Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2001-08-21 PZC MINUTES•' • • • CITY OF ENGLEWOOD PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION August 21, 2001 I. CALL TO ORDER The regular meeting of the City Planning and Zoning Commission was called to order at 7 p .m. in the City Council Chambers at the Englewood Civic Center, Vice Chair Waggoner presiding. Present: Willis, Krieger, Lathram, Mueller, Waggoner, Welker Absent: Rempel, Weber (both absent with prior notice) Late: Stockwell Staff Present: Senior Planner Langon Planner I Donnell y Senior Manager Dannemiller Assistant City Attorney Reid II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES July 1 7, 2001 Vice-chair Waggoner stated that the Minutes of July 17, 2001 were to be considered for approval. Welker moved : Willis seconded: The 1Vlinutes of Jul y 1 7, 2001 be approved. Mr. Welker asked that Page 5, first paragraph , fourth line, be amended to state "east" of the hillcrest rather than west of the hillcrest. The vote on approval of the Minutes of July 17, 2001 , as amended: AYES : NAYS : ABSTAIN: ABSENT: Krieger, Lathram, Waggoner, Welker, Willis None Mueller Stockwell, Rempel, Weber The motion carried. Ill. MGM SUPPLY SUBDIVISION 3296 South Zuni Street CASE #SUB 2001-03 Mr. Waggoner stated that the issue before the Commission is a Public Hearing on a Pre- liminary Plat for the proposed MGM Supply Subdivision . H:'GROl.JPI BOARDS\PLAN COMMIM inu1cs 1M inu1cs "OO ll PC:.t 08-2001A.doc • • Ms . Lathram stated that her firm does business with the applicant and MGM Supply Com- pany. She stated that she does not feel that her business association with this company will impact her ability to render a fair and impartial decision regarding the proposed subdivision. Mr. Waggoner asked for a motion to open the Public Hearing. Willis moved: Lathram seconded: The Public Hearing on Case #SUB 2001-03 be opened. AYES: NAYS : ABSENT: Lathram, Mueller, Welker, Willis, Krieger, Waggoner None Stockwell, Rempel, Weber The motion carried. Senior Planner Langon was sworn in. Ms. Langon testified that the Public Hearing is on ap- plication from Bruce Miller for property on the northeast corner of West Floyd Avenue and South Zuni Street. Mr. Miller is owner of the Denver Drywall Company, owner of the sub- ject property. Ms . Langon stated that notice of the Public Hearing was published in the Englewood Herald on August 10, 2001, and adjacent and adjoining property owners were notified by certified mail, return card requested; 10 cards have been returned, one has not been returned. These letters were mailed on August 9, 2001 . Ms. Langon stated that Title 10 of the Englewood Municipal Code requires that unplatted property be subdivided by the 1'vlajor Subdivision process. No minimum lot size or street frontage is required in the 1-2, General Industrial Zone District, the zone classification ap- plied to the subject property. The total site comprises 2.34 acres in size ; the proposed subdivision will create two lots -the larger of which will be 1.72 acres, the smaller lot will be .62 acres in size. The larger lot is presently developed with two warehouse structures, storage area, and required parking. The smaller lot is developed with an office building, constructed in 2000; this lot does meet the landscaping and parking standards set forth in Title 16 of the EMC. Both parcels front on South Zuni street, and are addressed on South Zuni Street. The small .62 acre lot is tenanted by MGM Supply Company. Mr. Floyd, president of MGM Supply Company, is requesting the subdivision to enable use of the subdivided lot as collateral for a business loan. Ownership of the site will be retained by Mr. Miller. Ms. Langon stated that South Zuni Street and West Floyd Avenue is the boundary line be- tween the City of Englewood and the City of Sheridan. Properties to the south in Sheridan are zoned E-light industrial; property west of South Zuni Street and north of West Floyd Avenue is also zoned E-light industrial; the area west of South Zuni Street and south of West Floyd is zoned A, residential. • Ms. Langon stated that the proposed Subdivision Plat has been reviewed by the Develop- ment Review Team (ORT), composed of representatives of City Departments. Comments H:I GROUP'BOAROS\PL.\NCOMM\Minu1cs\Minu1cs :001 1PC:-.t 08 .:00IA.doc 2 ,, • • and changes suggested by the ORT were transmitted to the applicant, and modifications have been made on the plat to comply with the requirements. Ms. Langon stated that the proposed subdivision was also referred to Sheridan, but there has been no response. Ms. Langon stated that Title 10 of the EMC cites 10 criteria that the Commission must con- sider when reviewing a proposed subdivision. These criteria are set forth in the Staff Re- port. Ms. Langon stated that the application meets all the development requirements, and is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Ms. Langon stated that to the best of her knowledge, all issues raised during ORT review have been addressed and resolved. Ms. Langon stated that Community Development staff