Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2001-11-20 PZC MINUTES• • • CITY OF ENGLEWOOD PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION November 20, 2001 I. CALL TO ORDER The regular meeting of the City Planning and Zoning Commission was called to order at 7:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers of the Englewood Civic Center, Chairman David Weber presiding. Members present: Krieger, Lathram, Mueller, Rempel, Waggoner, Welker, Willis, Weber Alternate Member Parks Ex-Officio Simpson Members late: Stockwell Members absent: None Also present: Senior Planner Graham Planner I Voboril Assistant City Attorney Reid II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES October 16 , 2001 Chairman Weber stated that the Minutes of October 16, 2001 were to be considered for approval. Lathram moved: Willis seconded: The Minutes of October 16, 2001 be approved as written. AYES: NAYS : Lathram, Mueller, Rempel, Waggoner, Welker, Willis, Krieger, Weber None ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: Stockwell The motion carried . Ill. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT Bates Station Framework Plan CASE #CP 2001-01 Chairman Weber stated that the Public Hearing is regarding a proposed amendment to the Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Weber set forth parameters for conduct of the Hearing. Stockwell entered the meeting and took his seat with members of the Commission . Waggoner moved: Lathram seconded: The Public Hearing on Case #CP 2001-01 be opened . H:IGROUPIBOARDSIPLANCOMMIMinutcsl Minutcs 2001\PCM 11 -2001 A.doc AYES: NAYS : ABSTAIN: ABSENT: Rempel, Stockwell, Waggoner, Welker, Willis, Krieger, Lathram, Mueller, Webber None None None The motion carried. Mr. Webber asked the staff to present the case. Mr. Mark Graham was sworn in. Mr. Graham testified that the proposal before the Com- mission is a suggested amendment to the Comprehensive Plan by adding an element enti- tled the "Bates Station Framework Plan ." The Commission is being asked to take testimon y regarding the proposed Comprehensive Plan amendment, and make a recommendation to the City Council. Mr. Graham then reviewed in detail the staff report and proposed Framework Plan . Points covered in Mr. Graham 's testimony included: • The Goals and Objectives in the Plan provide guidance to staff, boards and Council ; • The Goals and Objectives were drafted to be consistent with MetroVision 2020; • The Goals and Objectives supersede 1979 Comprehensive Plan statements on Gen- eral Iron Works site ; • • The Planning Commission discussed the proposed plan on September 18 and Octa-• ber 16, of 2001; • The Englewood Urban Renewal Authority endorsed the Framework Plan on No- vember 14, 2001; • The Goals will not be "regulatory", but will be guidelines; • Since the GIW operations closed in the mid-80's, there have been several "transi- tional uses", buildings have been dismantled, and equipment sold ; • Barton Brothers purchased the site in 1999, and used the site for warehousing and material storage; • GIW was a major employer in the City of Englewood for man y y ears ; • The Comprehensive Plan was most recently revised in 1999 to include new ele- ments on compliance with MetroVision 2020 and amendment of the transportation section; • The light rail line began operation in 2000; • Improvements have been made to Santa Fe Drive that impact the GIW site; Mr. Graham suggested that the Commission consider these points as opportunities to re- duce use of private transportation by having development "nodes" at light rail transit sta- tions; also that the Commission consider what could be developed in the surrounding area. Mr. Graham also pointed out that: H:IGROUPIBOARDSIPLANCOMM\M inu1cs1M inu1cs 1001 \PC~ 11 ·200 1 A Joe • • • • • Several years ago, a "small area plan" was proposed for the north Englewood neighborhood; however, the citizenry opposed the plan and staff asked that the Commission turn the proposal down . • Two years after this, RTD presented a proposal to the City to use the GIW property as a light rail maintenance facility. • This proposed maintenance facility will be the largest maintenance facility on the light rail line, and will provide service for cars on both the southwest and southeast corridor lines. The City asked RTD to consider other locations; RTD viewed several other sites, but determined that the GIW site best met their needs. • RTD has agreed to use only part of the GIW site for the maintenance facility, and part of the RTD operation will be in Denver across West Yale Avenue . • The south po rti on of the GIW site , approximately 10 .5 acres , is available for rede- velopment for housing and employment centers to meet goals and objecti v es voiced b y the City Counc i l. • Developers that were solicited for this 10 .5-acre site agreed that a light rail transit station would be an integral part of an y rede velopment o f th e GI W site . • The Bates Station Framework Plan provides Goals and Obje c ti v es fo r lan d us es ne ar the proposed transit station . • The Bates Station Framework Plan is unique and is not applicable