Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2003-09-03 PZC MINUTES• CITY OF ENGLEWOOD PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION • September 3, 2003 I. CALL TO ORDER The re gular meeting of the City Planning and Zoning Commission was called to order at 7:00 p.m . in the Community Development Conference Room of Englewood Civic Center, Chair Waggoner presiding. Present: Absent: Staff: Guests : Adams, Roth, Schum, Waggoner, Welker Bleile, Diekmeier, Krieger, Mueller Senior Planner Mark Graham Assistant City Attorne y Nancy Reid Anne Ricker, Lel and Consulting Diane Wray II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Au gust 19, 200 3 Chair Waggo ner stat ed the Minutes of August 19, 200 3 were to be co nsidered for appro val. Mr. Welker mov ed: M r. Sch um seco nd ed: The Minutes o f Au gust 19, 200 3 be appro v ed as written . Chair Waggoner asked if there were an y corrections or modifications to the Minutes. None were proposed, and Chair Waggoner asked for the vote. AYES : NAYS : ABSTAIN: ABSENT : Adams, Roth , Schum , Waggoner, Welker None None Bleile, Diekmeier, Krieger, Mueller The motion carried. Ill. SOUTH BROADWAY PLAN 2003 Anne Ricker of Leland Consulting stated she would briefly discuss the highlights within each of the sections . She urged the Commissioners to ask questions as she was going through the Plan and to think about the Plan from the audience 's perspective. She explained the • audience for the Plan is City Council, merchants, property owners, and residents. 1 • • • The purpose of the Plan is to initiate a process that would ensure future improvements within the South Broadway Corridor occur with aesthetic and functional continuity. The important part of the purpose is the functional portion . Sometimes when Plans are developed, it only deals with the appearance of a Corridor. This Plan strives to do more; it addresses market, implementation, and function. One of the biggest challenges is how can the Corridor accommodate opportunities and where does it limit opportunities . The Plan was also designed to provide recommendations for future improvements, policy reform, and promote investment and reinvestment. The central approach of the Plan is to encourage strategic investments in nodes where there will be a "ripple effect" effectively leveraging public dollars. Ms . Ricker reviewed the project objectives : • Revitalize the Corridor • Rede ve lop the key nodes • Support multiple modes of transportation • Incre ase retail spending • Improve opportunities for wo rkforce housing • Reposition underused properties for rede ve lopment • Prepare a long-term investment strategy for the Corridor Various supporting efforts are referenced in the Plan . The 199 7 South Broad way Action Plan is largely implemented . City Council goals for the last few yea rs are supportive of the Plan . The Historic Properties Inventory and the Br oadway Corridor Parkin g Inventory are in process. The Plan also references the three open houses which were held to which 100 percent of the property and busines s owners on the Corridor were invited to attend . Outreach efforts also included the Chamber's fax newsletter and the City's fax news letter. There was reasonable attendance to the open houses. Those who attended provided good input and expressed concerns regardin g how future policy decisions might impact different types of uses and how future physical improvements might affect different businesses. It was also expressed that a stronger economic climate was needed on the Corridor and diversity was important in the overall strategy for revitalization of the Corridor. Ms. Ricker continued; the Corridor is 3.5 miles consisting of 388 properties, with a total area of 241 acres . Because of the length, the Corridor is very different from segment to segment. A slight boundary adjustment was made to the Downtown District to include the Gothic Theatre . As the potential for growth in the Downtown District as a entertainment/dining destination gets stronger, the Gothic is a good anchor. A one hundred percent physical inventory of the Corridor was conducted to support the argument that physical improvements needed to be made. The uniqueness of the various Districts is described in the Plan to establish a theme for marketing. The Plan introduces the idea of the "node" which is a catalyst area for investment. Ms. Ricker stated the strategy for revitalization of the South Broadway Corridor is based on redevelopment and targeted investment in key nodes, or catalyst areas , which hold investment potential despite 2 • select economic and physical redevelopment challenges. There is a difference between market feasibility, financial feasibility, and physical feasibility. Physical feasibility is the largest issue on the Corridor; however, despite the challenges there are still opportunities on the Corridor. Four nodes are identified in the Plan. Belleview and downtown are the two obvious nodes. A northern district and south central district were also identified which might be off; however, she is not concerned. The most important portion in that section is describing the criteria for a node. Chair Waggoner asked if a node needed four corners. Ms. Ricker stated it did not, but it often does. It tends to function better, but she has seen nodes happen within blocks . Chair Waggoner wondered why Yale Avenue would not be considered a node since it is the north entry point to the City. Ms. Ricker stated it could be; it is important to refer back to the criteria. Mr. Welker stated he felt Oxford Avenue was a more viable node than Quincy Avenue. Mr. Schum stated he agreed. Mr. Welker