recommends approval of the preliminary plat. Mr. Stockwell entered the meeting and took his seat with members of the Commission. Mr. Welker discussed a discrepancy between the legal description written on the plat and figures shown on the depiction of the subdi vi sion. He questioned whether changes called out by the Engineering Services di visio n noted in the staff report have, in fact, been made, and what documents were initiall y reviewed that instigated the Engineering Services divi- sion changes. Mr. Stockwell noted that all documents should have been provided the Commission. Discussion ensued. Mr. Welker stated that he just wants clarification and verification of the legal description and the depiction of the proposed subdivision. Mr. Waggoner agreed that the legal description on the Plat does not match the drawing of the proposed parcel division. Discussion ensued . Ms. Lathram noted that measurements cited in a legal description to get to the "point of beginning" would not show on the plat. Mr. Welker noted that there is a 12 foot discrepancy on the easterl y line, and the westerl y line has a discrepancy of 15 feet. He reiterated that his objective is to make sure the legal description and depiction of the subdivision is correct. Mr. Waggoner stated that the legal description and the drawing of the proposed subdivision must agree . Ms . Reid suggested that possibly the Commission could require clarification of the legal de- scription as a condition if they decide to conditionall y approve the preliminary plat. Mr. Waggoner pointed out that there is a six inch "jog" that is not addressed. Ms. Mueller stated that the "jog" is addressed in the second paragraph of the description . Mr. Welker stated that the Zun i/Floyd city limit boundary should also be indicated on the plat. Mr. Stockwell asked about the other departmental comments noted in the staff report. Mr. Welker stated that the Commission has been given to understand the corrections have been made . • Mr. Stockwell asked about requirement of sidewalk installation; he noted that the site is ad- jacent to residential development in Sheridan. H:'GROUP'BOAROS\PLA NCOMM\Mi nu1cs •Minu1cs :oo l\PCM 08-:00 I A.doc 3 • • • Mr. Welker suggested that adjacent zoning designations should be shown on the plat. He also noted that the nearest park facilities are not shown on the plat. He asked about flood plain certification -is the site prone to flooding. Is the drainage plan adequate. Ms. Langon noted that the historical drainage flow has not been modified. Mr. Stockwell asked if additional drainage would be created. Ms. Langon reiterated that the historical drainage has not been modified; the applicants do have a retention facility for storm waters. Mr. Waggoner asked if additional development is proposed. Ms. Langon reiterated that there are two warehouse structures on the large lot, and a new office building on the small lot. Mr. Welker asked if the applicant has presented the easement documents, and Treasurer's Certificate on payment of taxes. Ms. Langon responded affirmatively. He asked about an easement for the rail spur line shown on the plat. Mr. Waggoner asked if there were further questions of staff . The applicants were asked to present their case. Mr. Bruce Miller and Tod Floyd were sworn in . Mr. Miller testified that all of the property is held in the name of Denver Drywall Company. The new building was constructed in 2000 on the .62 acre parcel. The bank has asked for collateral for the construction loan, and they do not want to pledge the entire 2.34 acre site for this loan . Mr. Welker inquired about the rail spur shown on the plat. Mr. Floyd stated that the com- pany owns the rail spur line off the switch, and the spur does run through the property. He suggested that there is an easement for the railroad. Mr. Welker asked if the easement is a dedicated easement; if it is not dedicated, he suggested that it should be. Mr . Miller stated that the spur was bought and paid for by his company. Mr. Welker pointed out that it ap- pears the spur also extends onto the property on the north . Mr. Miller stated that he owns the northern property, also. Mr. Welker further discussed the need for rail easement. Mr . Stockwell expressed the opinion that the Federal Government has given the rail com- panies permission to have lines on private property. Ms. Reid referenced the plat, and noted that it may be a "prescriptive easement" but in the event there is no easement, there doesn 't have to be an easement. She further advised that there is no reason to require an easement as part of the consideration of the subdivision; this would be a civil matter between the property owners and the rail company. Discussion followed. Mr . Welker reiterated that if there is a rail spur easement, it should be shown on the plat. Ms. Reid suggested that the Commission may want to make this a con- dition of their approval. H.IGROU P'BOAROSIPLA NCOMMIMinu1cs 1M1nu1es 2001 \PCM 0 8-cOOIA.doc 4 • Mr. Miller reiterated that this is a private spur line. Mr. Welker stated that it is strange the rail company doesn't have an easement. He pointed out that there may be no construction across easements. He further stated that he was not aware that Mr. Miller also owned the property to the north. • • Mr . Floyd addressed the concern regarding drainage. He said that when the new building was constructed, they put in a retention system. He stated that there is not much drainage onto the property, and they have provided two large tanks for retention; both slowly drain into a pond, which leaches into the ground. Mr. Stockwell asked if there is any chemical runoff from this property. Mr. Miller stated there is not. The issue of legal description and depiction of parcel split was raised for further discussion. Mr . Floyd stated that he did not know what the problem is between the engineer and the surveyor figures. The applicants were advised that the legal description figures need to cor- respond to figures in the depiction of the parcel split. Mr. Waggoner asked if there were further questions of the applicant. He then asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to address the Commission on this pro- posed subdivision plat. No one indicated they wanted to address the Commission . Mr. Waggoner asked for a motion to close the Hearing . Lathram moved : Willis seconded: The Public Hearing on Case #SUB 2001-03 be closed. AYES: NAYS : Mueller, Stockwell , Welker, Willis , Krieger , Lathram None ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: Rempel, Weber The motion carried. Mr. Waggoner asked the pleasure of the Commission. Stockwell moved : Krieger seconded: Case #SUB 2001-03, MGM Supply Subdivision Preliminary Plat, be conditionally approved. Ms. Lath ram asked if the 10 points cited for Commission consideration need to be ad- dressed in the motion. Ms. Reid stated that the 10 points will be covered in the Findings of Fact. Mr . Welker reiterated that he wants to make sure the plat has the correct legal description and property split depiction. He asked that the legal description be verified and clarified . Mr . Stockwell stated that the motion had to be very specific regarding what requires verifi- cation and clarification. Mr . Welker stated that he is concerned with the entire legal de- H·I G ROt:P' BOARDS I PLA NCOM~M i nu1es 1 Minu1es :oo I' PCM 08-200 I A.doc 5 • • • scription -all figures cited must coincide with those shown on the plat on the property split. Welker moved: Lathram seconded: The motion to conditionally approve Case #SUB 2001-03 be amended to include the following: 1. The legal description cited on the Plat must be clarified. 2. The legal description cited on the Plat must conform to the drawing of property division. Mr. Stockwell and Ms. Krieger accepted the friendly amendment. The vote on the motion to conditionally approve Case #SUB 2001-03 , with the aforecited conditions, was called: AYES: NAYS: Stockwell, Welker, Willis, Krieger, Lathram, Mueller, Waggoner None ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: Rempel, Weber The motion carried . IV. HISTORIC DESIGNATION 2734 South Acoma Street CASE #HD 2001-01 Mr. Waggoner stated that this issue is a Public Hearing, and asked for a motion to open the Hearing. Willis moved: Lathram seconded: The Public Hearing on Case #HD 2001-01 be opened. AYES : NAYS: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: Welker, Willis, Krieger, Lathram, Mueller, Stockwell None None Rempel , Weber The motion carried. Ms. Lauri Dannemiller, Senior Manager in Community Development was sworn in. Ms. Dannemiller stated that the application for Historic Designation of 2734 South Acoma was received on July 12 , 2001, and notice of the Public Hearing was published in the Engle- wood Herald on August 10, 2001. Ms. Dannemiller stated that the applicants are Bill and Laura Bartnick, owners of the subject property . Ms. Dannemiller reviewed criteria for historical preservation of an individual building. H:1GROUP'BOAROS\PLANCOMM\Minu1cs 1Minu1cs cOOl l PC:l-1 08-cOOIA .doc 6 • • • Only buildings or structures which have been in existence for at least fifty (50) years, or dis- tricts in which the majority of structures have been in existence for at least fifty (50) years may be designated. In addition, such building, structure, or district must also meet one of the fol- lowing criteria: • A building, structure, or a majority of structures within a district which have some con- nection to events or persons significant to the history of the City of Englewood, Arapa- hoe County, the State of Colorado, or the United States; or • A building, structure or group of structures within a district which embody distinguish- ing characteristics of an architectural type inherently valuable for a study of a period, style, method of construction, or of indigenous materials or craftsmanship; or • A building, structure or a group of structures within a district which exemplifies or re- flects the broad culture, political, economic, or social history of the City of Englewood, Arapahoe County, the State of Colorado, or the United States; or • Those buildings, structures or districts within the City which are listed in the National Register of Historic Places shall be construed as having local historic designation, and subject to the same provisions as any local historic building, structure or district. Ms. Dannemiller stated that the house at 2734 South Acoma Street was constructed in 1919, as verified by Arapahoe County Assessor's Records. The structure is representative of the "arts and crafts" architectural style interior, thereby meeting criteria #ii. The property was used at one time by George I. Scheneman, a woodworker in Englewood, a require- ment of criteria #iii. Ms. Dannemiller discussed the arts and crafts architectural style, and noted the photos of the interior of the home reflect facets of this architectural style. The arts and crafts style epitomizes a style of home built in early Englewood. Ms. Dannemiller stated that the Community Development staff recommends that Historic Designation be granted to this property. Mr. Waggoner asked what the advantage is to a property owner to have Historic Designa- tion. Are there funds available for preservation efforts of such properties. Ms. Dannemiller stated there are no tax credits available to the property owner, and no other financial incen- tives to pursue the designation available from the City of Englewood. Ms. Dannemiller stated that preservation funds are available through the State for public properties -such as the Skerritt House or the Englewood Depot. There may be funds for private homeowners if available, and if the site is in a Certified Local Government city.. Ms. Dannemiller pointed out that the request by Ms. Bartnick is the first request for Historic Designation by a private homeowner . H:'GROUPIBOARDS IPLANCOMM\M1nu1cs ,Minu1cs :oo I \PCM 08-200 I A.doc 7 • • • Mr. Waggoner asked if there are other residences in this area that might be eligible for His- toric Designation . Ms. Dannemiller stated that she did not know for a fact, but suspected that there could be other homes eligible for the HD. Ms. Krieger asked about homes in the Arapahoe Acres area. Ms. Dannemiller stated that the Arapahoe Acres property owners have pursued historic designation of their area through the State ; it is designated on the State Register as an Historic District. Mr. Willis asked if staff anticipates more private owners coming forward to seek HD for their property. Ms. Dannemiller stated that she hoped there would be further applications from private property owners. She suggested that possibly the lack of financial incentives on the local level is inhibiting applicants. Ms. Dannemiller suggested the possibility of strengthening the ordinance and consider becoming a Certified Local Government, which can provide financial incentives to properties that are granted historic designation. Mr. Willis asked what is to prevent a property owner from "gutting" the interior of a home after the "structure " has been granted h istoric designation . Ms. Krieger stated that the home would not be "historic" any more. Ms. Dannemiller agreed; she pointed out that at the time the Ordinance was enacted, the determination w as made by the Commission and City Council that no restrictions would be placed -no prohibition of remodeling and reno- vation would be enacted as part of the ordinanc e. She commented that a property owner who takes the incentive to request HD for their home will undoubtedly take steps to pre- serve it. There is nothing, however, to prevent sale to someone not interested in preserving the historic character of the home. Brief discussion ensued . Laura Bartnick was sworn in. Ms. Bartnick testified to her interest in preserving her home, and preser v ing and improv in g the quality of her neighborhood. She stated that she is not an architect, but she has taken some arc h itectural classes , and she is aware of the architec- tural periods o f se v eral of the structures i n the neighborhood. Ms. Bartnick stated that she had hoped for tax credits or grant monies; she needs a letter from the municipality stating that the property has received local HD to quali fy for any financial benefits. Ms. Bartnick stated that she would be very cautious about sale of her home once the HD is granted. Mr. Welker asked if the applicant would support ordinance restrictions to require preserva- tion of architectural style and character after HD is granted . Ms . Bartnick stated that she would support provisions to require maintenance of the integrity and style of the property. Mr. Welker recalled concerns about imposing district-wide restrictions at the time the ordi- nance was initially considered. He commented that Ms. Bartnick indicates support of re- strictions that would run with property and that buyers would be aware of restrictions on remodeling and renovation of the structure. Ms. Dannemiller discussed the possibility of ordinance revisions if the Commission so de- sired, and means to provide HD homeowners tax credits . H·'G RO UP'BOARDSIPLANCOMMI Mmu11:s 1M inu tcs cOO ll PC M 08-cOOI A doc 8 • • • Mr. Welker asked if anyone other than a property owner ask for HD or a property. Mr. Stockwell suggested it could be requested by a corporation. Ms. Dannemiller stated that the request must come from the property owner. Mr. Willis asked about modifications such as installation of new windows in a historically designated house, noting that new window styles and improvements make a home much more energy efficient. At what point does architectural integrity over-ride the practicality of energy efficiency. Ms. Dannemiller stated that there is room for flexibility and some modi- fications may be allowed so long as the integrity of the architectural style is preserved. Mr. Willis asked if the City of Englewood is registered as a local historical agency. Ms. Dannemiller stated that the City is not so registered. Mr. Waggoner asked if the Englewood Historical Society is involved in this issue. Ms. Dannemiller stated that the Englewood His- torical Society reviewed the Ordinance when it was being drafted, but they are not in- volved in consideration of HD applications and the approval process. Mr. Waggoner ques- tioned whether the Englewood Historical Society should be involved on individual applica- tions . Brief discussion ensued . Mr. Willis stated that if staff anticipates additional private homeowners applying for HD for their properties, perhaps the ordinance needs to be reviewed and revised . Ms. Mueller stated that she agreed. She noted that this exterior of 2734 South Acoma Street does not appear to be "original", and cited trim, porch railings, etc. She suggested that the Ordi- nance might specify where and to what extent appearances may be changed. Ms. Krieger stated that under the present ordinance, designation seems dependent on whatever infor- mation is presented to staff and the Commission. Mr. Welker exp ressed his opinio n that the goal is to determine whether a property "repre- sents a styl e" and provide encouragement to a property owner to improve the property but gear the improvements to returning the property to the style and character when initially built. He agreed that the subject house may have had new siding and porch railings in- stalled. Mr. Welker agreed there is need to revisit the Ordinance provisions, and include provisions that changes may be allowed, but changes "from " a particular style should not be allowed. Ms. Dannemiller suggested a study session on the historic designation ordinance if the Commission wanted to review the Ordinance .. Mr. Willis asked if there are other cities that are registered as local historic designation agencies. Ms. Dannemiller stated that there are several, and not all of them are in the metro area. Mr. Willis asked why have historical designation if there are no incentives for the property owners to seek that designation. Under the present ordinance, a property owner pays a $100 application fee in the hopes of getting the designation and possible fi- nancial assistance, but it isn't a given even if the designation is granted . Mr. Welker stated that there are some things that should be protected, such as architectural styles and histori- cal sites. H.1GROUP'BOARDS\PLANCOM M'M1nu teS1M1nu1cs :OOllPCM 08-200\A doc 9 • • • Mr. Waggoner asked if there is any place in the Ordinance that requires a historically des- ignated property to be open for public viewing. He commented that just driving by a property one might not know it has historical significance. Ms. Dannemiller stated that pri- vate properties are not required to be open for public viewing. Property owners are given a certificate stating that the property has received historic designation. Mr. Waggoner asked if there were further questions of staff or of the applicant. No further questions were asked. Willis moved: Lathram seconded: The Public Hearing on Case #HD 2001-01 be closed. AYES: NAYS: Welker, Willis, Krieger, Lathram, Mueller, Stockwell, Waggoner None ABST A IN : None ABSE NT: Rempel, Weber The motion carried . Mr. Waggoner asked the pleasure of the Commission. Welker moved: Krieger seconded : The Planning Commission recommend that Historic Designation be granted to 2 734 South Acoma Street. AYES : NAYS : Welker, Willis, Krieger, Lathram , Mueller, Stockwell, Waggoner None ABST A IN: None ABSE N T: Rempel , Weber The motion carried. v. HISTORIC DESIGNATION 2 775 South Delaware Street CASE #HD 2002-02 Mr. Waggoner noted that there was no staff report regarding this case in the packet. Ms . Dannemiller addressed the Commission , and stated that the applicant, Ms . Bartnick, has requested that the Public Hearing on this request be continued to a date not specified. Staff supports the request by Ms. Bartnick. Mr. Waggoner asked if there is a reason to open the Public Hearing. Ms. Dannemiller stated that the Public Hearing was advertised i n the Englewood Herald on August 10, 2001 , and that City Attorney Brotzman advised that if the Commission opened the Public Hearing and continued it to a date not spec ified , there would not be need to readvertise the Hear- ing . H GROUP'BOA RD S\PLAN CO MMIM1 nu1cs ,Minu 1cs c OOl \PC~ QS.;OOI A.doc 10 • Stockwell moved: Willis seconded: The Public Hearing on Case #HD 2001-02 be opened. AYES: NAYS: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: Willis, Krieger, Lathram, Mueller, Stockwell Waggoner, Welker None Rempel, Weber The motion carried. Stockwell moved: Krieger seconded: That Case #HD 2001-02 be continued to a date not specified. AYES: NAYS: ABSTAIN: ABSENT : Krieger, Lathram, Mueller, Stockwell, Welker, Willis, Waggoner None None Weber, Rempel The motion carried . VI. DIRECTOR'S CHOICE • Ms. Langon reminded members of the Planning Commission of the picnic scheduled for August 24 1h at Cushing Park, from 11 a.m. to 2 p.m.; members of the Commission and their families are invited. • Ms. Langon reminded members of the Commission of the ice cream social planned for the evening of August 30 , also at Cushing Park; this is from 6 p.m. to 8 p.m. Staff has been asked to obtain a count of those who will be in attendance, and how many family members will be in attendance. Members indicated they would be in attendance, and several of them indicated they would have family members with them . Staff will turn those numbers in to the City Manager's Office. Ms. Langon stated that the next meeting of the Commission will be on September S1 h -a Wednesday evening because of the Labor Day Holiday on Monday. At this time, Mr. Gra- ham is scheduled to provide an update on the General Iron Works site; however, Mr. Gra- ham has been out of the office because of illness; this may necessitate a change in the agenda. Ms. Langon asked for clarification regarding the MGM Supply Subdivision plat -does the Commission want to see the plat with the changes that were requested this evening, or did they intend that it be submitted to City Council once staff has verified the changes. Mr. Stockwell pointed out that the regulations state that the plat will come back to the Planning Commission for review . Mr. Waggoner stated that he would like to view the plat again be- fore recommending approval to City Council. H:'GRO UP'BOAROSI PLANCOMM\Minutesl Minutes :OOl l PCM 08-:00IA.doc 11 • VII. A TIORNEY'S CHOICE • • Ms. Reid discussed a recently approved attendance policy adopted by City Council, and applicable to all Boards and Commissions appointed by the Council. She noted that this ordinance states that if any board or commission has an attendance policy in place that is more restrictive than this proposed by Council, it does not have to be changed; no policy can be less restrictive than that proposed by Council. Ms. Reid stated that in her opinion, the policy the Commission presently follows is more restrictive than the Council proposal, and they do not have to modify the current policy. Mr. Stockwell disagreed with Ms. Reid, and stated that the current Planning Commission policy is less restrictive than what is proposed by Council. Discussion ensued. Mr. Waggoner stated that minutes of some boards or commissions indicate whether an ab- sence is "excused" or "unexcused". Ms. Reid stated that in general it is the determination of the Chairman to rule an absence excused or unexcused. The Planning Commission usu- ally notes that an absence is with or without prior notice. Discussion ensued. Inasmuch as the Recording Secretary is the individual making calls to notify members of the meeting, and it is typically the Recording Secretary called by individuals not attending the meeting, it is suggested that the Recording Secretary of the Planning Commission make the determina- tion if an absence is "excused" for cause, or is "unexcused" . The determination was also made that the current Planning Commission attendance policy does not need to be revised at this time. VIII. COMMISSIONER'S CHOICE Mr. Willis discussed a house on South Clarkson Street several blocks to the north that is for sale ; it appears to be a "homestead" house with quite a bit of property around it. The City Ditch cuts through the site, which may impact division of the site into multiple building sites . He asked if this site is on the historic register . Mr. Waggoner stated that this is the McMurtry property. Ms. Langon stated that she did not know if the structure is historic; she related that she has recently spoken to a representative of the owners, and they indicated that they will be "se- lective" in sale and subsequent use of the property. Ms. Langon stated that the site is owned by a "group", and the woman who was living in the house was allowed to remain in the premises so long as she could take care of herself. Mr. Willis stated he understood they are asking $1,000,000 for this property. Ms. Krieger stated that a property immediately in the rear of the McMurtry property sold for $400,000 within the last year. Mr. Welker stated that this site has been discussed in the open space meeting he attended recently. He stated that the site might be considered for open space /park land . There was nothing further brought forth for discussion . The meeting was declared adjourned . H·IGROUP' BOARDS' PLANCOMM\Minu1cslMinu1es :001 1PCM os.:001 A doc 12 • • • H:IGROUPIBOARDSIPLANCOMM\MinutcslMinutcs ZOO I \PC~ OS.ZOO! A.doc 13