to an y other loca- tion in the City. • The Bates Station is envisioned as an integral part of the north Englewood commu- nity. • The neighborhood will be served and connected with recreation, open space, em- ployment and station-serving retail and services. Mr. Graham then reviewed goals and objectives of the Framework Plan. He emphasized that: • The City Council supports development of owner-occupied housing units, • There should be a variety in the housing stock as to type, style, and cost. • Development goals for the GIW site include that there be a walkable distance to a light rail station for residents of the redevelopment -residents may be employed in the immediate redevelopment area, or be able to take light rail to do w nto w n Den- ver, to the Oxford Station, or to Littleton for both employment needs and leisure ac- tivities. • Linkage of this area via biking and hiking trails to recreational areas along the South Platte, or other open space areas , is an important consideration. This linkage is also important for those who wish to get to Broadwa y to shop . • The proposed development is envisioned to be compatible with the existing lower density residential area, but will provide higher-density residential use, employment opportunities, and limited retail opportunities. • It is not the intent t o adversely impact existing homes, but to provide neighborhood amenities -a coffe e shop, local dry cleaner, small bakery, and similar small uses. • The City is looking for "quality" development. • Maintenance of view corridors along West Cornell and West Bates Avenues to the westis an important objective of the Plan .. lt\GROUPIBOARDSIPLA NCOMM\M inuteslMinutes 200 1\PCM 11.2001 A.doc • There will be a "core area" and a "transitional area" in the redevelopment area, but these areas are not "mapped". • • The light rail operation itself is quiet, but there will be some noise associated with the maintenance facility -this will be a 24-hour per day operational facility. • Means to reduce noise impacts will be explored -this may include sound walls, berms, or landscaping to reduce the sound. • When existing buildings on the GIW site are demolished there will be nothing to re- flect existing noise from the rail lines. • Alternative modes of transportation were addressed; • Linkage to CityCenter, the Broadway commercial corridor, and other points throughout Englewood and metro area was again cited;. • Light rail , bicycle and hiking trails are part of the linkage equation. • The Bates Light Rail Station will be a "kiss and ride " station -no parking facilities will be provided for transit riders at this station. • The station is to primarily support the immediate neighborhood residents and work- ers. • During the time GIW was operating, there were neighborhood parking regulations that insured employees park on-site, not on-street in the residential neighborhood . • Land use mixes and quality development were discussed by Mr. Graham. • A mix of housing types is desirable -townhouse, condominium -owner-occupied units . • A diverse price range of the housing is also desirable. • Employment opportunities are sought in the redevelopment to provide an opportu- nity to people who want to live and work in the area. • • Mr. Graham reiterated the desire to see station-serving commercial/retail establish- ments in the redevelopment. • Mr. Graham emphasized that we are looking for business /employment development that will not generate additional traffic through the neighborhood. • Establishment of development and design criteria at a later date was discussed. • Blight conditions were established during the process of creating the urban renewal district, including such issues as no sidewalks, or poorly maintained sidewalks ; poor building maintenance; poor street maintenance, etc. • The goal is to create a quality development sensitive to the surrounding neighbor- hood. • Diversity in architectural style, materials, colors, etc. is also sought. • Transportation facilities to serve the neighborhood as well as the transit-oriented de- velopment were addressed. • Bates Avenue should serve as the pedestrian link to Broadway from the Bates sta- tion, while automotive access should be from Yale and /or Dartmouth Avenues via the Galapago/Elati connector street. Mr. Graham stated he would try to answer questions or address concerns the Commission might have . Mr. Welker stated that it appears to him that staff is "deliberately trying to not define the • development boundaries". Is there a need to more clearly define the connection between H:\GROUPIBOARDSIPLANCOMM\M inuteslMinutes ~OO llPC~ 11·2001 A.doc • • • • "core area" and "transitional area", and what is the next step to be taken. Mr. Graham stated that once the basic principles have been accepted, the next steps would be ad- dressed. He emphasized that a Comprehensive Plan is only as good as the vision for the future. He pointed out that the urban renewal district boundaries may not be the bounda- ries that are chosen for the core area and the transitional area. Mr. Welker noted that when zoning designation considered and applied, boundaries would be established. Will there be specific new zoning for this district? Mr. Graham responded affirmatively. He did caution, however, that a property owner could make application for an existing zone dis- trict. Mr. Graham stated that we cannot anticipate that all of the property owners will want the new zoning. Mr. Welker stated that the area is now zoned for industrial development and use, and this zoning is legitimate until new zoning is applied . He discussed the need to mak e sure that the boundaries line up, and to take into consideration existing uses that m ay hav e to b e grandfathered into the zoning. Mr. Stockwell discussed the traffic issue ; he pointed out that it is not re alistic to think t hat primary traffic routes will be onl y on the per i phery of the redevelopment. Al l n ei ghbo rh ood streets will take on more volume of tra ff ic , and motorists w ill cut through the nei ghb o rhoo d from Broadway to the Bates Station . Ms. Lathram asked if there had been community input on development of the goals for the Bates Station. She asked if the "overview" of the Framework Plan would become part of the Comprehensive Plan . Mr. Graham stated that direct "house-to-house " notification to the ne i ghborhood of this Hearing was not done; the Public Notice of the Hearing was pub- lished in the Englewood Herald in accordance with requirements .. He further stated that he thinks inclusion of this statement will help establish intent of the Framework Plan. Ms. Lathram stated that she wants to make sure a template for the Bates Station is not being created that will be overlaid in other areas such as the Oxford Avenue Station area. Mr. Graham stated that the Bates Station Framework Plan is applicable onl y to the Bates Sta- tion. Mr. Graham noted that for sometime, there have been discussions on wa y s to re v ise and update the Zoning Ordinance. One way is to create a mixed-use district, including criteria for transit-oriented developments. Overlay districts were also discussed . Neither method is being followed i n this instance. The staff is proposing that this amendment to the Compre- hensive Plan will be a self-contained document applicable only to the Bates Station neighborhood. Ms. Lathram asked what happens if the proposed Comprehensive Plan amendment doesn 't go forward, or if the developer backs out. What about providing low-income housing -if the amendment is approved is the City limiting what can be developed on the site . Mr. Graham stated that the amendment does provide reason to rezone the GIW site to meet the goals of the Bates Framework Plan . He emphasized that individual property own- ers in the surrounding neighborhood have the right to individuall y request rezoning for their H:IGROUPIBOAROSI PLA NCOMM\Mi nut eslMinutes "OO l l PCM I 1·"00 1 A do< property. Mr. Graham further stated that if no change in zoning is imposed on the GIW site, it could be used for any current "use-by-right" cited in that zone district in the Zoning Ordnance. Robert Simpson, Director of Community Development, was sworn in . Mr. Simpson re- sponded to Ms. Lathram's questions by stating that the Overview in the Framework Plan should be included as part of the Comprehensive Plan amendment; this statement provides the Visions and Intent of the Bates Station Framework Plan. The Comprehensive Plan is a broad policy statement, and sets the vision for the future of the neighborhoods and the City as a whole. Mr. Simpson then addressed Ms. Lathram's concern regarding development of a template with the adoption of this Framework Plan. He emphasized that the Bates Sta- tion Framework plan would not be appropriate in another location . This Plan is designed to meet the needs of an individual, unique neighborhood in the City, and to strengthen the Bates Station area as an unique neighborhood. Development that occurs around the Bates Station is not what may develop at CityCenter, or at the Oxford Lig ht Rail stations. Mr. Simpson then addressed the issue of "community input". He stated that there ha v e been numerous meetings regarding the General Iron Site and the rede ve lopment of that site o v er the last couple of years . There have also been meetings regarding impro v ements to Santa Fe Drive as it impacts Engle w ood neighborhoods; there ha ve been meetings regarding pre- vious amendments to the Comprehensive Plan, and there have been meetings and length y discussions regarding the aborted "Small Area Plan" that was proposed for this area a few years ago. Mr. Simpson stated that City staff has tried to be responsive to the needs of the community. Mr. Simpson pointed out that RTD approached the City with their proposal to acquire and use the site for the transit maintenance facility, and the City has worked with RTD to refine the proposal and encouraged RTD to confine their proposal only to the north portion of the site. Mr. Simpson stated that an RTD Transit Maintenance Facility will be de- veloped on the north portion of the GIW site -that is a given that we must accept and work with RTD . The City has the responsibility of determining the most acceptable devel- opment for the remaining south portion of the GIW site. He emphasized that zoning regu- lations are being developed for the GIW site, but if some other property owner requested that these zoning regulations be applied to their property, the City would consider the re- quest. Mr. Simpson reiterated that the City's focus is on the GIW site at this time. Mr. Simpson then addressed Ms . Lathram's concern of what would happen if the proposed De- veloper backed out and no new development occurred . He stated that the RTD acquisition of the total GIW site by RTD is moving forward, and the Bates Station will be a reality. RTD has agreed to demolish the existing structures on the site . If the current developer decided he was no longer interested in the project, the City would have a site cleared of structures to offer to new potential developers. RTD will do soils remediation only on their north por- tion. Mr. Simpson emphasized the need to work to develop positive long-term goals for this project neighborhood. Mr. Stockwell asked about the use of the site by the Barton Brothers . Mr. Graham stated that Barton Brothers will be moving from the site by December 21 51 , and it will be turned over to RTD . Mr. Simpson stated that the heavy industrial zone classification currently in place will continue at this time. He pointed out that residents want to preserve their quality of life, and the City wants to protect that quality of life. He stated that an "urban commu- H:IGRO UPI BOARDSIPLA NCOMM\Minu1 cs1Minu1cs :OOl l PCM 11.:001 A Joe • • • • • • • nity'' -residential, employment opportunities, limited retail -will be created in the new de- velopment. Mr. Simpson emphasized that this is a long-term development project. Mr. Welker asked how the urban renewal area plan is to be considered; the GIW site is part of that area, but the urban renewal plan is more extensive. How will the connotation of "blight" be eliminated, particularly if the GIW site is all that is considered for redevelop- ment. Mr. Simpson stated that the boundaries of the urban renewal district were identified with the purpose of trying to be fair; the general area is in need of infrastructure improve- ments -street paving, curbs, gutters, and sidewalk construction. The boundaries were drawn consistent with the industrial district boundaries. Mr. Simpson emphasized the need to address and correct the infrastructure and environmental issues of this neighborhood. Mr. Welker agreed that the GIW site is definitely in the redevelopment plan, but the re- mainder of the urban renewal area has been defined -will it be part of this plan or be something else. He stated that there needs to be more discussion on this. The remainder of the urban renewal district cannot be ignored when one considers the "vision" for the neighborhood. The area has been designated as one that needs resolution of the problems -we need to remove the "blight". Mr. Graham stated that the obligation of the urban renewal district is to remedy the infra- structure problems, improve drainage issues, and address the environmental issues affecting the neighborhood. This is not a problem that the Planning Commission needs to address . Mr. Welker stated that the issues are not resolved just be being included in the urban re- newal district; it's also something that has affected land values in this area. He emphasized that traffic issues will not be confined just to the Bates Station; there will be parking on- street by many of the transit riders. He stated that the residents of the area are "stirred up", and want to know if the City's proposals will help them or hurt them . Mr. Stockwell further addressed maintenance of natural resources -such as mountain views, and the placement of buildings to preserve this view. He also addressed noise im- pacts of the trains on the neighborhood, and the fact that the trains sound horns at each station. Mr. Weber stated that the proposal before the Commission is a broad view of development parameters -it is not into specifics such as train horns. Mr. Stockwell responded that staff has mentioned development of regulations; he feels it is appropriate to point out these is- sues. Mr. Stockwell also suggested that the hiking and biking trail linkage be improved to other jurisdictions -not just to other points of Englewood. Ms. Mueller referenced the Goals, and the brief mention of parks and open space. She asked that the goals be expanded on provision of open space in the redevelopment. Mr. Simpson stated he appreciated Ms . Mueller's point of view, and that staff will endeavor to develop policy statements on provision of open space, parks, and trail linkage . Mr. Willis noted that staff has stated that Barton Brothers will be vacating the GIW site; who will be doing the environmental clean-up. Mr. Graham stated that RTD will clean the north H:'.GROUP\BOARDSIPLANCOMM\Minutcs\Minutcs 200 1\PC~ 11 -2001 A.doc half of the site, and the south half will be done by another contractor. Mr. Graham empha- sized that the regulations for environmental clean-up are much more strict for properties to • be used for residential redevelopment than for properties to be used for industrial pur- poses. Mr. Stockwell asked where the contaminated soils will be taken. Mr. Graham stated that contaminated soils will be removed to whatever site is certified to receive contami- nated soils. Mr. Simpson interjected that the redeveloper is responsible for soil remediation on the south one-half of the site, and plans for the clean-up will have to be submitted to the State Department of Health. Mr. Willis asked how long before Mr. Fullerton begins work on the site. Mr. Graham stated that Mr. Fullerton will not take title until all issues such as zoning regulations have been re- solved; he estimated it may be six to nine months before Mr. Fullerton has control of the site. Mr. Simpson estimated that it will be late 2002 before everything is resolved and Mr. Fullerton has title. Mr. Graham stated that he understood the Bates Station would not be open until sometime in the 3rd quarter of 2003. Mr. Simpson suggested that the clean-up of the site may take 12 months, and refining de- velopment plans for the property may take 18 months; he stated that Mr. Fullerton may be before the Commission from time-to-time, but that actual construction of the new devel- opment probably won't begin until 2004. Ms. Lathram asked if there is a time frame on the proposed amendment. Can changes be • suggested, and can it be brought back to the Commission. Mr. Graham stated that a study session on the proposed Bates Station Framework Plan is scheduled before City Council on December 3rd, and noted that City Council may also have suggested changes . He sug- gested that staff can certainly update the Commission on the Council discussion, and this could be scheduled for December 4 1 h Commission meeting. Brief discussion followed. Mr. Simpson further addressed the need for "protection" of exist- ing amenities -i.e ., mountain views -this needs to be encouraged and worked into the Plan. He stated that the zoning regulations are not in completed form at this time, but the protection of amenities needs to be worked into the regulations. Mr. Simpson suggested that the Public Hearing can be continued to December 4 1h, and the Plan be revised to in- corporate changes and additional comments. Mr. Weber noted that some members seem to be of the opinion that the proposal is too detailed; other members are of the opinion that it is not detailed enough. He stated that the issue "public place" and mountain views are mentioned quite a few times in the pro- posed amendment. Mr. Weber asked members of the audience to address the Commission . Mr. Don Roth was sworn in. He stated that he serves on the Englewood Urban Renewal • Authority, Keep Englewood Beautiful, and the Code Enforcement Advisory Committee. He H:IGROUPIBOARDSIPLANCOMM\Minutcs 1Minutcs 100 I IPC:vt 11 .200 I A Joe • • • stated that the proposed amendment was presented to the EURA on November 14rh, and he felt that there are problems with the proposal. Mr. Roth stated that he resides "in sight" of this neighborhood. Mr. Roth stated that he is concerned about the goal of "high density" development; he feels that the statement "within walking distance" is vague. The residen- tial neighborhood is already zoned for R-2 (Medium Density) development, so a higher density development can only mean R-3 under the current zoning standards. This is not in keeping with the small town feel of the neighborhood. Mr. Roth stated that in conjunction with his work on the CEAC, they did a study a couple of years ago, and one of the issues considered was population density. Englewood has the greatest population density per square mile in a four-state area . High density development will increase this population density even more; this is of concern to him, and should be of concern to the Commission. The development of the Light Rail Station at Bates Avenue is also of concern. One-hundred fifty-one parking citations were issued in September of 1999; in September of 2001 , 795 parking citations were issued. The increase is attributable to the light rail stations at City- Center Englewood and at Oxford Avenue. Before light rail stations opened in June of 2000, there were only two areas of parking concern -the Englewood High School neighborhood, and the Swedish Medical Center neighborhood . Mr. Roth stated that these are big issues to him that must be considered . Denise Wehrer, 2711 South Acoma Street, was sworn in, and stated that she doesn't think the light rail station at Bates Avenue is needed. She does not like the "kiss and ride" con- cept for these stations, and it does not work; there needs to be parking lots for the transit riders. She asked how many members of the Commission used the light rail on this date . Two members responded affirmatively. Ms. Wehrer stated that she has issues with construction of housing units right next to rail- road tracks; what kind of people will want to live next to the railroad. Mr. Weber asked what use she envisioned for the GIW site? Ms. Wehrer responded that a park is a good idea. Mr. Stockwell asked if she felt that sound walls would be helpful. Ms. Wehrer responded affirmatively. She further noted that people using the light rail will not walk to King Soopers or Safeway to do their grocery shopping -there must be provision for parking so that vehi- cles can be used. Ms. Lathram asked what limitation she would suggest for high-density development. Ms. Wehrer stated that she is concerned about traffic increases; if 300 residential units are built, you can plan on 600 vehicles. She lives in this neighborhood, and she doesn't want in- creased traffic. Mr. Willis asked her opinion on the heavy trucks that are traveling in the neighborhood now. Ms. Wehrer responded that Bob's Towing has trucks, but they are leaving the neighborhood . H:IGROUl'IBOAROS\PLANCOMMIMinutcsiMinutcs 1001\PC:-.t 11 -1001 A Joe Mr. Weber asked if she felt the new development would increase property values . Ms. Wehrer reiterated that she does not want inc re ased traffic; she likes the small town feel of • the neighborhood, and if apartments are built that "feel" will be ruined. Ms . Sunny Vincennie, 2 7 18 South Acoma Street, was sworn in . She stated that if the RTD maintenance facility is a "done deal", why is a transit station needed at Bates Avenue. She expressed concern regarding increased traffic in the Bishop Elementary School area -in- creased traffic will increase the chance of a child being struck by a motorist. She stated that the "kiss and ride " station is a "utopian idea -this isn 't the 1950's where Mom takes Dad to the station, and she stays home with kids etc." Transit riders will be parking in front of her house in the 2 700 block. This is a blue-collar neighborhood, and she likes how she knows every one in her neighborhood . She doesn 't want to see ev er y thing she has put into her home "go down the tubes ". She stated that she is wi thin w alkin g d istan ce o f City Cen- ter. Ms. Vincennie agreed that the GIW site is an ey esore , and someth i ng should be done regarding that site, but don 't put a bi g office bu ilding, or tall apartment buil d i ngs o n the sit e. She did not want to see tr ansient peopl e mo v ing into the ne ig hb o rh ood. She as k ed whe n the zoning regulations w ill be dev elop ed, and w hen the boun darie s for th e zoni n g wi ll be determined . Ms . Vincennie re f er e nc ed a pr ev ious impro v ement pl an tha t was p ro p osed , and noted that homes were to be taken . She stated that this is a public h ea rin g, but v ery few members of the public are in attendance; she found out about the hearing b y "acc i- dent"; people have notices of such hearings mailed to their homes . The proposed redevel - opment of the GIW site will impact her at her residence . She wants to keep the neighbor- hood as "homey community ", and the idea that the traffic will be kept on Yale and Dart- mouth A v enues is crazy . • Mr. Stockwell advised Ms. Vincennie that "RTD has the ability to tell us what to do", and the City must work around that to determine roadway improvements, etc. He further ad- vised that "the Bates Transit station will happen", and the City needs to work with that. Ms. Mueller advised Ms. Vincennie that the proposed development is not "apartments " for transient dwellers; it will be townhouse and condominium development encouraging home ownership. Ms . Lathram stated that she lives nearer the Oxford Avenue station , but is not dir ectl y i m- pacted by the users of the light rail. She asked what members of the audience fe el about parking restrictions . She further noted that Mr. Fullerton will be having public meetings to present the proposal. Ms. Vincennie stated that "no one came to her door" to advise her o f this meeting. Mr. Weber advised that the Notice of Public Hearing was published in the Englewood Herald on November 2, 2001. Mr. Weber asked if anyone else wished to address the Commission. Other members of the audience did not address the Commission. H"GROUP'BO ARDSIPLANCOMM\M inutcslMinutcs 2001 \PC M 11 .:001 A .Joe 10 • • • • Mr. Simpson stated that he appreciated the comments from the Commission, and from members of the audience. He requested that the Public Hearing be continued to Decem- ber 41h. He stated that staff has heard the concerns voiced, and would like to address those issues. Mr. Weber asked the pleasure of the Commission. Waggoner moved: Rempel seconded: The Public Hearing on Case #CP 2001-01 be continued to December 4, 2001. Mr. Welker asked if everyone has had a chance to say what they want to say. Ms. Krieger stated that she likes the format. Mr. Weber agreed; he stated that the proposed Framework Plan is a good outline. He reiterated that the development of the maintenance facility and the Bates station will happen, and the City needs to make the best of it that we can. Mr. Welker stated that he supports the goals and objectives, but emphasized the need to establish boundaries. This plan does not address the urban renewal area or the zoning changes on individual properties . Mr. Rempel noted that this Framework Plan addresses the Bates Station and the GIW site only. Mr. Welker stated that the Commission needs to be very clear where we are headed with this. Mr. Willis asked if the Winslow property is part of this redevelopment. Mr. Simpson stated that the Winslow property owners have been kept apprised of the amendment, and they are comfortable with it. He surmised that the Winslow property owners want to let Mr. Fullerton take the lead on development at this time; they are working on a "plan", but he has not seen any proposal from them. He advised that Winslow's are ceasing operation of a part of their business at this site. Mr. Rempel referenced comments on maintenance of view, scale of architecture, and den- sity; he asked about the process for people to have input on development projects, and what would constitute a "sensitive transition" from the lower density neighborhood to the maintenance facility on the north of the GIW site . Mr. Simpson stated that transition will be achieved through implementation of the proposed amendment and by the zoning regula- tions. He stated that staff and the consultant have been working on the zoning regulations for some time, and the regulation document is not quite completed. He stated that it has been difficult to find or write regulations to preserve what we value and want to preserve in the neighborhood. He stated that the City will have to work with the neighborhood, and with the developer. He acknowledged that the proposed Bates Station Framework Plan is "broad in scope", but that was intended. The next step in the process will be where the developer and City representatives hold public meetings with the neighborhood within the next 12 -18 months . Mr. Welker stated that in his opinion, the redevelopment cannot all be accomplished within the GIW boundaries. He stated that staff is describing a lot broader area than the GIW site encompasses . He reiterated that everything cannot be "crammed" into that site. H:IGRO UPI BOARDSIPLANCOMM\M inuteslMinutes 1001 \PCM 11-2001 A.Joe 11 Ms. Krieger stated that she interpreted the Plan to mean that the taller buildings will be constructed close to the rail lines; they cannot be pushed out into the neighborhood. She • stated that in her opinion, this will apply to most of the north Englewood neighborhood. Ms. Krieger stated that she is a resident of the north Englewood neighborhood. Mr. Stockwell stated that he agrees with many of Mr. Welker's concerns, but in his opinion there can be varied densities, and the City can control the height and placement of build- ings and traffic through the area without tearing down homes. Mr. Willis stated that he does not feel there is sufficient space to accommodate all that is envisioned. Mr. Simpson stated that it is staff's and the amendment's intent to prov ide prote c tion to th e neighborhood from increased traffic. We do not want to cre ate "cut-throu gh str e et s" in thi s neighborhood . Mr. Simpson noted that man y specifi c conc erns can no t b e add r essed through the Framewor k Plan , but wi ll b e add resse d in the zo ni n g reg ul ati ons : "sca le " o r building height, for instance . H e stat ed that Co mmission members an d th e au d i e nce hav e referenced "tall buildings " -w hat does this m ean -w hat height are the y talkin g about. In his opinion, construction ma y be limited to no more than eight stories i n h eight a nd transi- tioned down to blend in with existing de v elopment. He suggested that the majority of the structures w ill be four to five stories i n height, and the eight-story building will be the "archi- tectural statement" of the development. Staff is seeking to create a reasonable density to support the redevelopment and clean-up of a problem site, and make it a valuable asset to the neighborhood and to the community as a whole. • Ms. Mueller stepped out of the meeting for a brief time. Mr. Stockwell stated that a Kiss and Ride station concept is a mistake; parking violations are up, and referenced the parking congestion at the Oxford Av enue station. People are park- ing all over the surrounding neighborhood. People will park wherev er the y want, and pay the $10 ticket -it's cheaper than driving downtown and pa y ing the parking fees. There needs to be a parking lot for riders at the Bates Station. The vote was called on the motion to continue the Hearing. AYES: NAYS : ABSTAIN: ABSENT: Stockwell, Waggoner, Welker, Willis, Krieger, Lathram , Rempel , Weber None None Mueller The motion carried. IV. PUBLIC FORUM Members of the audience had left with the vote on continuance o f the Hearing; no one was present to address the Commission. H:IGROUPI BOAROSIP LA NCO MM\Minutcs\Mi nutes 1001 \PCM 11 -100 1 A Joe 11 • ' . • • • Ms. Mueller entered the meeting and took her place with the Commission . V. DIRECTOR'S CHOICE Mr. Simpson stated that the annual holiday dinner is scheduled for December 13th at the Englewood Golf Course; cocktail hour at 6:00 p.m., dinner to be served at 7:00 p.m. Invita- tions were mailed to members of the Commission earlier on this date. Mr. Simpson stated that staff has been working very hard to develop the mixed use transit district. He stated that the Comprehensive Plan has not been totally up-dated since 1979, and the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance has not had a complete up-dated since the mid- 1980' s. He anticipated that many of the documents pertaining to updates of both the Comprehensive Plan and the Zoning Ordinance will be before the Commission in 2002. He stated that there is an RTD meeting on December 12 1h; there will be more discussion of the light rail facility; that meeting will have neighborhood notice . On December 4th' the Planning Commission will consider the continued Public Hearing on the Bates Station Framework Plan, and a public hearing on a proposed Conditional Use. VI. ATTORNEY'S CHOICE Ms. Reid stated she had nothing to bring before the Commission . VII. COMMISSIONER'S CHOICE Mr. Welker inquired about a meeting on December 14th, sponsored by the Colorado Mu- nicipal League. He will fax the information to the Secretary . Mr. Waggoner asked if staff had any plans to do an origination/destination study. He stated that with the residential units proposed for development at the GIW site, a question- naire might be developed regarding the use of light rail by potential residents. Mr. Graham stated that a study was done by RTD, which revealed that the Bates Station could expect a ridership of 800 per day. Discussion ensued . Mr. Simpson noted that CityCenter Englewood will have 438 residential units when fully built out; these are for-rent units. There are now in excess of 100 of the units leased and occupied. Mr. Waggoner reiterated that he felt the study and questionnaire on ridership would be very valuable. Mr. Willis asked about tenant leasing in CityCenter. Mr. Simpson stated that full build-out of the project is anticipated to be completed in approximately six months. Office leasing is going well. Miller-Weingarten (CityCenter developers) will be moving their headquarters to this development, and vacating their premises in Inverness. Wal-Mart is constructed and has been open for over a year; Office Depot is open, as is International House of Pancakes, and Qdoba Mexican Restaurant. Bailey's Health Spa is under construction; a restaurant is H:IGROUP\BOAJUJS\PLANCOMM\M inutcs \Minutes ~00 !\PCM 11-200 l A.doc lJ .. planned for part of this building, and negotiations are also underway to bring the David Tay- lor Dance Troupe to the Bailey's building. Mr. Simpson discussed negotiations with other • potential lessees for various pad sites, including the site across from Chuck E Cheese. Gart Sports will lease a retail site, approximately 24,000 square feet -this will be a "prototype store". Garts corporate headquarters has moved into the former Home Base site south of U.S . 285, and opened in early November. Mr. Simpson stated that Trammell Crow Resi- dential, developer of the Alexan Apartments in CityCenter, is doing their own leasing of re- tail space on the first level. Trammell Crow will also be moving their corporate offices to the CityCenter site . Mr. Simpson did acknowledge that it has been difficult to attract res- taurants to the site -transit-oriented development is a new concept, and restaurants have been reluctant to commit to locate here so far. Mr. Willis asked about the Phar-Mor site now that it is closing. Mr. Simpson stated that the City does not have control of the site , but ma y be in negotiation with the property owne r i n conjunction with the Elati Street site rede v elopment. Mr. Willis asked if co nsi d eration has been given to development of a movie theatre e n the Phar-Mor site . Mr. Simpson noted that the City has not done well i n negotiations w ith theatre chains . Mr. W illis st ated that he was considering more a "local" smaller theatre . Mr. Simpson stated he w ould be happ y to discuss this with Mr. Willis. Mr. Simpson stated that the Elati Street site has been razed and will be cleaned in the very near future. The City will continue to advertise for developers . Mr. Waggoner asked if there is anyone on staff actively pursing businesses to come to • Englewood. Mr. Simpson stated that the Economic Development program is focused on both retention and attraction . Englewood does not have a lot of land available to attract new businesses, and the focus has been retaining the businesses that we do have . We were very fortunate that Garts Corporate Headquarters was interested in the former Home Base site, and this will bring 450 jobs into the City over the next year -these are high pay- ing jobs in excess of the $60,000 range. Mr. Simpson stated that development of the south side of U.S. 285 is ver y important. There is the former Office Depot site that needs to be considered. A temporary user is in the building at the present time. Brief discussion ensued . Mr. Welker asked if there is anything the City can do to encourage new businesses -improve signage regulations, etc. Mr. Simpson stated that the Creati v e Sign Code, which was implemented for South Broadway, has created more interest in sign- age. He suggested that consideration can be given to revamping this Code and applying it to a wider segment of the business community. Further brief discussion ensued . Gertrude G. Welty, Recording S H:\GRO UP\BOAR.DS\PLA NCOM M\MinuccslMinuccs WO llPCM 11 .2001 A.doc 14 •