stated the Dartmouth node makes sense, but both Dartmouth and Oxford have similar problems; they are the interconnective roads across the City that joins with Santa Fe . Mr. Schum stated one va lue point is those are the areas where the most concentration of people travel. Discussion ensued. Ms. Ricker continued; within the discussion of opportunities, one of the lar ge challenges identified is how fragmented and how small the average lot ownership is . The ave rage lot ownership on the Corridor is .64 acres. • Chair Waggoner asked if the identified nodes correspond wi th the District boundaries. Ms. • Ricker stated they do not. Belle vi ew is the obvious location to accommod ate larger more dense retail. The Quincy node introduces the idea of incubator space and office space. Downtown builds off the entertainment theme . Mr. Welker stated the District boundaries were more of a way to identify the physical cha racteristics of the City, and doesn't feel it is critical to have one node per Di strict. Mr. Graham interjected there ma y be some advantages to ha vi ng similar businesses in the same Di st rict. For entertainment uses , it makes sense for those assembly type uses to be in the same district because the y have common needs, such as parking, and more demand . If those uses are spread out into two or three Districts, there ma y never be the critical mass needed. Discussion ensued . Ms. Ricker continued; 56 percent of the properties on the Corridor are underutilized . Over the next few years, Englewood 's leadership will be faced with a series of difficult choices. Mr. Schum agreed ; 56 percent is a large number and must be addressed ; however, the City also has a responsibility to ensure businesses, such as car dealerships, do not feel they are being targeted. Ms. Ricker stated the Plan also includes several demographic indicators which was used to conduct the market analysis and demand anal ysis. She referred the Commission to the employment section on page 14 of the Plan, which is especially important to the City as it considers the Occupational Privilege Tax (OPT) issue. The analysis used employment numbers from traffic area zones (TAZ) which yields a higher number than the pure City of 3 • Englewood numbers. Mr. Graham stated that specifically the 30,000 to 35 ,000 workers are the numbers believed to be high . The numbers being used for the OPT are 22,000 to 23,000 . Mr. Schum asked why there was such a large difference . Ms. Ricker explained the Plan does not just look at the City of Englewood for growth . Englewood has the opportunity to capture a share of the region 's growth, not just the City's growth. Discussion ensued. Ms . Reid stated the Plan is clear that Englewood's employment base, which extends beyond its municipal boundaries, is estimated at between 30,000 and 35,000 workers. Mr. Graham stated one of the arguments to include this information is the maps used showing the trade area extending beyond the City's boundaries. He asked if the higher numbers were confusing . Mr. Welker stated it was clear to him because he is not focusing on the OPT. Mr. Schum stated he doesn't want people to get confused between the two numbers. • • Chair Waggoner asked for an explanation of the CAAGR. Ms. Ricker stated it stands for Compound Average Annual Growth Rate . Mr. Welker asked for an explanation of "DU ." Ms. Ricker stated it means dw elling unit. Ms . Reid suggested adding the explanation of the acronyms at the bottom of each chart. Ms . Ricker stated the summary of the demand is projecting growth. It is important to not just look at the City of Englewood in isolation ; that is not were the market opportunities exist. Englewood 's ability to capture the region 's growth is largel y dependent upon how things are implemented out of the Plan. Englewood has two principal commercial corridors and not a lot of ph ysical opportunity. Ms . Ricker state d the Plan quantifies the City's gro w th and the growth in the secondary trade are a. The third group quantified is the emplo y ee that tr avels into the area, which is not a market to underestimate. Discussion ensue d. Mr. Schum asked whether the City has ev er activel y sur v ey ed cities south of Englewood to determine w hat ty pe of uses would cause people to st o p in Englewood on their way home. Mr. Graham stated that to his kno w ledge that particular type of surve y has not been conducted. He stated staff has discussed doing a sur v ey of the people who are out shopping, but those expenses w ere not budgeted for in the project. Ms. Reid stated there are general surve y s of metropolitan areas indicating what types of businesses people frequent on their wa y home. Discussion ensued. Ms. Ricker stated that while some dollars will be captured from people driving through Englewood, the majority of second level dollar spending will be captured when uses and activities are concentrated . Mr. Graham stated that a principal suggested by Ms. Ricker is that transit does not make the opportunity; it enhances the opportunity. Transit on its own will not create the market on the Corridor. Ms. Ricker stated the real estate has to work in spite of the transportation . Discussion ensued . Ms. Ricker stated the final section of the Plan includes a set of standard strategies which create a foundation for implementation and actions for change . The Plan ties barriers to the actions for change . Implementation strategies are designed to be very specific in assisting Englewood in capitalizing on its unique opportunities and overcoming its unique barriers. The large issues that need to be addressed on the Corridor are: 4 • • • • Fragmented ownership • Retail mix • Underutilized and vacant properties • Role of the street • Lot depth • Dispersion of retail uses • Building relationship to the street • Absence of multi-family housing Ms. Ricker continued; the report concludes with the discussion of the potential development strategies for the nodes. The development strategies are designed to address a different audiences. This format can be developed into marketing materials to solicit potential investor interest. Chair Waggoner asked if a map could be added showing the different districts. Ms. Ricker stated a fully illustrated report was just completed which includes a map identifying the districts. Mr. Welker agreed that it would be important to have maps identifying the various districts and nodes. Chair Waggoner also suggested the Development Strategies be placed in a specific order such as north to south . Ms. Ricker stated she would make that correction and add the maps. Mr. Welker stated a charette would be a good method to look at one of the nodes to consider all the issues involved in developing a project. Mr. Graham stated a charette is scheduled on September 11 at 5:30 pm in the City Council Conference Room for the property at Englewood Parkway and Broadway. The charette will be facilitated by Dick Farle y, an urban designer for Civitas. Mr. Graham stated one of the recommendations in the Plan is design standards and staff has solicited a proposal for writing th ose design standards by year's end. Discussion ensued . Mr. Graham stated that tentatively September 23 is scheduled for a public hearing on the Plan. Another study session could be scheduled for September 9 if the Commission so desires. The changes will be made to the draft and staff will send members the illustrated version of the Plan . Chair Waggoner asked the Commissioners if they would like to review the final version before the public hearing. Mr. Welker stated he didn 't feel another study session was warranted. Discussion ensued. Mr. Graham stated he should be able to deliver the final Plan to the members within the next week. Mr. Welker requested that his packet be mailed since he will be out of town . IV. PUBLIC FORUM Diane Wray, an Englewood citizen, asked if the property inventory was available for review. Ms. Ricker stated a number of items were looked at to create the property inventory; and the database would be the complete matrix. Ms. Wray asked if the database was available. Mr. Graham stated the analysis had not been written up . Ms. Wray asked who prepared the historical/architectural survey. Mr. Graham responded Ginn y Steele did the historical 5 • • • assessment. She stated she would like to review the information indicating which buildings represent the 56 percent of the properties as underutilized. Ms. Ricker stated that is different from the property inventory; that information has been mapped and is included in the illustrated version of the Plan. Ms. Wray asked whether the historical/architectural information would be included in the database. Mr. Graham stated that information is voluminous and will not be reproduced in large quantities . Copies will be available for the public in the Community Development Department as well as the library. When the condition study, the historic inventory, and parking data are all compiled and the analysis complete, they will be considered as part of the Comprehensive Plan amendment. Ms. Wray asked if they would be available to the public prior to the public hearing on September 23. Mr. Graham stated it would be available to the public before the end of the year . The Plan and the illustrations will be going to City Council before the end of the year; the additional documents are being treated as addendums which will be useful for addressing development proposals on the Corridor. Ms . Wray stated she would like to see a copy of the Ginny Steele 's historic survey material as soon as possible . Ms. Reid reiterated that once the information is complete, it will be available in the library or the Community Development Department. V. DIRECTOR'S CHOICE Mr. Graham stated the Unified Development Code is scheduled for a public hearing on September 16 . If at all po ssible, the draft will be sent to Commissioners on Friday, September 5 . Mr. Graham stated the public hearing for the South Broadwa y Plan is scheduled for September 23. VI. A TIORNEY'S CHOICE Ms . Reid stated she had nothing further. VII. COMMISSIONER'S CHOICE Mr. Schum stated his neighborhood was informed that asbestos removal from the General Iron Works' site would begin on September 2 . Mr. Schum expressed his concern on how the soil has been removed from General Iron Work and the safety procedures being used. Mr. Schum also expressed his frustration over the lack of public input on the manner in which the asbestos is being removed and the noise permit allowing work to be done at night for 45 days. Discussion ensued. Mr. Graham stated the issues raised are under the authority of the State Health Department. The plan for removing the asbestos was approved by CDPHE, and the City does not have the authority to stop the removal for health reasons . Mr. Schum clarified he was not asking the City to put a stop work order on the asbestos removal only on the noise permit. Ms. Reid explained there is a provision in the Ordinance for a special permit for a waiver of the noise ordinance for a small period of time to complete a project; it does not require a public hearing. The appeal process would be either to City Council or district court. Discussion ensued. 6 • The meeting was declared adjourned at 8 :50 p.m . • • 7