recording Secretary
MEM ORANDUM TO THE ENGLEWOOD CITY COUNCIL REGARDING ACTION OR RECOMMENDATION OF THE CITY
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION.
DATE: December 5, 1963
SUBJECT: Denial of Rezoning Request -4600 block S. Acoma
RECOMMENDATION:
Love moved :
Miles seconded: i In view of the history of the area and the s~ron~ opposition to the
request, the Planning Commission recommend to City Council the re-
zoning request be denied.
The motion carried unanimously.
Respectfully submitted,
By Order of the City Planning
and Zoning Commission.
Gertrude G. Welty
Recording Secretary
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *