The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2004-06-21 (Regular) Meeting Agenda Packet.. . . ,· •• •• ·• • • .. \·.· . , .... .•. .,. •. l . . ... -;-~ . . ~ .. .. . ·.• ... ::. , ·-· -·. .. •.: . . :. -: · .... : ·• " ~-... :·· .,.-. .\ ... ·-·.: .. ,. . '<.· ·:/ . ..... 0 ' . .. . >. ·.· ... ·-... ~ .. ;; . ------------~=--...... -----'--'---'-~-~ ------. .. . •· ., :~ Regular City Council Meeting ~'))J June 2 1 , 2004 o, , •• ~e /. -;C .,<: "· "· "· ,, Re s olution II /, 7' jY-/ ( 58, 59, 60, 6 1 , 62, 63 / •· 1 ,, "" .. . .. .•. ,; .. .. . • 'J • . . • • • 0 . • .. .. ' • • ·• • • ENGLEWOOD CITY COUNCIL ENGLEWOOD, ARAPAHOE COUNTY, COLORADO June 21, 2004 l. Call to Order The regular meeting of the Englewood City Council was called to order by Mayor Garrett at 7:34 p.m. 2 . Invocation The invocation was given by Council Member Barrentine. 3. Pledp or Allepmce The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Mayor Garrett. 4. Roll Call Present : Absent: A quorum was present . Also present: Council Members Tomasso, Moore, Barrentine, Garrett, Bradshaw, Wolosyn Council Member Yurchiclr. City Manager Sean City Anomey Brouman Assillallt City Manaaa-Flaherty City Clerk Ellis Director Olson, Safety Services Director Gryglcwicz. Finance and Mminiwllive Services Director Simpson. Community Development Planner Fruchtl, Community Developmenl Senior Planner Graham, Community Development Director Black, Parks and Recreation Open Space Manager Lee, Puts and Recreation ••••• Mayor Garrett said I received a letter today from Counci l Member Yurchiclr. which Sla1eS "due to unfortunate circ um stance , I regretfully re ign from Ci ty Council effective Jul y 3, 2004." I would like to say that Mr. Yun:hiclr. v.as wanting to resign immediately . I had requested that he delay hi s resi&nation until July 3o1 fuJ the followh• re son ... and we may or may not be ta lking about this in more detail a little bit laler ... bul under the Enalcwood Charter we have onl y thirty days from the effective date of the resignation in order IO appoint a new member. Given that . .,.e want to make ure that we do this in a thouptful and timely procaa and ICt that in place before we start the thirty day clock . Thi s will give us until August 2• 10 make that appointment . Mayor Oanett aubmined the leaer of rcs1gna11o n to the ity lerk . 5 Minutes (a) COUNCIL MEMBER WOLOSYN MOVED, AND IT WAS SECONDED, TO APnOVE THEM IN TES or THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JUNE 7, JIN. Ma or Garrctt lWted 1f there .,.ere any comments. questiona or additions. Then wae ..-. \'ow rftlllls: 1 ' .•' • • Englewood City Council June 21, 2004 Page2 Ayes: Nays: Absent: Motion carried . 6. Scheduled Visitors ·• • • }...__,. • I I· ' i~ Council Members Barrentine, Moore, Bradshaw, Garrett, Wolosyn. Tomasso None Council Member Yurch ick (a) Don Seymour was recognized by City Council for his years of servi<:e of the Englewood Board of Adjustment and Appeals. Mayor Garrett said Mr. Seymour has been in this community a long time and has served on the Englewood Board o f Adjustments and Appeals for an unprecedented 29 years . He was Chair for two of those years . One of the things he is known for is that he showed up for almost all those meetings. Out of all those years, there were only two meetings that anyone can remember that he missed . One was when he was in Japan and another when he was in Ru ssia attending his son's wedding. There are many other things that this individual has done for this community. He has been a volunteer firefighter , served on the Englewood Historical Society and he has also been a Boy Scout leader. We want to thank him for his volunteer service on the Board of Adjustment and Appeals and for his contributions to the community of Englewood, he said Mayor Garrett presented Mr . Seymour with a plaque. This is in appreciation of your commitment and dedication to the community as a member of the Board of Adjustments and Appeals from February I, 1975 to February I, 2004, he said . He thanked Mr. Seymour on behalf of the Englewood City Council. There was applause . ••••• Mayor Garrett said for those of you who were not in the Study Session, the City Council decided to defer any action o n dog or off-leash park issues this evening and wait until we receive the report from the Task Force, which will meet on June 29 ... The expectation is that that report will be in our packets on July 81h , made publicly available in the City Library and the City Managers office on July 9lh and wc will then review that report in a Study Session on Jul y 12 ... as well as look at alternatives regarding the off-leash program. So, whether you still would like to comment or not is up to you, but I would like to just say that you may want to consider holding whatever comments you may o r ma y not have. depending upon what that report says and our discussions on July 12 ... So, I will now call yo ur names and if you care to speak, please do. If you care to decline , please do and we will sec you next time. (b) Susan Pacek, 4249 South Lincoln. said if you will bear with me, I have a short power point presentation . She said I am here to provide some ideas and some solutions for off-leash dog privileges, to develo p a win/win situation . Just to give yo u a little bit of background about me . I am the Comprehensive Planning Manager for the Town of Parker and have been the Planning Director for Clear Creek County. I have about 15 years of planning experience behind me . Monday nights are usually my nights wi th my Council , but I :!lad tonight off, so I was able to come and present thi s. Just a short background ... about-two and a half years ago you instituted a leash law and you identified five parks to accommodate off-leash privileges for a one year pilot program. The program was recei,·ed very "ell and it was made permanent . On the 151h of September of 2003. Council Member Garrett stated that the off-leash dog park policy was actually converted from a pilot program to a permanent program. A Task Force was initiated at the end of last -year. The charge was to identify a formal dog park and o n January 271h of this year they had their initial meeting. They have been working toward a soluti o n for the last six months and, as you said Mayor. they are expected to have a forma l recommendation at their next meeting on the 29•. On the 14• of pnl a petition was submitted to the Parks and Recreation Comm ission . The petition requested that Jason Park be removed from the no-leash law and that petition did state reasons for the request . Fifteen individuals signed that pet111on however. o nl y nine households were represented . Of the nine . o nl y four of the twenty-four households who directly bound Jason Park signed the petition . On the 6• and 10"' of June a few of us conducted a door-to-door ur,ey to under tand what the i ues were of the adjacent property owners. so wc can better provide you with a r omme ndation . Sixteen o ut of the twenty-four households who directly bound the park were in support of maintaining off-I ash c11v1 11e at the Park . And two that "'ere initially against those dog activities said that they "ould change their position 1f pcc,fic re trictions were implemented . Herc is a map of Jason Park and the urrounding household~ and you can sec the pro-dog households. And again, ixteen of the t"-enty-four household c m fa,or of maintaining the off-lca-h pnv1lcges. and two of the households who initially opposed were willing to ' . ... • • -· Englewood City Council June 21, 2004 Page3 n u support with the restrictions . I have a few questions that are kind of rhetoric and I don't expect an answer. The first one is ... why would Council entertain closing Jason Park when the majority of the households who are directly impacted by the activities in the park are actually in support for maintaining off-leash privileges? And the second one is ... why would Council entertain the extreme step of closing all of the off-leash dog parks when concern was expressed over only one of them? As a planner I really try to reach creative planning solutions to all kinds of issues and especially when they are as controversial as this. So how do we get there from here? We look at compromises. We look at preserving parks for all the public. We look to develop a win/win solution. We look to co-habitat uses that work together. We work toward positive outcomes, not negative and ultimately we work together. In reviewing some of the minutes from the last couple of years of Council's sessions, I found that Council also supported a lot of these ideas and philosophies. I think we can't do a win/Jose. I think we have to do a win/win in our community. I think a compromise can be reached. that is why I think we all need to work together. I do like the prospect of compromise. And, I still think that people need to learn to co-habitat peacefully. I think that it is important for us to preserve public parks for all of the public, not just people with children, not just people with dogs and that we have to learn to work together on this. I hope that both entities can come together and work toward a positive outcome. Just as a side note, I must admit that people who use dog parks really clean it up and Gomes told me that they went to an off-leash park and found five deposits and when they went to a leashed park they found forty-five. So, how many people really do care about this dog park issue? The Denver Post, on May 20• of this year, actually identified that in Jefferson County 45 .9 percent of the people owned dogs ... Adams County 45 percent. .. Boulder 40.6 percent ... Douglas County 38.5 percent and the City and County of Denver 31.8 percent. And where do we fall in that here in Englewood? Arapahoe County is at 52.8 percent . I have some recommendations for Council I think are trying to achieve this win/win situation. Allow the Task Force to continue with their efforts and formalize their recommendation to identify a park dedicated to off-leash dog activities. Maintain Jason Park as a multi-use park that includes off-leash dog privileges and institute specific restrictions that address the concerns of those who directly bound the park. Address any issues that are brought forth on the other three off-leash dog parks on a case- by-case basis and develop a park-specific plan, if necessary. Then institute an Englewood dog license to help off-set the applicable costs associated with any of those park specific plans. And lastly, institute a Dog Park Association or a non-profit 501 (C)(3) that would be staffed by volunteers to the community that could help you address some of these issues. I would like to close with a quote ... "I believe there is a solution for co-habitation. I would like to sec people move towards that ." I would just like to say that as a planner, I would be happy to volunlecr my time and help the Task Force any way I could to reach those solutions, because I think there are positive and win/win solutions out there . Thank you for taking the time and listening to my comments. There was applause . Mayor Garrett said one of the things I failed to mention was that as you ask rhetorical questions. generally we do not get into question answering and sometimes that is misinterpreted during this particular time. Sometimes Council members will offer comments during Council Members Choice. So, for those who want to stick around and sec if we have any answers to rhetorical questions or otherwise, you can do that . (c) Greg Kainer . 4443 South Acoma Street. said I am a new resident of the area and I'm also a new business person here in Englewood. I chose to move to this area from Anchorage, Alaska after four vacations here in Colorado. One of the deciding factors of relocating to Englewood was a dog park. I have a show dog and I exercise my dog 4 . 5. 6 days a week at Jason Park. II is a beautiful little community thing. It is a wonderful socialization process . Some people go to bars. some people go to book clubs and some people go to dog parks. One o f the things that I wanted to present to you fo lk s tonight ... I worked in Anchorage. Alaska for six months with a non-profit. We actually formed a 50l(C)(3)-Anchoragc Unleashed. We worked with the city as a partner to get six dog parks dedicated. It was a process, so I empathize with you on your diligence. )'Our perseverance. and your emotions. I know it is a prcx·e . One of the things that the S0l(C)(3) did for the city is it relieved their coffers a little bit . because we were a formal group that had an accounting processes. so we actually took tax deductions from the communit y and we got a IOI . We got fencing. we got labor. we got donations in kind, and we got cash . We worked with the city a lot. It can work . It is a process. but it can work . I think you will find that most of the people here to night that are for the dog park i ue. are very dedicated people. They are probably more accommodating ... what I found being 1n the Jason Park ... than the real world. for instance. we work with all of the multi -use in the park right now. When there are softball games. when there are volleyball aames. when there arc picnic ... we mo,·e to another area. We don't confront people and say thi i our space . We are alad 10 ha11e thi little portion of the land in the C'Offlmunity where we can exercise our animal and actually soc1ah11C unona oursel ve . One of the things we found when we were in Anchora,e working on the doa part iuue, was tluil the ucce or the dog p.1rk relied a lot on the convenience 10 the community. People -n·t PIii to dn11e all the way t • • Englewood City Council June 21, 2004 Page4 •• • (--. (.~_ across town to a gravel pit. Most of the people walked to the parks from their house. Most of the people were there on a regular basis. They probably knew people better in the dog parks, because they saw them every day. than some of their other neighbors. It is hard to explain if you haven 't been there with an animal, the socialization process that takes place, but I consider lots of these folks in the audience that I have seen at the park, my friends. We socialize and we have barbecues. One of the things that the dog park does for the community is it really makes neighbors of the people. It really makes neighbors . You will find that people go out of their way, because they met someone at the dog park. It is just kind of a unique experience. I think that is what this community is all about. It is a nice, neighborly community. I like the size. I like to be able to get to know everybody. I think that the community would benefit greatly if they would consider maintaining some sort of dog park status convenient to the community. I think that they would benefit if they opened up the option of a 501(C)(3) where they would have a community partnership that would allow private donations. One of the things the 501(C)(3) did was we also worked with the city in requiring licensing for the animals within the city. And, that was a huge revenue generator. It did not create a drain on the city. Another thing that the dog parks did, and you arc probably aware of this, was it reduced vandalism and graffiti and damage to all of the park facilities, because of just extreme use. I understand where the City has responsibilities for the grass and for all the other multi-users in the park, but I would like to think that there is a significant portion of the community with animals that really don't have another place to exercise their dogs, because of the lot limitation and if you arc a renter you don't even have a house of your own, you arc in an apartment. The dog parks, where you arc able to take your dog off-leash and exercise a dog. goes a very long way . That is really all the comments I wanted to bring to you tonight. There was applause. (d) Tavis Hanna, 4420 South Elati Street, said I have been an Englewood resident for a linle over a year and a half now. I just want to start off by saying thank you for the Study Session at the beginning. That left me with a feeling of hope, with a feeling of faith , with a feeling of genuine respect for what you people arc doing here. It is the first time that I have truly seen a reciprocation from the Council in terms of hearing the suggestions that have been brought to the tablc ... hearing our feelings on the issue. It is the first time I have seen a real proactive approach to this issue, at large. I have seen it from individuals on specific occasions, but as a whole from the entire Council. this is the first time I feel that this issue is moving forward toward a solution and not rearward toward an ultimatum. Definitely, I appreciate everything you folks have done up to this point. I prcpaml what I wanted to say tonight much more than previously. I have had to strike most of it out. considering the meeting before this. Just to start off. I would like to walk through and really address the key issue at this point regarding Jason Park's off-leash status. and that is the drought. It has been alleviated a liulc bil by the rains the past few days. but that at best would o nl y la st a month , so the long term solution is hard. But, to kind of back trace our steps. one of the most important things that I saw happening in this pattern. since the Bates Logan si tuation, was the issues that were brought up at that point were put into a si tuation o f mediation. The sugge lions that came out of that which were •av-I to by boih side . I think were pcrfcclly valid . And. the fact thal they were aiirced to by both sides. really speaks for itself. The fact that rhat park was closed so immediately and those suggestions just vanished ... really kind of made my heart sink. The day 1ha1 Bares Logan Park closed I went to Jason Park and for the first time in a year I had other dogs to play wirh . I had 30 dogs lo play with . I went home to my wife thal night and said. that's it , we're done. it is going 10 go 100. And s lowly the issues have started popping up and all those issues arc symptoms of over populauon, ymptoms of over use. It is true with people. It i true wi th animals. You get too many in one confined s pace and II doc n't go mooth a if you have fewer number . I really. honcsrly think that the Bates Logan i uc is very pccifi , in the sense that ii is so close to the Denver border. I wi h Denver would figure out a way to put an off-leas h facility on their sout h border. Harvard Gulch Park i gigantic. I can't sec why they couldn't figure out how to put something mall . eve n a n enclosure in there and that would help to alleviate the strain o n our northern border. To be hone 1. most of the people who were coming to Jason Park for the past sill months have been Denver v1 11or . h has tapered off a bit . since they opened their parks . So the ituation i getting better. But aaain. I did feel that what happened with Bates Logan ... it was !IOI as proactive a sollllion as a loc of us were lookina for . And that is where I ttl'ink. a lot of th i has started 10 become very emotional a nd very trcSSful for both ides or th1 issue. I definitely think that what it essentially accomplished was sh1ft1n1 the ymptoms or the problcm ... llOI addressing the problem but s h1f11ng the ymptoms of the problem. out of ighl/out of mind until they popped up apin. It was es,enuall hkc equating something to weeping it under the rug . You can only do it so Ion& until the lump aeu bigger under the rug. The drought. specificall y, i a definite concern of mine and I defini1ely think that i one of the ffljln rc-.as that a lot of us feel that we are most compelled 10 compromise on. because we understand that we do ha,c n impact . We understand that our dogs certainly arc !IOI alway there all the tune. but 111 , as ocher people haH, 1d. a random ui.c . They are no1 all concentrated m one area . For example. if I So there late in the evening , rc--1fo:all) 10 11,01d l.irgc number , we will do a lap or two around the pen meter of the park and walk home . That ' • • - Englewood City Council June 21, 2004 PageS ·• • • r_J--. 'l way the use isn't fixated on one spot. The dogs can run around off-leash .. .I can't run as fast as they can ... they can smell everything that they usually smell, eat the blades of grass that grow up along the edge of the fence where the mower can't get to, they even like some of the dogs who border the park.. .they are kind of visiting their friends. Then there are afternoons where there are a few people there. It is usually anywhere from 8 to 12 consistently and we tend to stay in a spot where we are off the soccer field, off the baseball field and away from the playground. Addressing that, I would have to say that, that one section is the only section that we could attribute any wear and tear on the grass and soil to the dogs. However, in having viewed the entire park, even sections of it that I don't normally go to ... the grass condition in all those parks is almost identical. I would also like to submit a video tape tonight. .. it is a tour of the greenbelt adjacent to my home, it goes to Rotolo Park and then we jumped over to Jason Park. Rotolo Park hardly gets any use and the greenbelt hardly gets any use at all. . .I mean even less than Rotolo Park and it is only Jason Park that gets it for dogs off-leash. There arc patches that look dry and damaged and those are typically patches that don't get a lot of shade or arc not getting enough watering from the sprinklers. In some instances the sprinklers say here there is a big pine tree here and there is a shadow effect behind the pine tree where the water doesn't get to. So I would like to submit that. Please view it. It is about 45 minutes, but it is a great comparison of places that don't get any dog traffic, places that get medium people traffic and then Jason Park which gets a bit of both. You will also see on the Jason Park side, sections of the park where literally no one goes, I've never seen people really hanging out or playing on the south border of the park. It is under a bunch of trees, so it gets good shade but the grass there is in the same condition as shortstop on the baseball field, the baselines on the baseball field, the wings going up and down the soccer field, the center of the soccer field, the sections where people set up for their volleyball stations and there are some sections right between the parking lot where you walk right on to the playground that are really pretty badly dried up and it is just bare dirt. We also have some photographs here. Some are of Rotolo Park, some of Jason Park and some of Bates Logan Park. You will see that the grass, in these photographs ... I would have to say ... is better at Jason Park than at Bates Logan at this point, which has actually had less use, but maybe it doesn't get as much shade as Jason Park does. So I urge you to really view this and compare it also with the recommendation you get from Parks and Recreation. This is great information. It literally takes you there and puts you right at those parks so that you can do a side by side comparison and then keep in mind the usage. Moving on ... one question that I would like you guys to answer at the end ... do we water the parks, especially Jason Park. with gray water? I know somebody brought that up and it was kind of a suggestion or some kind of statement, but I would like to koow. I guess I would have to move on to some solutions. You've heard tonight from a woman who does planning specifically as her job. You have heard from a gentleman who helped create an off-leash program where one did not exist prior. I had the opponunity to sit in on last Monday's Park and Recreation meeting. One of the gentlemen was giving a report on the water park and one thing I really liked hearing from him was everything is smooth, but we do have some small adaptations or small fixes that you have to make when you start a business. A few years ago, this was a pilot program and I think that the kind of attention to detail that it was given was great in the beginning. it kind of ran smooth for awhile and I just kind of got the feeling like it became a non-issue. then Bates Logan exploded and it was a real pain in the butt. I can understand closing it . I think that was the right decis ion. I think that closing our other parks though. is a completely different beast. Some of the ympto ms that we ha ve had at Jason Park arc similar to Bates Logan, but many of them aren't. I haven't had any problems with parents getting upset that the dogs arc near their kids. In fact. parents usually bring their kids over to see the d ogs. Although. I think the main issue for me, aside from the drought, is safety. I would definitely like to sec one large off-leash facility within Englewood, because we are sti ll going to have the people from Denver, wc arc 1111 going to have the people from Littleton ... I meet them almost every night. So, for them to go to one big facility '"here the y can JUSI really have a blast, that is great . Dogs need a place where they can just go crazy sometimes. But sometimes that doesn't belong in our parks and that is one reason why I don't really like it when people refer to Jason Park as the dog park. It is not . We have a privilege. It is a soccer park. It is a basketball park. It is a pla ground park. It is baseball, it is everything. It is not 'ihc dog park." And that is where I think that an adaptation. a mi nor t11;cak o n this open1tion, would best be done by following through with establishing one large off-leash park . But. to jump over to Denver 's conccpc. they felt that multiple locations, which they researched per the demographic need. was a better soluuo n than one off-leash park. because they felt that would overstress that fac1h t) and n 11,ould 1mmcd1atcly doom 1110 fail. I would hkc to submit thi s video. Thanks . There was applause. (e ) Jane Coleman. 901 South Galapago. said I have a letter that I have been ukcd to read . This letter 1 trom Kcrm11 and 1rg1ma F1kan. 11 76 We t Princeton Place. Engle,.-ood. Colorado. and it i to the Enalewood 11 Council. It I regarding off-leash prh 1lcgcs ,n Englewood parks. "My wife and I boupt this property in pt ember o f 19 9 nd we "'ere one o f the first people in the development and we arc the onainal owners at 1176 ~ c,1 Pr1occton Pl c We 0 11,n and pay property ta cs on four proper1.1C$ 1n Englewood. The house that wc have ' ... .-· • • En&lewood City Council June 21, 2004 Page6 lived in since 1959 borders on Jason Park . ln fact, we were here before Jason was a park . At that time ii was a sheep pasture . My wife and I arc for off-leash privileges at Jason . We have enjoyed seeing the different kinds of dogs and talking with the people as they come through the park. Our great-grandkids love ii . The dogs have replaced the geese and the dogs don't do one-lcnlh of the damage that the geese ever did . We find that the owners of the dogs arc diligent about cleaning up after their dogs . We arc in favor of keeping the parks open 10 off-leash privileges . As long time Englewood residents and taxpayers , we hope the City Council will reconsider any ideas of taking the off-leash privileges away al Jason and the other off-leash parks in Englewood. We feel the off-leash privileges arc a good thing ." II is signed Kermit Fikan and Virginia Fikan . They also asked me to give you these pictures and would like you 10 look at them. She said l don't know what I can say tonight that hasn't already been said . We have explained 10 you the benefits of the off-leash privileges at Jason Park and the other Englewood Parks that are off-leash . We have presented the residents' approval of the off-leash privilcgcs ... 92% of the residents that are directly adjacent 10 Jason Park have resoundingly voiced and signed their approval of the off-leash privileges . They feel the greatest impact of the dogs and people visiting the park and still 92% support the off-leash privileges . We have shown you pictures of the turf al Jason and other off-leash parks, plus also offered a comparison 10 parks that arc nol off-leash and Jason is in better shape, visibly, than the comparisons . We have shown pictures of huge nocks of geese enjoying the soccer field, prior 10 the off-leash privileges. Of course, as has been noted, no one owns the geese, so no one can be blamed, but the damage they can create is there just the same. We have related the wonderful experiences Iha! arc available by walking your dog al Jason and other off-leash parks. Such as : friendships have been forged; people moving into the area because of off-leash privileges; young and old adults relishing the fresh air and sunshine that comes with exercising themselves and their dogs at the park; a good mental and physical uplifting by just getting out of the house; socializing the dogs to make better dog citizens; policing the parks, thereby making them safe for those using the parks, and surrounding areas, and for those that arc anti-off- leash, the willingness lo work together with the City and cooperate in any way possible to maintain and keep the parks clean and safe, following the restrictions that have been placed on the parks for the playground, children and ball fields, the large numbers ... 52% of the Arapahoe County families owning dogs. These arc all working towards the betterment for the City and citizens of Englewood . The television states that Colorado is approaching the end of the six-year drought. With the recent rains, and with the continued cooperation of people in the Enalcwood area, we will gel through this. showing little or no damage lo our lawns and the turf al the parks. With the Englewood parks watered with non-potable waler, thcrc is even less chance of waler-shortage damage. The Parks arc there for everyone . Not 10 sit empty. day after day . That would be a use waste and waste of the taxpayer's money . We have offered solutions 10 the off-leash situation; and arc open 10 alternatives, such as restricted hours, registration, volunteer park associations, help in providing necessary facilities, Cle. We have people here who arc willing to abide by the rules; 10 take care of the parks and prolccl them; 10 use them ·10 the full advantage that they were intended ; 10 appreciate and work with City officials to protect the assets they have pledged to maintain; 10 provide willing hands 10 help with that prolcetion; 10 work 10 a solution that will afford the majority of the people the satisfaction of their parks . At the last City Council meeting, I stated "compromise." The off-leash groups have said repeatedly that they were willing 10 compromise . This is a quote "put a compromise on the table; and let's come to some sort of an agreement . Gel a mediator if necessary . The Off-Leash Task Force was a start; and we need to continue with our efforts to use the parks system in its maximum ." Again I state, and I speak for both off-~ groups at Jason Park, and I want 10 make this crystal clear ... we arc willing to compromise. II is my belief that the City Council will look at the overall picture; that the Council will realize that the majority of Englewood citizens arc wanting off-leash privilege and this majority will cooperate in every way possible to maintain and support them . Thank you very much. There was applause . 7 . Unsc:heduled Visitors Mayor Garrett said we now move 10 unscheduled public comment. In keeping with a policy that we adopted. we arc going to have 45 minutes of unscheduled public comment. Once we set 10 45 minutes we will Slop, ao to the regular agenda of our meeting and then come back to those who still have noc had an opportunity to speak. (a) Jill Wilson, 3061 South Grant, said I am on the Task Force as you probably know. I read this same lelter in the fall , so I'm j11c t going 10 re-read ii and show that 1heR was compromise then and there is w,lhngncss I compromise now . I would like to brina up two main I ues . Solutions for the Park and Expc,ctab011$ of the Cny ounc,t. I want you 10 know that thi , • pros,am lha1 works. The AKC has a web pqe ielhna people how 10 ere 1c an off-leash dog park . The uppon the concq,t. We have addrased all the iaaua and recommended the folio"' ing compromises 10 mne 1111 a ful •CftllR that can be fflJOyed by t•cry member of the t ... • • - 0 En&lewood City Council June 21, 2004 Page7 • • community. Park sites ... keeping the four existing dog parks, plus the Task Force's choice. Fenced in areas would help contain the dogs. It also would allow a specific place where the community could meet. Scheduled times would also work, in the morning from 6 :00 to 9:00 and in the evening, from 5 :00 to 8:00, or any other times . In addition to these compromises, I would like to address some questions that have been raised over the last year regarding concerns about the dog park, such as health, safety, budget, educating dog owners, and City liability. Health ... right now there are waste pick up bags supplied by the community. Covered trash cans. Scheduling a monthly park clean up day for the dog park users. Safety ... Code Enforcement patrol. .. they are already doing an excellent job. Community monitoring, which is already done across the country at dog parks. When the parks have people in them, it is a good , inexpensive way to deter crime. Budget. .. charging fees for residents and non-residents, similar to what Parks and Recreation does now. The dog park users could organize fund raisers. Donations. Another vital issue that must be handled is the education of dog owners: This can easily be addressed by passing out flyers throughout the community with pet owner information. Having dog trainers come to the park and give mini training sessions. City liability ... post a sign up with the rules . Owners are legally responsible for their dogs and any injuries caused by them. Puppies and dogs must be properly licensed, inoculated and healthy. Animals should wear a collar and ID tags at all times . Owners must clean up after their dogs. Dogs showing aggression towards people or other animals will be removed from the park. Animals who exhibit a history of aggressive behavior will not be permitted. Puppies using the park must be at least four months old. Owners should not leave their dogs unattended or allowed out of sight. If young children are permitted in the dog park, they too should be under constant supervision. Dogs in heat will not be allowed inside the park. Owners must carry a leash at all times. Dogs should be leashed before entering and prior to leaving the park. Violators will be subject to removal from the park and suspension of park privileges. My expectations for the City Council are that they represent everyone. Dog parks are a great place for owners to meet other people with common interests. The love people share for their dogs reaches beyond economic and social barriers and helps to foster a sense of community. Dog owners deserve a part of the park pie with the other special use groups like baseball, soccer and basketball. On Englewood's web page there is an organizational chart and at the top are the citizens of Englewood. City Council positions are elected ... voted in to serve all the citizens. Thank you very much. There was applause. (b) Chris Earley, 4249 South Lincoln Street, said I am going to read a brief letter from Mr. Craig Miller, a professional horticulturist relating to turf use and damage that I think is pertinent to this whole issue. "'E nglewood City Council : I have a Bachelor of Science in Horticulture and Forestry and 35 years in the green industry. I am also a certified arborist. and a member of the International Society of Arboriculture, Colorado Weed Management Association , Front Range Urban Forestry Council, Colorado Tree Coalition and I am a Colorado Department of Agriculture Certified Pesticide Applicator. In my 35 years in the business, typically what I see is more damage done to turf from the heavily programmed sports such as soccer, football and baseball, than I do from responsible dog usage. Feces and urine can cause damage to turf due to excessive nitrification . However, when responsible owners clean up after their pets , and with the typical frequency of irrigation that occurs in most park lands . dog spotting can be minimized . Furthermore. in my experience, dog spots are easier to repair than compacted soi l and excessive wear that occur, for example. within the goal mouth of a soccer field. They are also typically less visible . Repair of these areas often requires aeration, soil modification, over seeding, re-sodding and fertilization. as we ll as restric ting the use to allow such areas to recover. Thank you, Craig R. Miller, Horticulturist." Mr. Earley said I will s ubmit this for the record . There was applause. (c) Jay Schneiders, 2980 South Emerson Street, said I have been at this address for about four years . T hank you for the opportunit y to make a few comments. People have eloquently given the recreational rationales better than I ever could and . 1 think, very solidly. I would like to just make a reflection about a larger benefit to all of us in o ur communit y. that the meeting of dogs and people in parks has, apart from recreation. That has to do with a larger issue of public welfare and public well being, I think ... public health even. You know dogs were, initially, protecto rs and then they were serva nt s, now for 52% of us they are also friends and kind of extended family . At one of yo ur local hos pitals. where 1 practice. we have been making use of the fact that the dog/person interaction is a remarkabl y robust one. When it comes to healing, you probably all know and I am not going to get into a lot of detail. about the way auti sti c folks are socialized with animals in particular ways. Nursing hornes ... you will see people who literall y ha ven ·1 spoken in years and when they arc approached by a dog and have a chance to be uound a dog will come out of depressions and feelings . We have therapy dogs that travel through Swedish and room after room people s ign up for these dogs. The medical literature is becoming fairly resilient and robust about this, that they seem 10 promote healing ... our immune system reaction seem. to be improved. I think those of us who live with dogs know that . I think that the mix of dogs and pe<>r 1• in parks isn't just good for the dogs, it is good for us. I ' . .. ·' • • Englewood City Council June 21, 2004 Page8 • • am not somebody who thinks that dogs and people are the same. I was in Walgreens the other day, I had to pick up some medicine, you know the new HIPPA laws where you get these long forms you have to fill out every time you get a prescription and the pharmacist said that I was picking up medicine for Uma and that she would have lo sign for it. I said she is out in the car, do you want me to get her and he said yes, you will need to get her lo sign for it. I think that dogs and people arc different and there are limits. There are real reasonable differences that we all can agree to maintain. But you know societies typically have been judged, by many thoughtful philosophers and sociologists, by how they treat other species. In many religious traditions protection for animals and socialization with animals has beer. a mark of humane culture. And, I think that from just those standpoints ... the public health, the public welfare, and the public well being, I think a lot of us as people could use more socialization. I wish we could come up with something as good as the dogs have for what they do at the parks ... the sniffing aside. I just make a small musing and note that I think there arc reasons beyond just the recreational ones, that this is a good thing for all of us . Thanks. There was applause. (d) Glenn Pennebaker, 4255 South Lincoln Street, said I have been a resident in Englewood for three years and I have been a dog owner for two and a half years . Unfortunately, I just found out about the dog park recently and less than a week ago I found out there is a possibility that we are going to be losing this park. Not only is it good recreation for my dog, but I am a rather large person myself and walking my dog to the park and stuff has done me great wonders as well. I wanted to read an article published by the National Recreation and Park Association published by Maya Avrasin entitled ''Cause for Paws: A Look at Pooch-Friendly Parks". In this article, the author states that "dog parks are increasingly seen not as luxuries, but necessities." The article goes on to further state "according to the dogpark.com website, which has a comprehensive list of dog parks nationwide, there arc almost 700 dog parks in the country." Communities all over the front range have either implemented off-leash dog programs or arc looking to starting them. So why is the Englewood Council considering eliminating all of our off- leash privileges, based upon a petition signed by 9 households, instead of implementing restrictions· to address the concerns raised? Isn't working toward a win-win solution that accommodates all Englewood residents worth working toward? Thank you and I do have copies to submit. There was applause. (c) Kathleen Buckley, 4648 South Pearl Street, said I was here the other day and I don't want to reiterate any further . I just want to show my support and volunteer in anyway that I can if you are willing to keep the parks open for us . Thanks. There was applause. (I) Noreen Bcgordis said I just kind of want to give a perspective as a senior citizen. I have lived in Englewood for about 25 years, first in Centennial Acres and now I live at 4500 South Delaware. I used to have a German shepherd. which I used to walk along the greenbelt . It was real great, because it was just a half a block away, but in the winter I fell three or four different times ... hurt my hip. my knee, my arm and was on crutches for a few weeks. When I lost my German shepherd two years ago I decided that, well I can't walk a dog in the park any more , because in the winter my lungs get bad. Well, a friend of mine gave me this cute little Lhasa Apso named Sadie. I thought well my yard should be fine, but she loves to run just as much as the big dogs do. She loves to go to Jason Park and chase the big dogs. And, especially for the senior citizens in the winter I can't walk her along the greenbelt, but boy she will jump in the car and I lake her to Jason Park and she can run through the snow and have a gay old time and I can enjoy watching her. I just don't want to lose the privilege. I think that the park should be used for those of us that live in Englewood and pay taxes in Englewood. Maybe have a license or charge. I think Denver and Linleton should provide their own off-leash. I think if we keep it just for those of us who live in Englewood, I think it would be great . I've got three grandkids and they just love to go to Jason Park and throw tennis balls for the other dogs and chase t!lc dogs and play with them and with my little dog especially. So many of the other kids that were there at the playground. they would come walking over and say "oh can I pct your dog" and the parents would say, '1h1s is so neat that the ki~ can interact with the dog." And, also, like I say. when they've got ball game and thi and that . I usually come early in the morning and in the evening and we just walk around the pcnrncter and don't bother anybody. When there arc a lot of people there, I will walk her in the greenbelt. But I think we ho uld have the chance to bring our grandkids and bring the dog and, for us that pay taxes, to have the use of Jason Park . Thank you. There was applause . (g) huck Nour, 39().& South Pearl Street. said I am glad to sec the support of the dogs. but a lot of the things that arc being brought up. from CVCl')1hing that I have heard and from everything that I have read, the Council 1 not t.al.ng l'"'I) the dog p;arl The) arc looking at modifying it ... moving it, whatever. As a coach, I coach three different pons 1n Engle,.ood I am also on the Enalcwood Soccer Associauon. Two weeks ago we had a clinic for ' ... • • -· Englewood City Council June 21, 2004 Pqe9 the kids. We had five incidences with owners who could not control their animals. I had a Great Dane come up and take food off the table. We talked to the owner and she said I can't control him. We said you need to have him on a leash ... she turned around and walked away with her dog, as her dog sat there and ate the stuff that was on the table. We had three Colorado Rapids come oul at that time, they set up a field . We had a dog who thought it would be fun to take every one of the cones as the kids were playing. At that same time, me and another little kid ... 13 ... were kicking a ball back and forth . An owner standing at about a distance from me to Council Member Bradshaw was watching his dog. I am kicking a ball and the dog comes from behind me and tries auac.king the ball as I am on a kick. I ta.kc the dogs legs out. The owner then appropriately comes up to me and asks me what my name was and how I was going to pay if his dog was injured . I understand , I am a dog owner myself, so whatever comes out of my mouth, I think about the kids more than I think about anything . When you play with your dog, your dog gets used to what you do. If you throw a tennis ball, every ball looks like a tennis ball. I tell my dog to go get her toy she brings me back whatever ball she finds first ... baseball, tennis ball, soccer ball, baslr.etball, it doesn't matter. The same thing happens when you have children playing. We have T-ball up there now . We've got soccer. Soccer games have been disrupted, because dogs have run on the field . Soccer games have been stopped, because dogs have run on the field during the game. As a coach, if I have your children and I said go do whatever and I didn't pay attention, what kind of coach would I be? What kind of person would you entrust your child with? I am up here for the children of the community. I hear 26 of the neighboring houses approve the dog par.k at Jason. That is 26 households. I am on a Soccer Board that has 300 children. That is 600 parents. That out numbers the 26. That does !IOI include the baseball people that use it. That does not include the basketball people. Most of the time, every meeting I have been to I've heard, well the numbers have dwindled at Bates Logan and the numbers have dwindled at Jason Park. Some parents are afraid to have their kids there. So if the dogs are there, they go some place else. When it rains or when it snows as the Soccer Board we call off every game. Question I have for the dog owners ... do you call every dog owner and say do not go on the field to stop it from being tom up? We pay for permits to be on those fields . I understand that it is a public park, the public gets it. But. on the flip side, we have to abide by rules of the Parks and Recreation division for baseball or for any other organized spon. Do the dog owners follow the same policies? Thank you. (h) Patricia Pattison said I live at 2594 South Acoma, which makes me one block off of Englewood, an interloper into Jason Park. What I'm here to say is that I really understand what the gentleman was talking about who was up here before me . And. if there are games going on in the park. I don't ta.kc my dogs in. I have some pretty severe disabilities, so I have a service dog and I can't walk my dogs on leash because of that. .. the disabilities. So. it is just a wonderful thin& to be able to go to Jason Park and let them run and play. I also have met a number of people there who I really enjoy talking to and that is good from that standpoint. I do feel that maybe it is possible to nol have the dogs there when the children are there playing the games. Aren't the games scheduled? Wouldn't there be a way to Ir.now when the games are going to be played and that Ir.ind of thing? But for someone like me, a park like Jason is really essenlial . Thank you very much. There was applause. 8. Communkalioas, Proda-tloal ud Appolni-ats (a) A proclamation declaring June as National Homeownership Month was considered. COUNCIL MEMBER BRADSHAW MOVED, AND IT WAS SECONDED, TO APPROVE A PROCLAMATION DECLARING JUNE AS NATIONAL HOMEOWNERSHIP MONTH. Mayor Garren asked if Chere was any discussion. There was none. Vol~ results: Ayes : Nays : Absent Mocion carried . 9 . Pllblk Hearina Council Members Barrentine, Moore, Bradshaw, Garrett. Wolosyn. Tomasso None Council Member Yurchick No pubhc hearing .,.., hedulcd before Council. t .. • • -=-· Englewood City Council June 21, 2004 PqelO 10. Consent Agenda (a) Approval of Ordinances on First Reading 0 . There were no additional items submitted for approval on first reading . (See Agenda Item 11 -Regular Agenda.) COUNCIL MEMBER BRADSHAW MOVED, AND IT WAS SECONDED, TO APPROVE CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS 10 (b) (I) AND 10 (c) (I), (II) and (W). (b) Approval of Ordinances on Second Reading (i) ORDINANCE NO . 33, SERIES OF 2004 (COUNCIL BILL NO . 32. INTRODUCED BY COUNCIL MEMBER BRADSHAW) AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING ACCEPTANCE OF A TRANSPORTATION/UTILITY EASEMENT ALONG SOUTH ELA TI STREET FROM THE REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION DISTRICT TO THE CITY OF ENGLEWOOD, COLORADO . (c) Resolutions and Motions (i) RESOLUTION NO . 53, SERIES OF 2004 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE ADOPTION OF THE COLORADO MUNICIPAL RECORDS RETENTION SCHEDULE BY THE CITY OF ENGLEWOOD, COLORADO . (ii) RESOLUTION NO . 54, SERIES OF 2004 A RESOLUTION IN WHICH THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ENGLEWOOD, COLORADO HEREBY CASTS ITS EMPLOYER'S VOTE IN FAVOR OF THE FIRE AND POLICE PENSION ASSOCIATION'S (F.P.P.A. 'S) PROPOSED AMENDMENTS NO . I, NO. 2 AND NO . 3. (iii) RESOLUTION NO . 55, SERIES OF 2004 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE APPROVAL OF DIRECT SUBGRA.i'lT AW ARDS FOR THE COLORADO DIVISION OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE JUVENILE ACCOUNT ABILITY INCENTIVE BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM. Vole results: Moti on carried. Ayes : Nays : Absent : Council Members Barrentine, Moore. Bradshaw, Garrett , Wolosyn, Tomasso None Council Member Yurchick 11. Regular Agenda (a) Approval of Ordinances on First Reading (i) Planner Fruchtl presented a recommendation from the Community Development Depanment to adopt a bill for an ordinance approving the Planned Unit Development for Englewood Estates. Staff also is requesting that City Council schedule a Public Hearing for July 19, 2004 to gather input on the proposed Planned Unit Development. At this time. if Council would like, staff is prepared to give a short overview of the projec t and answer any questions you may have . Mayor Garrett said that would be very helpful , thank you . Mr . Fruchtl sai d the ubjcct propcny is a vacant parcel of approximately 1.19 acrcs located at 1296 West Quincy Avenue . It is approximately I 000 feet cast of the intenection of Quincy and Windermere . Access to the proposed development will be through a private drive and that will be West Quincy Circle and thal will be accascd from West Quincy Avenue . Adjacent properties to the nonh , cast and south are zoned R-1-C Sinale-Family Unit ,. ' .:.., ... .... • • - Englewood City Council June 21, 2004 Page 11 Residential District and contain single-family homes. Adjacent properties to the west are zoned 1-1 and are used as automotive sales and engine repair. The Englewood Estates application proposes 7 single family lots ranging in size from 5,116 square feet to 6,750 square feet. The average lot size of the PUD is 5,784 square feet, which is comparable to the adjacent R-1-C zoning. which requires a minimum lot size of 6,000 square feet. The proposed height of the principal structures is 32 feet, which is the same as the height mandated in the Unified Development Code, which was recently adopted. Setbacks for this development are established through a development envelope and are specific to each lot and that development envelope is shown on the PUD District Plan . Please note that although the development envelope is the area in which development may occur, any provisions within the PUD District Plan Development Standards preclude the development envelope from being fully developed. Additional provisions to the development envelope require that garage doors be set back a minimum 24 feet from West Quincy Circle to provide additional parking within there . Any type of landscaping associated with the project is compatible with Section 16-6-7: Landscaping and Screening of the Unified Development Code. If there are any questions from City Council at this time, I would be more than happy to answer them. Mayor Garrett said are there any questions from Council . Council Member Bradshaw said I just have a brief comment. This property has been sitting there for years and at one time in the SO's we had a proposal come through. This really is a good looking proposal. Mayor Garrett asked if there were any questions or comments from Council. Mayor Garrett said I have a couple. The first one is the 6 foot height requirement that the developers are going to put around the perimeter of the property. My concern is on the Qu.incy Avenue side. Because a lot of the properties along there, that actually face other streets, their side yard is facing Quincy. The 6 foot fence they may use as a privacy fence for the back yard, but the front yard piece is either no fence or low fence. I was wondering, if you start running a barrier along Quincy ... a 6 foot fence completely blocking off ... if that was considered when you all were looking at the design? Mr. Fruchtl said yes, that actually was considered and that was also brought up before the Planning Commission. With that, one of the recommendations from the Planning Commission to City Council was that the fence along West Quincy Avenue cannot be constructed within 20 feet of the intersection of West Quincy Circle and the front property line on the East side. Mayor Garrett said that was to address that condition? Mr. Fruchtl said yes and also, within the UDC and also within the previous zone district, those are the side yards for that lot. If an applicant were to come in for a fence permit, they would be allowed to construct a 6 foot fence 5 feet off of their property line. That would be considered their side yard set back. Mayor Garrett said the second issue is the off street parking . I know you have four spots per lot. Mr. Fruchtl said yes. Mr. Garrett said there is only four other spaces for the entire development . Mr. Fruchtl said yes. Mr. Garrett said lets think of something crazy, like maybe the Broncos make the Super Bowl. What happens when they have a Super Bowl party. where are those people supposed to park? Mr. Fruchll said that also was addressed not only with the Planning Commission, but also during the development stages of this property. I believe the applicant would most likely be the best person to address that. Staff believes the parking provided is adequate, but also believes that seve n people potentially aren't going to be ha,·i ng seven individual functions held one evening. Additionally there is the ability to park along West Quincy Avenue as that is a public street. Mayor Garrett said will this be a public street...the Circle? Mr . Fruchtl said. The circle will not be a public street. It is going to be a private street that will be maintained through a homeowners association. Mayor Garrett said who will be enforcing the no parking? Mr . Fruchtl sa:d that is a very good question and I will be addressing that with the applicant. COUNCIL MEMBER WOLOSYN MOVED, AND IT WAS SECONDED, TO APPROVE AGENDA ITEM 11 (a) (I)· COUNCIL BILL NO. 33 AND TO SET A PUBLIC HEARING FOR JULY 19, 2004. COUNCIL BILL NO. 33, INTRODUCED BY COUNCIL MEMBER WOLOSYN A BILL FOR AN ORDINANCE APPROVING THE ENGLEWOOD EST ATES PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD) AT 1296 WEST QUINCY AVENUE IN THE CITY OF ENGLEWOOD. COLORADO. Mayor Garrett asked if there were any comments or discussion. There was none . I• ' .· .. .. • • • Enalewood City Council June 21, 2004 Page 12 Vote results: Motion carried. (b) Ayes: Nays: Absent: Council Members Barrentine, Moore, Bradshaw, Garrett, Wolosyn, Tomasso None Council Member Yurchick Approval of Ordinances on Second Reading (i) Council Bill No . 26, authorizing an Intergovernmental Agreement with the City of Littleton for the purchase of the "Herbertson" property for the Littleton/Englewood Wastewater Treatment Plant was considered. COUNCIL MEMBER BRADSHAW MOVED, AND IT WAS SECONDED, TO APPROVE AGENDA ITEM 11 (b) (I)· ORDINANCE NO. 30, SERIFS OF 2004. ORDINANCE NO . 30, SERIES OF 2004 (COUNCIL BILL NO. 26, INTRODUCED BY COUNCIL MEMBER BRADSHAW) AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING AN INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF LITTLETON, COLORADO AND THE CITY OF ENGLEWOOD PERTAINING TO THE "SECOND AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITIES OF LITTLETON AND ENGLEWOOD, COLORADO, FOR JOINT WASTEWATER TREATMENT FACli.lTIES ." Mayor Garrett asked if there was any discussion or comments. There was none. Vote results: Motion carried . Ayes : Nays : Absent: Council Members Barrentine, Moore, Bradshaw, Garrett. Wolosyn, Tomasso None Council Member Yurchick (ii) Council Bill No . 29, submitting to a vote of the registered electors of the City of Englewood a proposed amendment to Article I , Section 12, of the Englewood Home Rule Charter pertaining to Elections was considered. COUNCIL MEMBER WOLOSYN MOVED, AND IT WAS SECONDED, TO APPROVE AGENDA ITEM 11 (b) (11) • ORDINANCE NO. 34, SERIFS OF 2004 . ORDINANCE NO . 34. SERIES OF 2004 (COUNCn. BILL NO. 29, INTRODUCED BY COUNCIL MEMBER WOLOSYN) AN ORDINANCE SUBMITIING TO A VOTE OF THE REGISTERED ELECTORS OF THE CITY OF ENGLEWOOD AT THE NEXT SCHEDULED MUNICIPAL ELECTION A PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO ARTICLE I, SECTION 12, OF THE ENGLEWOOD HOME RULE CHARTER. Mayor Garrell asked if there was any di sc ussion or comment~. There were none . Vote results: Motion carried . Ayes : Nays : Absent : Council Members Barrentine. Moore . Bradshaw, Garrett, Wolosyn. Tomasso None Council Member Yurchick (iii ) Counci l Bill No . 30. submitting to a vote of the registered electors of the City of Englewood a Ballot Question to sell or 1fansfer property owned by the Englewood Water and Sewer Utilities to the Cities of Englewood and Liuleton for use by the Littleton/Englewood Wastewater Treatment Plant . ' ,=. .. .• • • --- Englewood City CouncU June 21, 2004 Page 13 COUNCIL MEMBER BRADSHAW MOVED, AND IT WAS SECONDED, TO APPROVE AGENDA ITEM 11 (b) (Ill)· ORDINANCE NO. 35, SERIES OF 2004 ORDINANCE NO . 35, SERIES OF 2004 (COUNCIL BILL NO. 30, INTRODUCED BY COUNCIL MEMBER BRADSHAW) AN ORDINANCE SUBMITTING TO A VOTE OF THE REGISTERED ELECTORS OF THE CITY OF ENGLEWOOD A BALLOT QUESTION AT THE NEXT SCHEDULED MUNICIPAL ELECTION TO SELL OR TRANSFER PROPERTY OWNED BY THE ENGLEWOOD WATER AND SEWER UTILITIES TO THE CITIES OF ENGLEWOOD AND LITTLETON FOR USE BY THE LITTLETON/ENGLEWOOD WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT. Mayor Garrett asked if there were any questions or comments. There were none . Vote results: Ayes: Nays : Absent : Motion carried. Council Members Barrentine, Moore, Bradshaw, Garrell, Wolosyn, Tomasso None Council Member Yurchick (c) Resolutions and Motions (i) Planner Fruchtl presented a recommendation from the Community Development Department to adopt a resolution approving proposed changes 10 the Development Review Application Fee Schedule . He said staff recommends that the City Council consider and approve by resolution the proposed Development Review Application Fee Schedule as outlined in Exhibit A. With the adoption of the Unified Development Code (UDC) on February 23, 2004, some modifications 10 the previously adopted Development Review Application Fee Schedule have been identified. They are as follows ... in regard to fee in lieu, this was previously located within the text of the landscape requirements of the former Zoning Ordinance. ii has been moved from the text to be included with other fees in the fees schedule and has been proposed to be increased from SI.IS to S 1.50. The land use permit is a new land use application that was created with the adoption of the Unified Development Code. The application fee is consistent with similar applications requiring similar degrees of review, administration and recording . Additionally, administrative adjustment. .. this is an existing fee that is located on the fee schedule. Staff is proposing a reduction of the required fee from S22S .OO to Sl2S.00. The proposed reduction brings the application fee in line with similar applications requiring similar degrees of review, administration and also recording . Additionally we have the temporary use permit. which is also located on the Development Review Fee Schedule . Staff is also proposing a reduction in the required fee from S IS0 .00 to S7S .OO . The proposed reduction brings the application fee in line with similar applications requiring similar degrees of review, admini stration and recordi~g . If there are any questions at this time the staff would like to entertain them . Ma yor Garrell asked if there were any questions . Council Member Bradshaw said with our revenue discussion and our budget discussion. I have lo ask the question about why the reduction in fees ? If the fees arc there, how many of them do we collect anyway? Because , we are a landlocked city. Mr. Fruchtl said I believe there has only been , actually. one application that has been brought to Community Development staff this year . Again it brings it into line with olhcr types of applications such IS the roning variance and al so the appeals . Both the appeal and also the variance are scheduled at SI 2S .00 . Staff believes it would be applicable at thi s Lime to reduce that fee down in line with that same Sl2S .OO area . Director Simpson said the que stion was why are we reducing some of these fees ? He said, IS Mr . Fruchtl said, when we establish fee schedules we try to take a look at review and recording fees and a lot of those aspects, but we also tr y to understand fee s a they may relate to other jurisdictions. We also try to make sure that there are issues of equit y co nsistent with other kind s of fees that we have imposed . When we were putting these into place. a lot of ' ..... ... • • -- Englewood City Council June 21, 2004 Page 14 • ·• • • these we gave our best guess, if you will, to try to look at a lot of these . Administrative adjustments ... as we start looking at those, they seem to be more reasonable to be a liule bit lower. IL seems to be less impaciful and most of the time those kind of reviews tend to be for citizens and not businesses . So, it made more sense to us and that is why we were requesting that. Council Member Barrentine said under the Financial Impact you said "proposed fees increase the potential for City revenues." I just wanted you to e,c.pound on that a linle . Director Simpson said obviously any time we impose any fees on any of our reviews, we have the potential for increasing revenues overall and I think last year we had estimated that somewhere in the range of $15,000.00 is what we were going to be e,c.pccting, based on previous reviews and this new fee structure. That is what we would have anticipated. Even with the minor reduction we will be within that general range, I suspect. Mayor Garren asked if there were any other questions . There were none. COUNCIL MEMBER WOLOSYN MOVED, AND IT WAS SECONDED, TO APPROVE AGENDA ITEM 11 (c) (i) • RESOLUTION NO. 56, SERIES OF 2004. RESOLUTION NO . 56, SERIES OF 2004 A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE DEVELOPMENT REVrEW APPLICATION FEE SCHEDULE FOR COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT. Mayor Garrell asked if there was any discussion . There was none. Vote results: Motio n carried. Ayes : Nays: Absent : Council Members Barrentine, Moore, Bradshaw, Garrell, Wolosyn, Tomasso None Council Member Yurchick (ii) Senior Planner Graham presented a recommendation from the Community Development Department to approve a resolution adopting the South Broadway Plan as a Strategic Plan implementing Englewood's Comprehensive Plan, Roadmap Englewood . He said the recommendation is to accept the Planning Commission's recommendation to approve this resolution. The South Broadway Plan has been going on for about a year and a half and rather than e,c.plain the details of the Plan. I would like to provide just an overview of the process . When we started thi s Plan we had targeted a stakeholder group that consisted primarily of business property owners. business owners and began working with them as we developed some strategies for improving Broadway. As the project progressed. we determined that there was a much larger stakeholder group and, as a result , e,c.panded the public process to include that group. By October of last year, we had two large community groups that involved the neighborhoods and following up after substantial revisions of the Plan early this year, we again invited everybody ... the business community, the residents and all the citizens of Englewood to come and comment . In the meantime, we had altered the plans substantially. We have gone from a fairly technical plan. that wa targeted at a business audience and an investor audience, to a li st of strategics in six categories, which we believe implement the Comprehensive Plan and help us to begin investing in Broadway and making that a more significant place in our community. I would like to say that I think we have honored the Council's commitment to 1he community by providing an expanded public process . IL was our experience that through this process we had a number of comments that we were able to address in the revised Plan . At our final meeting with the Planning Commi ssion we had only one citizen who had initially opposed it and had changed hi s request to the Commission in favor o f it . I hope that 1hat is representative of the lart;cr community . The Broadway Plan is just a refinement of so me o f the more generic goals of the Comprchcn ivc Plan, but focused on the things we could do on Broadway over the next five to ten years. We hope that with a resolution from the Council approving this. we can get started on doing !,()me of th ose thing . Mayor Garrett as l..ed 1f there >'ere question for Mr. Graham . ' I , I l ' • • Englewood City Council June 21, 2004 Page 15 Council Member Wolosyn said no, but I have a comment. I would like to thank staff. This is a long time coming and it is an imponant thing. I would like to thank staff, the business and residential community ... everybody stepped up to do this. And now, we have to step up to the other pan. Thank you . Council Member Bradshaw said well done Mark, good job. Mayor Garrett said it was a long process. I also want to congratulate Planning and Zoning for sticking with it over the long haul. I have to give them credit. They hung in there very well . COUNCIL MEMBER TOMASSO MOVED, AND IT WAS SECONDED, TO APPROVE AGENDA ITEM 11 (c) (ll) • RESOLUTION NO. 57, SERIF.s OF 2004. RESOLUTION NO . 57, SERIES OF 2004 A RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE SOUTH BROADWAY PLAN AS A STRATEGIC PLAN IMPLEMENTING THE ENGLEWOOD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. Mayor Garrett asked if there were any questions or comments. There were none . Vote results: Ayes : Nays : Absent : Motion carried. 12 . General Discussion (a} Mayor's Choice Council Members Barrentine, Moore, Bradshaw, Garrett, Wolosyn. Tomasso None Council Member Yurchick (i) to July 12. 2004. Mayor Garrett said I have a request 10 reschedule the July 6, 2004 City Council meeting COUNCIL MEMBER BRADSHAW MOVED, AND IT WAS SECONDED, TO RESCHEDULE THE JULY 6, 2004 CITY COUNCIL MEETING TO JULY 12, 2004. Vote results: Motion carried . Ayes : Nays : Absent : Council Members Barrentine, Moore. Bradshaw, Garrett, Wolosyn. Tomasso None Council Member Yurchick Mayor Garrett said so we will have our official meetings in July on July 12oi, and July 19 ... (ii) Mayor Garrett said. because of the resignation of Council Member Yurchick. would you like 10 meet for j ust a brief moment after we adjourn so the City Auomey can discuss the process we need to follow 10 appoint a new member? Council Member Bradshaw said is that an Executive Session or a public session? City Allorney Brotzman said that would be an open session. She said okay. Mayor Garrett said we need 10 go over the Chaner requirements so that we are all clear on what the process needs to be and then we can discuss how we want 10 take the next step. Is that agreeable? Council Member Bradshaw said then we will just have it in here? Council agreed . (b) Council Members' Choice ·'*1 .. • • F.aglewood City Council J1111e21 ,2004 Pqel6 (i) o uncil Member Bradshaw said I want to compliment the folks who spoke this evening. I really appreciate the lack of redundancy in your comments. You guys tried and it showed. Thank you very much. I still thought it was a pilot program. Mayor Garrett said I was wrong. It did not become a permanent program. It stayed a pilot program for a variety of reasons. So I apologize .. .I misspoke. Council Member Bradshaw said the other thing is I agree, I think there needs to a balance and I think we can compromise on this issue. But I appreciate the coach coming forward and telling us some of the problems, because those are the things we don't bear and that is not the bandwagon to get on right now. I thought that took a lot of guts to stand up in front of a room full of folks and say what you did. I notice that on the field, because I have friends whose grandchildren play there. Anyway, I do think that we can work this out and you did bear when we will be discussing this again. You are all cognizant of thaL Jill, thank you so much for all your efforts on this. I really appreciate it. 13 . City Muqer'1 Report City Manager Sears did not have any matters to bring before Council. 14-. City Attorney's Report City Attorney Brotzman did not have any matters to bring before Council. IS . Adjoa~t GARRE'M' MOVED TO ADJOURN. The meeting adjourned at 8:S8 p.m. l''U£<P/u..l,,U.AJ. d. (4 C 1. 2. 3 . AGENDA FOR THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE ENGLEWOOD CITY COUNCIL MONDAY, JUNE 21, 2004 7:30 P.M. Englewood Civic Center -Council Chambers 1000 Englewood Parkway Englewood, CO 80110 Call to order. '7: !fl~ Invocation.~ Pledge of Allegiance. ~ u 0 . 4. Roll Call. {# ~ / d}xw-{ Y liR!J! lf.l_) Ma yo r Garrett submitted Mike Yurchick's letter of resignation. His resignation is effective July 3, 2004 . 5 . Minutes. Offd.frO ,. M;"""' rrom !he RegolM c;1y CooocU m~Hog of'""' 7, 2004.~ 6 . Scheduled Visitors. (Please limit your present~tion to ten minutes.) a . Don Seymour will be recognized by City Council for his years of service of the Englewood Board of Adjustment and Appeals. b . Susan Pace k wil l be present to address City Council regarding off-leash dog p al'ks . c . Greg Kainer will be present to address City Council regarding dog p arks. d . Ta is Hanna will be present to address City Council regarding off-leash dog parks. e . Jane Coleman will be present to address City Council regarding dogs. 7 . Unscheduled isi tors . /Please lim it your presentation to five minutes.) (a) Jill Wil so n (e) Kathleen Buck ley (b) hn s Earle) (t) Noreen Bcgordis ( ) Jay Schneider (g) Chuck Nour (d) Glenn Penncbaler (h) Patricia Patti son II unscheduled , 1s11or pole abo ut the off-lea h dog park s. All were ,n rJ ,or of off-lea . h, c cc pl for huck Nour . He poke a~ainsl it . Please note: If you have a d1 . lity and need auxiliary aids or services, please notify the City of Englewood (303· 762-2 405 ) at least 48 hours in advance of when services are needed. Thank you. '. • • .· .. .. t • • -- Eng lewood City Council Agenda June 21, 2004 Page 2 8. Communications, Proclamations, and Appointments . tiff' ft-D a. A proclamation declaring ,June as National Homeownership Month. ~ 9 . Public Hearing. (No Public Hearing Scheduled) g- 10. Co ·' ' Offd 11--o a. ~~ ~ zt" tJiJNJHv_~~ 1~m ..... . rdinances on First Readir,f.r -v-. I. I {)6,-i u.J 1c)t 'l /, ,.11 I b . Approval of Ordinances on Second Reading. i. Council Bill No. 32, accepting a Transportation Utility Easement Agreement with the Regional Transportation District. c. Resolutions and Motions. i. Recommendation from the Department of Finance and Administrative Services, City Clerk's Office, to approve a resolution adopting the Colorado Municipal Records Ret ention Schedule . STAFF SOURCE: Loucrishia Ellis, City Clerk. ii. Recommendation from the Department of Finance and Administrative Services to adopt a resolution casting the City of Englewood's vote as employer regarding Fire and Police Pension Associ ation (FPPA) proposed amendments. STAFF SOURCE Frank Gryglewicz, Director o f Finance and Administrative Services. iii. Recommendation from th e Safety Services Department to adopt a resolution authorizing the approval of direct Subgrant Awards for the Colorado Division of cs-Criminal Justice Juvenile Accountability Incentive Block Grant Program. STAFF ""J: SOURCE: Chris Olson, Director of Safety Services. 11 . Regular Agenda. a. Approval of Ordinances on First Reading. Council Bill No. 26 , authorizing an Intergovernmental Agreement with the City of Littl eton for the purchase of the "Herbertson" property for the Littleton/Englewood Wastewater Treatment Plant. ~ Pl ease note: If you have a disability and need auxilwy aids Of sel'Vicft. please notify the City of Englewood (303-762-2 405) at le.isl 48 hours in advance of when services are needed . Thank you. .,, ' ... • • - • (J Engl ewood City Council Agenda June 2 1, 2004 Page 3 Council Bill No. 29, submitting to a vote of the registered electors of the City of Englewood a proposed amendment to Article I, Section 12, of the Englewood Home Rule Charter pertaining to Elections. IA.)~ (J?d#3i ii. appJ~-t) iii. Council Bill No. 30 , submitting to a vote of the registered electors of the City of .._ .J Jj,..3>'5" Englewood a Ballot Question to sell or transfer property owned by the Englewood {) (/)fr/~ 1 Water and Sewer Utilities to the Cities of Englewoo nd Littleton for use by the ,r"' r,-Olittleton/Englewood Wastewater Treatment Plant./A'U:4"'1W.W c. Resolutions and Motions. /) , 1 L1 ~ i. Recommendation from the Community Development Department to adopt a /::J,411:/F':7fP resolution approving proposed changes to the Developme~~!!'.1.~;~p~lica!on Fee 'ripfd /,-O Schedule . STAFF SOURCE: Anthony J. Fruchtl, Planner.,,.,~_.. ii . Recommendation from the Community Development Department to approve a /). _ IL r"rl resolution adopting the South Broadway Plan as a Strategic Plan implementing ~:::,-/ Englewood's Comprehensive an, Roadmap Englewood. STAFF SOURCE: Mark ~~-0 Graham, Senior Planner. 12 . General Discussion . a. Mayor's Choice. ~ ~-0 i. Request to reschedule the July 6, 2004 City Council meeting to July 12, 2004.~ b. Council Members' Choice. I At'ei\u o · r · · . Due to th e resignati o n of 6:>~ocii' Member urchick , ouncil agreed 10 meet , in open session, with t City h.ll orne y after the Re gular Council Meeting 10 di sc uss.the Pl'!)CeSs of appointing a.~w Council member . 13. Ci ty M anager's Report. 14 . City Attorney's Report. Adjournment. 3';5~ The following min utes were transmitted to City Council between Jun e 4 and 17, 2004: Englewood Cultural Arts Commission meeting of May 5, 2004 Englewood Parks and Recreation Commission meeting of M ay 13, 2004 Englewood Tra nsportatio n A dvisory Commi ttee meeting of M ay 13. 2004 Englewood Planning and Zoning Com mission mee ting of M ay 18, 2004 Pf ease note : If you have a disability and need auxilwy aids or services. please notify the City of Enstewood (303 -762 -2405) at ltast 48 hours in adv.uice of when sen,ices are needed . ThArlk ' • • Michael Yurchick 3972 South Fox Street Englewood, Colorado 80110 June 21, 2004 Douglas Garrett Mayor of Englewood 1000 Englewood Parkway Englewood, Colorado 80110 Dear Mayor Garrett: Due to unfortunate circumstances, I regretfully resigned from City Council effective July 3, 2004. • • I. Call to Order ENGLEWOOD CITY COUNCIL ENGLEWOOD, ARAPAHOE COUNTY, COWRADO Regular Selllon June 7, 2004 The regular meeting of the Englewood City Council was called to order by Mayor Garrett at 7:39 p.m. 2. Invocation The invocation was given by Council Member Barrentine. 3 . Pledp of Allepnce Cub Scout Pack #172 from Charles Hay Elemenwy School presented the Colors and led the Pledge of Allegiance. 4 . RoUCaU Present: Absent : A quorum was present. Also present: 5. Minutes Council Members Tomasso, Moore, Barrentine, Garrett, Bradshaw, Wolosyn, Yurchiclc None City Manap Sears City Attorney Brouman . Aslislant City Manager Flaberty City Clerk Ellis Senior Planner Graham. Community Development Direclor Rou. l'llblic Worts Dirutpr Gry1lewicz. Finam:c and Administrative Services Direc10r Black. Pub and Recrealioo Manager Dannemiller, Community Development (a) COUNCIL MEMBER WOLOSYN MOVED, AND IT WAS SECONDm, TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MAY 17,-._ Mayor Garren asked if there was any discussion, comments or corrections. There wen none. Aye : Nay : Abstain : M uon carried . 6 . Council Members Barmltine. Bradshaw , Garren. Wolosyn. Yurchick. Tomasso None Council Member Moore (a) Carolyn Armstrong. Awards Chairpenon for the Colorado l'lrb and Reaealioa Auociaboll. - presen1 to honor Cub Scout Pack #172 with a Customer Service Awud for tbeir wort in die EltaJewood ~- he said I think mo I of you know that the Colorado Pub and Rcaa&ioll Auocia&ion is III orpaiulion of Parks nd Recre uon Department from all across the Swe. Pan of die Colorado l'lrb and 1lecnaboa Allocialioa's charge 1s to honor people w fw1her the cause of parks and reaubOa m die SWc. 0. of die awards dlM we 11ve 0011 an a"'ard for Communny Service. That awud i IO recopize poups dial have perf~ .,.,.,. ...... t . ... .. • • Englewood City Council June 7, 2004 Page2 ·• • • community service for an agency. This year , the EnrJewood Parks and Recreation staff nominated a very deserving young group of gentlemen for this award . The Awards Committee reviewed that application and they were found, not only to have met all the criteria, but to have exceeded most of it. So, it is my pleasure tonight to award the Colorado Parks and Recreation Association Community Award to Cub Scout Pack #172. There was applause . She said we have certificates of merit, and free admission to Pirates Cove, for each one of these young men and their leaders . Each young man came forward and Ms. Armstrong and Cub Scout Leader Tim Sullivan handed out the certificates. Ms. Armstrong said, again, young men, congratulations. You have given a service to your City and your community and we truly, truly appreciate it. There was applause. Ms. Armstrong said the Englewood Parks and Recreation staff wishes for you to have a copy of the framed certificate to be displayed wherever you have your meetings. Thank you very much , she said . She presented the framed certificate to Mr . Sullivan . There was applause. Mr . Sullivan said I would like to thank you and especially your staff, because without the Englewood City Council providing us the opportunities to serve the community, we wouldn't have anybody to serve . I would really like to thank Gary Sears and his staff, Jerrell Black who has provided us numerous opportunities, Chris Olson with all the Neighborhood Watch stuff that we participate in , Ken Ross has provided places for them to store their pinewood derby track and we are very grateful to Council and we look forward to helping out our community in the future . As in the past, we always say thank you by giving you a pack yell . They gave the pack yell . There was applause . Council Member Bradshaw thanked Mr . Sullivan . ••••• Mayor Garrett said I just want to note that during the Scheduled and Unscheduled Visitor part of the meeting, Council listens . we do not really get into a dialogue . (b) Tavis Hanna, 4420 South Elati Street, said first , thank you for letting me speak tonight. I appreciate the opportunity to share my opinion and my suggestions. I moved to Englewood a little over a year and a half ago . One of the main drawing factors was ... just the neighborhood as a whole. the number of parks you have in th ose neig hborhoods and the specific facilities and services you offer in those parks . The main issue I wanted to address tonight was the dog off-leash privileges that we enjoy here in Englewood. When I moved here. I think it mu st have been almost a year ... that I would go to that park, walk there with my dogs, take them off-leash and they wo uld do a couple of laps around the park . They would do their business, get their energy out and we never played with another dog in that year . Never! You would sec people here and there, but they weren't there to gather and play so much. The day Bates Logan Park c losed for the off-leash privilege, there were thirty plus dogs there ... for hours. And si nce that happened last fall, the numbers have been dropping steadily . I believe part of it is the fact that Denver has ope ned their four or five off-leash parks and there are far fewer people going there now . On an average week night. I sec. at one time , probably anywhere from eight to 'twelve dogs at a time. Some of them are playing in one area and a couple of them are usually farther away playing fetch, so the use is somewhat spread out. I just feel that co nsi de ri ng the fact that that usage is consiste ntl y and steadily dropping, the concept of closing this park to off- leash really doesn't address the cause of thi s sym ptom . And that is ... number of facilities per capita . We have X amo unt of dog s and mostly dog owners in Englewood . They have just as much right to enjoy their recreational needs as anyone else doc . If they do it off-leash , it helps the dogs because they become more soci-1, so you have safe r dogs in your neighborhood . They do get their energy out faster . I know people who go to the park and throw a ball for their dog for tw o hours and the dogs sti 11 won't stop There are dog breed that can run 35 miles per hour plus . I can't jog like that . I really just don't see how it is a solution, a pro-active permanent solution. that applies to everyone unilaterally .just like the impacts of the drought and our economy effect everyone unilaterally and how everyone's impact on the park effects the park unilaterally ... socccr. baseball. people with dogs. children at the park . To be able 10 look at a ituation like this and think . well we have these new stresses comi ng on OW' community. the sol uu on 1s 1mplc ... let's take the new guy on the 101cm pole and bump him off. We are not going to ao away . We are not mo,•ins out of Englewood . We arc still going to go to the park . We are still goina to walk our clop . It will be on le h. but the impact won't change . The other aspect and facet 10 the impact i ... per capita agai n. You ' .., ' I ' I • • Englewood City Council June 7, 2004 Page3 0 -----------------•~"~~~~~~ decreased !he number of off-leash facilities we've had and it's concentrated that impact in one spot. I really, honestly, believe that a large complex like what I have heard in !he works ... one main place where all dog owners can go, is a great idea. I am not going to say no, we shouldn't do it. However, I don't think it replaces what we have by being able to have cells within in our neighborhood, within walking distance of our homes . When I come home on a week night, I spend eleven hours in school. I don't always have time to drive across the neighborhood to go somewhere. I only live five blocks from the Jason Park. And, I don't see how fixing the population of use in one specific area again is going to solve the problem. It may be a bigger facility, but we are still going to have a mud pit once all the Englewood dogs go there . So diversifying yolD' recreational needs, is the only way that you can ttuly limit the amount of impact you have per location . One of the suggestions I have had for that, for quite some time, is having parks off-leash after dark so it doesn't interfere with other people, other patrons, especially children, because there has been a lot of concerns about safety with that. The other is ~le fences . This is a fence that can be set up. It is permanently standing, in the sense that you don't have to take it down snd erect it, but it is on skids. When the park is mowed, they tow it to a new spot snd just pull it out a little bit so it is standing. It is the size of a regular dog run enclosure and they mow that area. The next week they move it again. the next week they move it again. You have had offers on the table since last fall, from people who are willing to put together the money to build these snd donate them. It doesn't have to come out of the City's pocket. I haven't seen any decision on that issue snd it has been a half a year since those kinds of suggestions were posted . I suppose the other issues to address, that are more specific, are the fact that one of the main things I noticed when all those people started coming to Jason Park was that the drug deals, that would go on morning, noon and night, stopped. They are gone . I haven't seen them since. Dogs may seem like a risk to kids, but in this case, I think they are providing a safety net for them . Additionally, every night I go there, at least one or two parents, bring their toddlers, probably two to three years old, from the playground over to see the dogs. This is not just sociali.ution for neighbors with neighbors or dogs with dogs. it is people looking at this as a resource to help their children acclimate to a divene society. These are dogs. son . This is how you treat them. This is how you interact with them. This is how you can be safe, but still be progressive . You have to learn to be able to be a self sufficient penon once you pw up. It seems like we serve just as much of a purpose to the other people who are there, as an inconvenience. Additionally the drought ... I'm a soccer coach for Denver Soccer Club snd we play on a field that is fenced ll nighL Dop are ablolutely not allowed up there. Those fields are probably three times worse than ours. bands down. I mean. they don't even have the use that we have here. I would have to say that I think Denver is meterina their water more than we are, but I still don't think that just the impact of the dogs alone is pushing this issue over ill breaking poinL Again. the drought affects us all unilaterally . To look at this as an issue of who is the new guy, who can wcbumpoff ofthis, doesn't make sense . To look it as an issue of what we have ... soccer players, baseball players. dogs. children ... bow many parks do we have? There are so many parks in Englewood, I can't even count them. Plenty of them have space for a hundred by hundred dog encloslD'C that is portable . Having the stuff go on after dark, helps reduce the risk to other people as well . I think the other issues, for me. that seems kind of 11ranae, is the fact that here we are talkina about not having enough money to do this. We have had offers. You know there wu a woman I met last fall. at one of these meetings . She was in opposition to keeping the Bates Logan Park off-leash. However, she saw it u a specific issue and he addressed all the issues specifically. not as a "let's trea1 the symptoms and sweep them under the carpet ." She and her husband. who is a contractor,, offered to donate time and labor if a volunteer orpnization wu willing to put up the money to build these fences . I haven't seen anythina come of that. It i a pal offer. It is a permanent soluuon. W~ighing that kind of situation with, here we have a drought. .. here wc have money. We have had so lutions and offen on the table for half a year and we just opened a multimillion dollar water park? It starts to look kind of discnminatory . Like wc can focus on this portion of the population. because they are children, because they arc adullS, and because they are people . Thi isn't about dog lnffte. This is about Ena)ewood reaidenl use . My feel pul JUSl as much impact on that ground u my clop. And the fact that I pay just u many taxes u anyone else. tell me lhat I have a right to be able to enjoy the recreational needs that I have in my community. I am not asking for anything cxtravagalll, like a han1 slider port. I am just ask.ins for a few encloaures spacod around the ny so that we don'! have people cOffllnl from five miles away, within Enalewood, to one part. It just -to me that 11 1 suc h common sense to put tOJClhcr a lOlulK>n. a proactive solution that continuea the propeuive conccptl th.II 11,erc put in place when Englewood was one of the ftrSt cities in the Denver metro area to llart its off-leub program . h seem ironic that now that the ymptoma of ow over population problem with Bales Lopn. which have shifted t Jason from the Denver i ue. when Ibey cbdn't have dleir own off-leash parb .. .it jull-very ironic thal now that the y are geuina their prosruns up snd JOI• and we are seein1 die usaae here and die impact here drop . that "°"' we are looluna at this as an ultillllllllll type deal apan. So. it is eidls we keep it in die off-leash program or we w.e II off. You ·ve had many augesllOIII and propouls pu1 IO you and ._ of them have been cq,tcd h doesn 't man sense that you would lake a utualion. buacally. unur With a worti• s,-dlal you ' :. • • -- Englewood City Council June 7 , 2004 Page4 ·• • • CJ already have in place and put it to a principle of take it or leave it, close it or keep it open. Somebody within this pane l probably brought up this idea a few years ago. The rest of the people on this panel probably thought, let's g ive it a try. And now that we arc in it , we arc going, the thing is working and we arc having to make adjustments here and there. It just seems counterproductive that every time we hit a hiccup along the way, we look at it as ... do we shut it down or keep it going? Do we throw out the things we have accomplished or do we listen to what the people have to say about safety, noise pollution, water pollution. Take those things into consideration and make some tweaks to what we have done and move forward . I'm telling you, we arc not going to go away. We live in Englewood . I am not selling my house . I am oot gcning rid of my dogs and I am still going to use the park. The traffic won't stop, money is tight for everybody, drought is hining everybody, and everybody here has their right to their opinion. Everybody here has even their own solutions and suggestions that they would like to sec implemented. If we meet in two weeks, arc we going to have a progressive solution to this or is it going to an ultimatum, yes or no? All of us on both sides of this issue have been waiting for a solution. And to look at this as an issue of, there arc all these people surrounding this issue and let's pick which group we want to stand by, you arc still our represented electives ... if you decide against us. I urge you to make a decision that benefits all of us ... unilatcrally. It just makes more sense in the long run. How many times are you going to have meetings addressing this same issue over the next year? Are we just going to keep coming here and wasting the City's money talking about this thing and never coming up with a solution that sticks and benefits everybody? We elected you . We want you to do the job that we hired you to do. The prayer that was read, at the beginning of this session, had the word narrow in it. This is not a pinpoint issue . This is not an issue that will be solved long term by having a narro w scope. We are asking you to look at every single person here and think, how can you accomplish the fin ancial challenges we face, the drought challenges we face, the safety challenges we face and the use challenges that all of us have a right to and make it stick or, arc you going to be back here again? Because I tell you, if you c lose this park down, or if at least you don't start opening other ones as well, you are going to have another petition next month and another one next month, and another one again and it is going to be put on the agenda. It is just not going to go away. Thank you. There was applause. (c) Jeanne Fyfe. 3986 South Bannock Street, said thank you too for lcning me come to speak . I came here tonight, as did many of you in the audience, because I hoped I might be able to say something that would make a difference. And, I wonder. what it is that can make a difference? There is always more than one side to a story, especially if it is controversial . but I believe that everyone in this room agrees on one thing. We are all grateful to have parks to go to and I am thankful to the City for that. regardless of what the decision will be. I appreciate it. I want to state up front that I am for off-leash parks. but I am also for kids being able to play without stepping in dog d ro ppings and I am for families to be able to have picnics without dogs running over to them and bothering them. I a m for a ll the good things that arc associated with parks. I have lived in Englewood for about two ycan now and I ha ve e njoyed several o f the parks. I have seen an increase in dog traffic at Jason with the closing of Bates Logan and I have pic ked up d og doo that my dog didn't do. We all have. I have taken plastic bags to the park. I have asked peopl e , politely, to mo ve from the kids playing area and fields . My dog hasn't always been the best dog and I have had to apologize to people sometimes for my d og running up to them. I think we arc all working o n being bencr stewards of o ur d ogs a nd o ur childre n and wh atever it is we take to the park. There arc problems and no o ne d enies this . but taki ng away someth ing. as the o ther gentl e man stated, isn't a solution. It j ust seems li ke a temporary fix . I d o n 't w ant 10 be red undant. but th at is the wa y it seems to me . And I re pcctfully as k the Council, where do yo u think we are all goi ng to go wi th o ur d ogs if you take away the off-leash privileges? A s the other gentleman sta ted . we are not go ing to go away. I like livi ng in Eng le wood and I like taking my dog to the park. I don't like to put anythin g in negat ive terms . but I am just thinki n g. where d o you think wc arc going to go with o ur dogs? I hope y u ha ve a lo t o f an ima l c o ntrol. because you arc probabl y goi ng to get more calls . And I don't mean that in a ne gat ive way at all . but I just wonder where we are s upposed to go. I will still go to the park with my do& on leash, but I've got a n Australian s hepherd -Bord er collie . If anybody has a ranch I can borrow, he reall y needs a job. I take him 10 my D ad 's farm in Nebra ka sometime , but that is 3 I'> hours a way. So that is something I have been thinking about. I heard the other gentle man say. a nd I've heard it before . you represent us and I know you gu ys have heard it o ver and o ver and o ver and you arc going to he ar it agai n. because you do represent us. all o f us, pe o ple wi th dogs . people "i tho ut do gs. people wit h kids o r any combination. And. one thing that I really want to say is that m y dog is my family and he deserve to n m a nd play in a park.just as much as a ny human child does. N . I know . o n that point, a lot o f us here will disagree. but that is how I feel. I WOllld just li ke to briefly tell you of a recent e xperience 1n a nother Colorado to wn tha t made me want to return to thal town. I wu with a fnend and our l\\o d ogs and "c were traveling through Este Par k. We s topped on the outSkins. because wc saw a fenced area. It looked h kc a plac e for dogs and II tumed out that II was. T he fenced area was actually divided into rwo and there . • .I-, ' .. t • ' • • Englewood City Council June 7, 2004 PageS was another guy there and I asked him why the small fenced park was divided into two. He said well, sometimes there gets 10 be too many dogs so we kind of all just divide them up and some of us go on one side and some go on the other. He said you know some dogs just get along with each other bcllcr than others and all in all it is a way to manage the situation. He lived there and he liked it. The ttash cans had coverings on them, they weren't open ones and they contained the smell and this place really looked to me like a dog park. And, I think that may be an imponant distinction . I know some folks aren't keen on fences, but the thought that comes to my mind is at least when you sec dogs in a fenced area. you know not to go over there if you don't care for dogs and I know a lot of people don't. And the dogs won't come running up to you because they can't. These arc just a few ofmy observations. They arc in no way saying what I think we should do with the parka here, because I know the money situation and that son of thing. II is just an observation and you know I want to go back to Estes Park bccaulc I felt really welcome with my dog there. I think that is something that cities want to do, is create wclc:omc places for everyone. Right now, honestly, I am not feeling so welcome with my dogs here in Englewood. I am not here to boohoo about it but you know , I was thinking the other day ... because I have a lot of friends that arc about my age and some of them have dogs and some of them don't. .. if they were to say to me, well, how do you like Englewood so far, do you like living there? I love living here, but this is one of those things that has kind of cast a damper over it and I would probably say to them right now, if you have dogs I don't know if I would move here. I realize bow it must sound 10 people who don't care for dogs or who don't have dogs .. .like why is it such a big deal to you? Just like many of you have children ... I don't have a human child and I spend a lot of time with my dog. ao it is just something that is really imponan110 me. You know, I really don't expect everyone to like dogs and that is okay. but here is one thing I do hope and I do expect ... City Council you must do the right thing. I can't tell you if keeping the off-leash parks open in the current condition is the right thing and I know that is not a popular thing to say, if you arc a member of the off-leash group, but I can advise you that closing the parks to off-leash privileges without or before you have a definite plan or some kind of plan for moving forward with a more desirable off-leash park or parts area, is not the right thing to do. We will all be waiting and wau:hing ... expecting you to do the right thing where we as responsible dog owners arc concerned. Finally I have just a couple of stats from my own street, the 3900 block of Bannock . There arc 24 homes ... 12 on each sidc ... and of these no fewer than 16 have dogs. I aiao know that at least 4 of those homes have more than I dog. Multiply that by all the blocks in Englewood. hypodlecic:ally, and you have the potential ... should you take off-leash privileges away ... for diacriminating against a whole lot of people and their beloved pets . But I would rather think along positive lines. I know we can find common ground . I know we can all gel along. Our dogs don't have a voice, but we do. Please help us find a solution that we can all happily live with. Thank you . There was applause. (d) Jane Coleman, 3901 South Galapago, said I am here tonight to speak with you reprding the off. leash privileges in the Englewood Park system. There are several items that I would like to point out IO you . Having lived in Englewood for fony-somc years and also being a businesi owner and a 11111nager for many of tbme years. I have seen many changes over the years here in Englewood. Number one ... the parks in Englewood . Ulllil the past three years. dogs were allowed 10 walk off-leash 111,oughout the City. The City. at about that time, designated that all dogs must be on leash if anywhere but on their own property; or the desipatcd off-leash parks in Englewood. Jason Park was among 4 parks , plus a greenbelt, that were designated off-leash parks for clop. The rest is history and you arc well aware of the closing of Bates Lopn. However, previous lO the designated areas for off-leash . the Canadian gccsc were able to run rampant wherever they wanted; and they panicuiarly loved Ja.m Park . You could go 10 Jason any time of the day or night and you would find huge flocks of pese. They loved to feed on the grasses . And . with huge flocks of gccsc. comes huge piles of llOOIC poop . It was everywhere. It was impossible 10 walk anywhere in the park due lO the green. sli my droppinp of the peae. The pese panicularly loved the open. grassy area of the soccer fields . Who got the blame for this? There wu no one IO blame . a .. with the onset of the off-leash dogs , the geese decided they would fly to another place and relinquish the sr-y park to the dogs. Proof of the geese and what they leave behind ... just loolt at Centeanial Park. anodier one ofEnpewood'1 current off-leash parks that is hardly used . Al Jason, the condition of the aoccer areas and the bueball araa are great . I know . I go there daily . The grass is green and there arc no bare spoca. The off-leash dot ownas have been very diligent about staying away from the areas that seem IO CIUIC concern to the City ; and they have dolle a l(IOCI job . The dog owners have cleaned up the parks, held clean up putia, educated the memben ol the off-leash poup6 of the ncce si ty and priority of picking up behind their clop and any ocher irrespoalible -tbal used the part. I would venture to say that the park is cleaner now thane-. The off-leash poup1 e-c:leu up e,iery Moaday morning behind the weekend picnickers and park party poup6. N~ two .. ·-o( the park . Wida Dea- opemng up live official off -leash parks. the usage at J.-Parlt has been c .. drutlc:ally. Mayol die IOUdl o.- people used 10 come to Englewood and use our park system. Now they have thcar own. aad die part ma,e ~ way ... .. • ' • Englewood City Council June 7, 2004 Page6 ·• • • 0 r·----. (J . down . It is rare that you have the large numbers of dogs and owners that were once using the park. Number three ... policing of the park . The off-leash groups have taken a strict eye to the drug business that was prevalent in the Englewood Park system. With so many eyes available to report suspicious drug activity; and with the use of cell phones , wherever the drug dealers have gone, they arc not at Jason Park . We used 10 sec people using the park for sleeping at night. This has all but been wiped out. Number four ... not in my backyard. This is a particular complaint of people living adjoining the park. However, the park is fenced . And , with that fence, that makes the park just as much in my backyard as anyone adjoining the park. Neighbors living around Jason have no more proprietary voices due to their proximity to the park, than say, I do and I live 5 blocks away . People as a general rule, are adverse to change. With the advent of legal off-leash in the four parks, plus the greenbelt, it was natural for some people to say, "no, I want things like they used to be." But we must move with the times, and the times have changed. Number five ... use of the park . Children are no longer able to safely play in parks unsupervised. With mothers and fathers having to work to supply the necessities for the children, a television has become their babysitter and children are in front of the television playing Nintendo and other television games. We cannot designate areas based on what we used to do . The numbers of children have dropped dramatically over the past ten years, with proof of this in that two years ago Englewood Schools laid off 26 teachers in our school system . More lay-offs are in the works, with a continual drop in allCndance, and thusly a drop in Federal funding. There is no need 10 have teachers if the children aren 'I there, and there is no need to reserve parks for children who are not there. Number six ... compromise. The off-leash groups have said, repeatedly, that they were willing to compromise. Put a compromise on the table; and let's come to some sort of an agreement. Get a mediator if necessary. The Off-Leash Task Force was a start and we need to continue with our efforts to use the parks systems to its maximum . Please don't shut the door on us . Let's continue to look for ways that the off-leash groups can continue with their use of the park privileges. Thank you for hearing my thinking . If you will allow us to continue to work together, I'm sure we can come up with something that will suit the majority of the people . Thank you very much . There was applause. Ms. Coleman said I have another lellCr that I was asked to read from someone that couldn't come tonight . If it suits you, I would like 10 read it. This is from Diane L. Theobald, 3860 South Sherman. "To Whom It May Concern: I have lived in Englewood now for 7 1/2 years . During the last several years, I have been blessed by being able to go to a park with my dog off-leash . I have thoroughly enjoyed being able to do that and get a great deal of enjoyment out of seeing other dogs at the park, as well . In my opinion, the off-leash parks are as much for the people as they are for the dogs. Thus I find it pretty disturbing to learn that even though dog owners are in the majority in Englewood, the off-leash privilege may disappear because of a few who do not want parks utilized in such a way . Some of the people who arc fighting this do not even use the parks, they simply do not want dogs to be loose. Others have made up their minds to be against dog parks because they do not like dogs . It bothers me to think I may be represented on the City Council by a person who would not consider my desires. because they are not the same as hers . I recognize that there arc risks with off-leash dogs, just as there are risks with everything in life . I sincerely hope that the City can find some way 10 accommodate dog owners who enjoy using the parks with their dogs, just as it accommodates people who play softball, soccer, basketball and so forth . I am sure there is a way that we can all share . Thank you for listening ." There was applause . (c) Laurie Roulsmn, 3884 South Sherman, said I grew up going to the Englewood par~. I am not the new guy on the block . I am really the old girl around Jason Park . I want 10 give you a little bit of prospective. I grew up here when you went to the Gothic and you watched the matinee theaters before there was G, R and X ratings . So that is how long I have been here . If you were to ask my mother, she would tell you that my two fa vorite places for me to go would be the Englewood Library and the parks. The rcuon that I tell you this is that thing s haven't changed much . Those are still my two favorite places to go . And, I happen to have two four-legged friend s that share my visio n of favorite places . The Border collie is still working on his reading, but I cxpccl he will ge t here in a few more days . The reason that I am telling you this is I am also a teacher and on my way to work I dnvc by Bates Logan Park every day. And. I drive by during the evening time, at various hours . Since this has beco me an issue, I have just been stopping by and checking. Every day at different times of the evening and 10night, I JU t want yo u to know this was the first person that I saw in the park in the last 20 days. There was actually one person at Bate, Logan pla ying basketball . That is the first time in twenty days . I feel like I pay tues so that I can use the park . These people here use the park. Sure, wc don't go to the park in bus loads of 100 to 1.50 kids at one tirne with summer fun day camps. but we do come there with our friends, our dop and wc do socialize them. We meet our fnends at the park . It is wonderful not to be isolated in your home. This is what I c<lll5ider community. I want the children I teach to be able to go to the park. I want them to be able to use the park . I wani all of us 10 be .. ' . .., ! • • • 0 Englewood City Council June 7, 2004 Page7 ·• • • 0 able to use the park ... this is for our community. This is a preference of life. Lately we have had some budget crunches. What should I tell the childrcn ... oh I'm sorry, just for the library, those of you who use the library, we have a budget crunch and therefore, we have decided not to let you check out any books, that way we can preserve the books. Think about it. When you make that decision ... represent the people, represent the future, and think progressi vely. What we have is wonderful. It is working. You people created something that is working. The parks have a boundary. People's backyards arc not an extension of a boundary of the park. The park is for the people of Englewood. Please don't take away my park. There was applause. (f) Paul Gaggini, 2200 South Lincoln Street, said I came here today to help you solve a problem. really don't think there is a problem with dogs at Jason Park . There is a problem with how some people sec this. There is a problem in that some people think it is somehow a bad thing that has to be forbidden. I was amazed .. .I came here with all kinds of arguments about how other things wercn 't harmed and I was amazed in this Study Session to hear that there was some concern about the turf, because I am an expert on th~ turf at Jason Park. I know every square inch of that turf as do several dozen people here. If you need to know anything about it, here arc your experts. There arc areas of the park that arc not being well watered. You know how a lawn looks when part of it is watered and part of it isn't. It is obvious that in certain places the sprinklers aren 't reaching. You have someone already hired on the staff of Parks and Recreation that knows how to tune these sprinklers and the relatively minor poor condition that I sec in certain places is due to that. I would like to point out that use by dog owners and their dogs is a very random sort of use of the lawn. It is not something like volleyball or soccer or baseball where there is constant wear over a certain area. There is a heavy amount of wear as people walk around the perimeter of the park. I want you people to go to that park and look. Don't rely on photographs. Don't rely on second hand ... take some time out of your day here and there to go and observe the owners with their dogs, the dogs and how they play and look at the lawn yourself. Walk around over there. It is quite a nice place. lam here to only talk about one thing about the Englewood parks and that is Jason Park. That is the one we refer to as "the dog park." You have created a wonderful thing. It is great. Some people like me who don't live in Englewood come there. People come there for other uses also, that don't live in Englewood. There arc people who come there from all over the metro area to play soccer, to play baseball and that is wonderful. And until you put up a fence around Englewood and a big sign that says No Trespassing that is going to happen and you have to take account for that. There was a lot of usage early in the winter before the Denver parks opened and I saw the condition of that turf late in the winter and I was sure it was gone. I was amazed to sec that it sprang back beautifully. Go there and look at it yourself. That is all I can sec. I think there might be a prejudice on the part of the Parks Department that their employees don't like emptying those barrels full of dog poop. So they arc kind of prejudice against it. I noticed today .. .I was there at approximately 3 o ·clock ... there were three people in the park, all people playing with their dogs. I noticed that the soccer field had been aerated, but'thc other part hadn 't. I don't know why. Maybe they have decided that the soccer field is a high use area and needs more aeration than the other part and that is the only part they aerated. I don't know. But I think you wouldn't have spent a cent more on water and I don't think it is going to be a great expense on water, I think it involves mostly just tuning up the sprinklers. giving them a reasonable amount of water like we do in Denver and Englewood under drought conditions. Our lawns haven 't died. I think that park is very ideal because it is fenced . Three fourths of it is already fenced . And if you did think that fences were necessary on the other part, one part which is a street, which I don't think needs it, but I am sure it could be done with minimal expense. I would like to say that in the who le time I've been there, I have never seen a soccer game interrupted by a dog. I have seen that the park is clean. It is cleaner than any park that I have every seen. I was anw.cd when I started invading your town to use your dog parks that I met a bunch of lady cops in these parks. These women ... if you don't notice that your dog just squeezed one out ... thcy arc going to holler at you. And that is what happens . It is a self policing group. It is wonderful. I took a survey .. .I will give you a copy of it .. .I walked and talked to the 24 homes who have fences bordering the park. Nine people wcren 't home. Three people didn't like it. Eleven people did like it. Of the people who didn 't like it. one lady complains that the park caused mice in her home. The mice may have come after the d ogs came to the park, but I don't think the dogs caused the mice. Another person complained of odor. This is something the C ity could d o right now. Go move that barrel away from the fence that is right by her backyard. Move it 50 feel into the park . Another person has a running dispute with a man who comes to the park and allows hi dog to poop in her front yard . He cleans it up. but still they have a fight going and he likes to tease her and they have a running argument. She c irculated a petition with 18 signatures on it of neighbors of the park that don't like the off-lush privilege that you ha ve given us. Of the people that immediately border the park, who have a lcg111matc claim to have been damaged in some way ... financially or by having their freedom interrupted or their peace of mind ... o nl y three were found to actually not like the park. Evidently her numbers were from the people in o utlying .1rcas. not people right close to the park. I don't like the idea of ponablc fences. You find an area that is ' ... .. • • Englewood City Council June 7, 2004 Page8 ·• • • stressed you might fence it off. This is the mistake that Denver is making right now. They have huge areas of their parks, but they seem to want to fence off a two or three acre area for the dogs . It really doesn't work. I have never seen a child hurt. I have never seen a child's play interrupted. Evidently some of you people haven't been there . I have been there hundreds of hours . I go to Chatfield two or three times a week. I have athletic dogs. I exercise them by playing fetch. You can't exercise a beautiful athletic dog by keeping it on a leash . And, you can't do it in a two or three acre place either. Jason is such an ideal dog park . And, I have never seen a soccer game interfered with. The issue of cleanliness ... everybody likes to see the little dogs scampering around, but the problem is they use the park as a toilet. Weil that is not a valid point, because in this case there would be 500 geese using the park as a toilet and nobody is going to clean up after them. Most of the people I know pick up dog waste, whether it is from their dog or not. We patrol the park and that is what we do. We walk around with our dogs and we look for waste and we clean it up. It happens and it is perfectly clean. No situation is perfect. It is up to you to sec what is the best good for the most people . I don't think it is an ecological issue. I think you can find the water to easily take care of that park. And, you have to consider the intense dismay that will be felt by us. It makes our day. Imagine that you have some activity in your life that fills you with joy every time you do it. A place where you go that every time you go there you know it is going to make you feel better and all of a sudden that is taken away . Imagine that you are a musician and every time you sit down to play the piano you feel happy, you feel joy and all of a sudden you arc paralyzed and you can't play . Imagine that you like to go and hear a certain preacher preach every Sunday and ail of a sudden he dies and you feel an emptiness inside. We arc going to feel intense dismay. Imagine you arc a City councilman and you enjoy your important job and you enjoy taking care of the affairs of the City and all of a sudden you get voted out of office. How would you feel? That is how we arc going to feel. And this intense dismay must be balanced against the occasional irritation expressed by the neighbors of the park. There was applause. (g) Jill Wilson, 3061 South Grant, said I am reading a letter for Susan Pacek as she could not be here . "Dear Mayor and Town Council Members: As the Comprehensive Planning Manager for the Town of Parker, I understand , that to every controversial issue such as off-leash dog areas, there are a multitude of issues that need to be considered in order for elected officials to make an informed and proactive decision that affects the constituents of their community. This time, I find myself personally involved in an issue within my own community. As a resident of Englewood, I would like to express my support for providing off-leash dog areas within our parks. The public open space management environment has changed dramatically in the last 20 years. The range of activities in which people are engaged has expanded, while budgets and resources have contracted . There is now much more emphasis on efficiency and improved management. Many Council's, such as yourselves, are grappling with making a judgment on how to accommodate the growing recreational uses of our parks. I would like to stress the importance of striving to be equitable and responsive to the voice of all of your constituents. According to the Parks and Recreation Department of the City and County of Denver, 35% of Colorado homeowners 0"11 at least one dog. Using 2000 population statistics. that translates to 5,165 households in Englewood who have dogs . One of the goals of the recently adopted Comprehensive Plan, otherwise known as Roadmap Englewood, states that the Town will ''provide sufficient parks and recreation facilities to serve the needs of Englewood citizens by encouraging a variety of park classifications." It is difficult to achieve such a goal when a substantial user base may not be accommodated if ail parks are closed to off-leash areas . Off-leash dog parks offer a multitude of opportunities for dogs and their owners alike . Such community benefits include: socializes and exercises dogs in a safe environment: A well soci alized and exercised dog is less likely to develop behavior problems such as aggression or barking. Provides an opportunity for people to interact and get to know other community members, while participating in an activity that they enjoy with their pets . Provides elder I y and disabled owners with an accessible and safe place to exercise their dogs . Provides a safe environment for o utdoor dog obedience classes. Removes unwanted elements, such as crime and loitering. from elsewhere in the park through dog owner supervision . I am also aware that there are community drawbacks. however, there are restrictions that can be developed to mitigate these valid concerns .... limiting hours. dis1ribu1ion of dog activities so no one park is overburdened. community based organizations to develop clean up days . e1c . Numerous communit ies adjacent to Englewood and throughout the country are taking active steps toward accommodating for off-leash dog recreation. In February of this year. Denver opened five off-leash dog areas within existing parks . According to Denver's Parks Planning project manager for the Dog Off-Leash Piloc Program. none of the imtial fears related to health and safety. voiced by the opposition. have been realized . She further added that the program has been succe sful thus far . Other communities such as Highlands Ranch have also implemented s u cessful programs. Council has recently taken a positive step toward developing a win-win solution by appointina a Task Force to study thi i ue . I understand from Jerrell Black, that the Tuk Force is close to finalizina a recommendation. I also understand that Council needs to respond to the petition recendy submitted by the residents ' ... • • Englewood City Council June 7, 2004 Page9 ·• • • .tn ·~ adjacent to Jason Park. as well as the recommendation from the Parks and Recreation Commission, to temporarily ban the off-leash parks program. I believe that Town Council would like to provide a community where the needs of all of its constituents arc met. Maintaining the Task Force to its fruition is a way to achieve this success. In summary. I respectfully request the Council postpone a decision to close all parks to off-leash activity until a formal recommendation, which is forthcoming. is submitted by the Task Force. At that point, Council would have the necessary information for making an informed decision based upon the input from the various parties vested in this issue. As a professional planner, I believe I could be of assistance with this effort and am happy to help in anyway. I have put my comments in writing to you because; unfortunately, I will not be able to attend your June 1• hc.aring date. due to a work conflict.. .l am presenting to Town Council in Parker as the staff planner on two projects. Thank you for listening to all of your constituents and in striving to reach a win-win solution. Respectfully, Susan M . Pacek." There was applause. 7. Unscheduled Visitors (a) Debra Brown, 2736 South Grant, said I am not just a Colorado native, I am an Englewood native ... born and raised in Englewood. I remember Bates Logan Park when it was an empty field. I used to walk across there going to grade school at Washington and Charles Hay. Going to the dog park with my dog to an off- leash park was a new experience for me. I got my dog a year ago and found out about the Jason Park Group. I went down there and found it to be a surprisingly very pleasant and positive experience. My dog has since grown to really enjoy it and become very well socialized. I got her from the Denver Dumb Friends League. I think having an off-leash park is a really progressive thing to do. I am very proud of Englewood and the things they have done over the years. I think that having an off-leash park kind of goes beyond humane. to kind and benevolent treatment of animals. I think that is a positive role model in our society. So, I just want to say that I think it allows dogs to be dogs and allows people to socialize in a really positive way and sets a good role model. I think we have some very responsible people here who care for their animals and care for the park very much. l just want to really be an advocate of that . Please come and see what goes on there . It is a surprisingly pleasant and refreshing experience. There was applause. (b) Karleen Broadwater, 3106 South Sherman Street, said I am a relatively new resident to Colorado. I have been here a year. I originally lived in Littleton and now I am in Englewood. One of the reasons I did move to Englewood is because I have dogs and you had dog parks. Now I live close to Bates Logan and it is closed and now Jason Park is on the block. We arc very concerned ... we hear a lot of rumors at the dog park ... this person is upset now or someone has complained about something ... and I think that on the whole, the dog owners that patronize Jason Park arc very conscientious. When I look around, l think what could be the problem? I am a good citizen. I don't want to invade anyone else space, or anything like that. Paul and I decided on Sunday just to go door to door. We went to all the houses that abut up and share a fence line with Jason Park . As you will see in the hando ut , there is a map ... they are a little dog-eared, because people hadn't seen them and they have been passed back and forth . But we went door to door and you can sec the results of who was home, who we spoke with, how many people had dogs, and the ones with the X 's arc the ones that had negative comments ... they didn't like the dog park . It was very interesting . We spoke with residents who had been there for six months and we spoke with res idents who had been there for 40 years. who had seen the evolution of the park and its use. There were a variety of comments. Most people said, oh no. no is s ues with the dog park . Even people with dogs said we don't really use th e dog park but we like the dog park. There weren't any huge concerns. There was one woman who was very concerned about her kids going out to the park, she had seen a rottwcilcr ... this is a scary dog. But at the same time, we had at least three households who said, no my kids take our dog over there all the time ... and you will note their ages are noted : 6, 11 and 13 and so the ages arc there . I think that one of the th in gs that spurred this is I tend to be a littl e wounded when people think that I have done them harm and so this was a way of putting to rest that we were irritating people . Truly it was a really good experience. It was good to talk with these people and hear what they had to say. The thing that did come up ... they asked that we please move the trash barrel away from their back fence especiall y as it gets hot . That is an easy thing to do. We had people say that they feel the park looks great. We spo ke with a 13 year o ld daughter of one resident and we asked her if she had ever seen a soccer game in terrupted ... has a dog ever chased the ball ... has a dog ever chased a kid ... and she said no . We spoke with a ge ntleman whose kid s had pl ayed soccer there in the 1970's o r early 19SO's and he said oh the geese were terrible . They s lide around in the slime all the time . The thing that did strike me was how many of thcsc households did have dogs. which was also brought up. But I thought thi s was interesting information, because these arc the pc.ople potentially who could be offended or not like the park. As for the turf issues, I 'm new to Englewood, I have been i• ' .. t • • • Englewood City Council June 7, 2004 Page 10 •• • • 0 here si nce January, I'm new to Colorado a little bit more than a year .. .I haven't met anybody in the park who isn't willing to put in work, to show up and clean up the park, and to follow directions. Every time I get my Englewood new sletter in the mail , I look through it and I look specifically for dog issues and park issues. I haven't seen any of those issues addressed since I have been here. so I think some of it is an education and communication issue. You have an army of people here who arc willing to adopt the park in some sense and do what it takes in terms of fencing, landscaping or whatever needs to be done . And I know that in the Englewood catalog that I get for classes ... and I patronize the classes here in Englewood, it is a great benefit. .. there was a thing about needing people to adopt a garden or a garden spot. You have a planner who tells you what kind of plants to buy and you can have a little spot where you can contribute to the community and purchase pansies or whatever and plant. I think the dog community in general is very much in that mind set. We arc happy to take care of what benefits us . We like being pan of the community. We want people to be happy with our presence. I guess I'm confused and this is the first time I have ever been to one of these meetings . We have great resources and we can use them and I hope we do . I am sure that I speak for almost everybody that I have ever met at the dog park, when I say that we are happy to do it. So, I would look forward to seeing solutions that include us more and also communication with us . Coming from out of state, I've never seen such controversy around dog issues. One of the solutions they implemented in Salt Lake City, in a very high traffic canyon, was odd/even days. People wanted to cross country ski with their dogs. It was a mess , so on odd days you ski with your dogs and on even days, no dogs. A canyon behind the capital, which is where I lived in Salt Lake City ... one side of the canyon allowed for runners, bikers, walkers and the other side of the canyon unpaved deer trails ... that is the dog side. Three times a year they have a big banner hanging over Memory Groove that says, Clean-Up Day and you go over there and there arc hundreds of people that use that canyon and that park that show up and we redo trails, wc restock bags, we do whatever it takes and it is a really fun community thing. I think that is another huge benefit of this dog park community is that I am a newcomer and this has become my community. This is how I have learned about Colorado. This is how I have learned about politics. And so it has been enormously beneficial to me personally. I think there are solutions out there and I think you should tap us as a resource very aggressively . Thank you. There was applause . ••••• Council Member Moore asked how many speakers do wc have left? Mayor Garrett said wc have two pages . Mr . Moore said we do have other business that we need to attend to and there are a lot of people who would like to speak. Do we need to set up a different time where we can finish the discussions so we can handle our other business? Mayor Garrett said we decided to put it on the agenda for the 21 11 • This is really the opportunity for them to speak . Council Member Bradshaw said that is true. Mr. Garrett said if we hadn't done that, if we were postponing we could actually set it up also for the 21 11 , but we don't have any formal opportunity for the people to speak until the next meeting. Mr. Moore said thank you . Council Member Bradshaw said wc arc going to continue. (c) Caroline Calhoun, 4501 South Pennsylvania Street, said I want to thank you guys for letting us all speak and lett ing us all come and voice our opinions. Because obviously with the turnout we have , this is pretty dear to all of our hearts. Sorry to si ngle you out Mr. Moore , but as you said in the meeting, the only option is to close the dog park . I kind of think yo u could be wrong, because we arc not going to stop going to the park. I moved int o my hou se al most four years ago. I didn't know anybody and I sat around .. .! live by myself and it gets a little nerve wracking ... no husband and no kids . Got my dog and started going to the park. Now every morning I hang o ut with Bill and Rita and il is not just running your dog . I know everybody's life. I know everything that happens . Wh en ~o meonc 's dog dies, we all sit and get sad . It is a friendship thing . It is not just a hanging out thing. I unde n,ia nd that children get to play and I understand that we should have soccer games , and I understand we should have T-ball ga mes. but I don't have kids . I pay my taxe s. I deserve my park and I don't have the other outlets that so me other people mi g ht have . I just think that telling me that my time and my liOCial life and my concerns arc not as important as a soccer team ... well, I'm willine, to wager that most of the children arc not Englewood kids and they are pro babl y not paying taxes like I do. Why am I watering a field so that somebody else can enjoy it? I'm not sa yi ng that I don 't want the m too as well . I think you ca n make it work for everybody. but you have to look at the si ngle person who lives by herself who was nervous. I got a dog to be safe and oow I know all of my ncighbon. They are goi ng to take care of my dog when I go out of town . They will watch my house . There is a sense of community and it brings the whole comm unit y together where you know everybody. They keep track of you . They make sure everything is going okay. If I didn 't show up they would wonder what happened . I mean, otherwise, what am I going to d o'/ Go to the bar every night ? That is not an option for me . Where el1e can I go to socialize myself as well a my d og in a healthy, sa fe way that promotes community, it promola safety, it docs not promoce ' .. .. • • - Englewood City Council June 7, 2004 Page 11 ·• • • goose and it doesn't promote drug dealers. I don't understand how you can make such an easy decision as to say that my life and my happiness co=s in second to a T -ball game . because I don't think that is fair. And, I don't really think it is a drought issue, because if it was we wouldn 't have built the big water park. I think it takes a heck of a lot less water to water a park than to build a big slide. But again, that is for children. Well my dog can't go down a slide so I guess I can't use that park, let the kids go there. I am not trying to say that we shouldn't all be able to live together and work together but the whole thing is, I think we should. And, I don't want to have to go back ar,d be cooped up in my house, not knowing my neighbors, not feeling safe, and not having anything to do in the evening but sit there and watch TV. I don't really like the TV. I would much rather sit outside and get some exercise. I know that sounds silly to you guys, but I also feel like as member of the community, I get to use it too. I know you guys arc pretty tired, because you have two pages of people signed up. but obviously you can tell that we really are not going away . These arc my friends now. I am going to hang out with my friends even if my dog is on a leash . So wear and tear on the park is really kind of going to get taken off the table, because we arc still using it. And I don't mean that in a bad way . You know, it is a much more fun, healthy, safe place and it is something for a single person like me to be able to go out, where at night I might not feel safe taking my dog just on a walk around the streets. But I do feel safe hanging out with IO friends that I have gotten to know quite well actually. Maybe I am just a geek who wants to hang out at the park, but I guess I have that right to be a geek who gets to hang out at the park, rather than an alcoholic who hangs out at the bar. So, anyway. I know we arc kind of doing this ad nauscam. but we felt it was necessary . Thanks. I won't take up all my time, because I think we arc still down to what ... two and a half pages. There was applause. (d) April Clifton, 819 South Logan, said I am an unscheduled guest and I have an unprepared talk , but it is a subject that I feel very passionate about. I am new to the area. As a social thing, I don't have kids and I am no longer physically able to do things like soccer and softball. I think there arc many people who do not or cannot have children and cannot appreciate the park in the physical way that children and adults in spans activities can. My pets are my family and now, visiting this park is a social life . As the woman before me said. it is a sense of community. You can make connections there. not just as friends or dog sitters, but ocher business connections and for someone who is new in the area. getting to know where to do this and that . It is very imponant. I am new and I don't know all the parks, but J noticed that this park, in my opinion. is much cleaner and much nicer. In the informative meeting earlier it seemed that the turf and the health of the park was an issue, whereas if you can look at many of the parks where dogs arc not allowed off-leash, they arc not in as good a condition. Not just goose poop, you may find more dog poop just because there isn't anyone policing. So, I feel Slrollgly because it is a community, as many people have mentioned . It does seem it would really help if you did actually go and visit the park. I heard at the information meeting. people were requesting pictures. which were great. but just stopping by and comparing a couple of parks and stopping by Jason. I think would make so much difference in your opinions. I know that not everyone has time to do that , but it 1s quick and you live in the area . That is all I am going to say. I am going to leave more time for peo ple who arc prepared . Thank you. There was applause. (e) Alice Hanna. 4420 South Elati Street, said I am goin°~ just one quick thing. The two times that I have met more people in the City of Engle wood was fir st. during the ~~d because I had to go outside and shovel my front yard . I met a lot of new neighbors. I had just moved to the Englewood area a year and a half Bi]O . And, the second time was when Bates Logan closed, because more people came to Jason Park. I began meeting my neighbors ... I live on South Elati Street. I think now. in the past six months. I have met five or six people who hve on my street.just because of the dog park issue and it has really helped foster the community. I am going to read a letter that I put together this weekend and had signed by about 65 off-leash supporters. I am going to read that to you . "Dear Counc il Member : The off-leas h parks in Englewood arc an essential pan of our community and I urge you to keep th e m off-leash . Through Englewood's off-leash parks . I have met others from my neighborhood as well as from ot her pans of the Englewood community. The benefits of off-leash parks are for our dogs as well a for the people. Our dogs are able to get the exercise they need and socialize with other dogs. res ulting in well-behaved and pub l ic ly safe dogs. The dog owners arc able to meet and socialize with other members of the community. For many of us . we have crea1cd wonderfu l friendships and have met more people from our neighborhoods throuah these off- leash parks. In add1t1 o n to cxerci ing our dogs. we have monthly social functions and park clelln-up days that arc organized through 1he multiple formal groups that have been created to addrc the need of off-leash parks and the users· enJoyment Those of u, who use these park . value their importance llnd arc rcsponsiblc dog owners. We arc stnct to enforce \\astc p, k up und keeping our dogs from the parks ' other patrons. as we are aware o f Olhcn who use these park as \\ell Taking away our off-leash privilege will rcmo,'C an 1mponant pan of the Englc11,'00d communny I uppo n off-lea h parl..s 1n Englewood and I uric Cn Council to keep off-leash pr1vilc 1n the ' 0 .I-, • • •• • - Englewood City Council June 7, 2004 Page 12 current off-leash parks." She then read the names from the letters that had been signed by off-leash supporters. I am sorry to read those, but I wanted to make sure they were part of the record. I also wanted you to see how many people that may not be here tonight really suppon this. I am going to hand them to the City Clerk to make sure they are part of the record. I appreciate your time. Thank you. There was applause . (f) Jonathan Patch, 819 South Logan Street, said I will keep it shon. Jason Park is an excellent place to go. I was pretty surprised when I first went there that it was set up in the way it was, because the pressure on deliberative bodies such as this, is to keep things safe and low risk and joyless. I was quite frankly impressed that this type of environment was set up. I think you've done a wonderful job. You are on the right track ... stay with it. Thank you. There was applause. (g) Roben Erickson, 4061 South Acoma, said there is not much I want to add to what has already been said tonight, except. ... which is already pretty much a given, but may have been forgotten ... about the bond between animals and people. There have been plenty of studies done with hospital patients and dogs and cats and the therapeutic value of their connection. You know, the people that are sick or alcoholics or drug addicts. If you visit the park you might get a wet nose, but it is a lot better reaction than you can get from a lot of other different situations . I haven't seen any drug dealers at the park or any teenagers doing drugs or drinking alcohol in the comers. And I haven't seen any kind of possible molestation type of situations going on. It could be, but I can't say positively for a fact, but it could be because there is the wet nose factor. There is a possibility of the stray dog running over and possibly stamping his wet nose on somebody who is trying to be pretty cool and do some illegal activity . I just want to throw that in just as a little added tidbit. Thank you. There was applause. (h) Cheryl Popevis, 5932 South Crestview, said the park is wonderful, please don't close it to us. I think it is great that the park is well used. I think that is what a park is for . That means that you are doing a great job. So, please don't close it. The grass will come back. Thank you, she said. There was applause. (i) Marianne Criswell, 3969 South Cherokee Street, said, except for seven years that I spent in our nation's capital, I have been a resident of Englewood since 1964. What I have learned througbwt my life is that it is the government's responsibility to build a community. This dog park adds to your community in such a way that I don't think you know. I was rather surprised, in the earlier meeting tonight, that someone wu asking for pictures. The park is approximately IO blocks from here. When was the last time any of you have gone there? Our congressmen are well known for taking fact finding trips ... they like to spend a lot of money. I will be more than happy to buy you a soda or a cup of coffee and you can come on over and take a look at it. The park is not in bad shape . The worst parts I have seen on it is that you will see four squares. Two up and two back, put a net in between ... that is volleyball . That is from one weekend. The drought is bad everywhere. 1 am a community member. .. ! don't have children . If you would like to take the taxes I pay that go to the school board and give it to the park. I wo uld be more than happy, because that is where I go with my kid Patch. If you don't believe that it docs build community. you should hear the whispers as I am coming up ... "that's Patch's momma." I don't know many of these people by name , I'm terrible with people names ... but I could probably tell you each of the dog's names . T his is part of my community and I have been proud to be a member of the Englewood community. Please keep the park open. T hank yo u, s he sa id. There was applause . (j) Sh annon Sturgen, 2431 South Tejon Street, said I am a registered voter in Englewood and I vote. I contac ted everybody on Friday to tell you I was pro choice ... that I am in favor of the off-leash dog parks and the onl y person I actually spoke to was Beverly. I didn 't talk to anybody else, nobody else called me back. even though I le ft my phone number. But. like I said , I want the dog park open. I don't have any kids either. I waltl my dog ll the park. I live by a greenbelt park, but it is not a good park for dogs . It is narrow, the kick are in the stteet, the kids harass m y dog. There is nothing that you guys do to stop that from going on. But I want my dog ll the park ... that 's it . There was a pplause . (k) Kathl een Buckley. 4648 South Pearl Street. said I know it has i-n a long evening. so I will make this very shon . I just want to say I suppon everyone 's comments from before. I know there are droupt concerns, tha t were addressed in the meeting pri or to thi s, and I'm just thinking that with the swnmcr comina, I know my dog JUSt gets ve ry le th argic and doesn't run around very much, but I know we will ao there and probably just Ilana out. So ma ybe that wo uld be a dccrea;c in the wear and tear on the grass . I don't think it is really that much of a ' .·., .. • • 0 ·• • • [\ j Englewood City Council June 7, 2004 Page 13 problem. il is a beautiful park, it is a beautiful community. I just hope that you will support us and keep it open. Thanks. she said. There was applause. (I) Jennifer Newton, 4062 South Acoma Street, said I have lived here over 30 years and I too am a woman without kids, so my ta~ money is going to parks, I hope, so I can use them. But I just wanted to say that I just discovered this park about a year ago. I have a 14 year old dog and an 8 month old puppy who is very rambunctious and the puppy lives for that park. I cannot skip a day ... my life is hell without it. It is just not fun. What I have discovered is that there is a beautiful community here of nice people who like each other. And I tell you what. .. after working the customer service desk all day, it is really nice to see people being nice to each other. It is just a good thing and I would hate to see it go away . What I see here is a muddling of issues. I see an issue with the drought. But I think we are using grey water on that park, so it shouldn't be as big an issue. I see an issue with leash or off-leash. I don't see what difference a leash would make ... we're going to use the park anyway. And I see an issue where this thing hasn't been publicized to the community. I haven't seen any postings, I haven't seen it in any of the papers, I haven't seen what the problem is. We have a drought, we will deal with it. There are ways of fencing things off ... maybe we need to spread the dogs out in more areas. I just don't see this black and white, yes and oo thing working. Because I don't think you are dealing with the voters. I mean I have my rights too, I need to go to that park. I need to decompress. It is a good thing. That's about all I can say. Please consider us all. There was applause . (m) Reed Quinn Jr., 461 West Quincy, said I lived there for 10 or 11 years now. In your earlier discussions, before this meeting. it seemed that you were focusing more on the drought issue and the hardship on the grass and the turf in the park. Some of the comments that were made was get rid of the dogs. Instead of taking one faction or one usage out of the park. it should be spread to the whole community. If dogs are a problem, limit their use, but also limit T-ball, soccer, volleyball, picnics ... the complete use of it, instead of singling out one particular group. It is a park for Englewood. For the citizens here. for anyone here. To single out one group .. .I think that is wrong. Secondly. I started using the park about a year ago. I know there arc concerns with people, with dogs being off-leash and being around children. I am fully aware of this. I am on my third rottweiler. Probably, one of the scariest dogs that are down at the park. When I used to walk my two rottweilers, people would cross the street. They were scared of the dogs because of reputation and lack of education. Having my dog down at the dog park, I have actually had parents bring their children over to the dog to pet it, to show the kids that it is not what it is made out to be . It is good for the children and it is good for the community to know that a panicular breed is not vicious, because of its breed. And it has been good for me, because I have been able to socializ.e my animals, which in turn makes them better animals in the community. I would hope that you would make a good decision on finding a solution for this. rather than just ending privileges of just one group. Thank you. he said. -There was applause. (n) Glorilea Washatko. 4140 South Inca Street, said my husband and I moved into Englewood. into o ur ho me about 4 l'l years ago. We enjoy the neighborhood. we like the neighborhood. I checked out the nei ghborhood very closely. before we moved in. just to make sure it was a good choice for us . One of the things that we really liked was Jason Park. I think. at that time, it wasn 't an off-leash dog park. We would go for walks in the evening . us ually between the ho urs of 8 :00 p.m. and 11 :00 p .m .. and there were times when we were walking that we wo uld see ac ti vi ties happening in the parking lot and in the park that were mischievous at best. I suspect there were probably drug deals going on. maybe other activities. but we didn't really go over and find out what they were doing. We just walked home. Since this has become a dog park, we don't see that anymore and we still go for walks betwee n the hours of 8 :00 p .m. and 11 :00 p .m. or we will take our dog to go walk in the park. Something that yo u should know is that I am not a dog owner for many years. We have recently adopted a pct and her name is Sally. She is a part of o ur family. She is very special to us and we consida her a family member. If you take away J ason Park from the d og o wners ... to pecplc who have pets in their family and they are actually a part of their family. .. would be like taking away privileges to children in families. Dogs aren't really any different than childrcn ... they are family members. They require exercise and care just like anything else does. I only found out about th i thi s past week. so I haven ·1 had very much time to prepare. I was curious why there haven 't been more th ing s in the new paper or o n flyers. I had to hear it from other people in the park ... that this was possibly someth ing that c uld happen. That the off-leash dog park privileges could be taken away. I was surprised because I ha ve never heard of or seen a single pro blem with the dogs or the k.ids or the interaction of the people there. Have any of you gone to the park and actually seen it or checked it out? Something else you should know is that I am used to fix mg thm . I was a computer technician for a long time and I moved inlO a teaching position. because my job was downsized My experience ha taught me that there are solutions to problems. My experience as a teacher ' ,• • • - Englewood City Council June 7, 2004 Page 14 0 0 has taught me that solutions to many problems usually involve caring and sharing and community. To focus on just one group of people who have dogs, who utilize a park and actually make it safer, is not right. It is not right. There arc many options that could be looked at for something like that. There could be particular hours for dogs to be off- lcash, something to where everybody has to share the park. It should be divided equally. You shouldn't take away privileges for one group of people just because you think that is going to solve the problem, especially since you haven't been to the park and actually seen it. Mike Flaherty told me that there are, on record, problems at Bates Logan Park with dogs and children. I don't know of anything like that, but again, I haven't had time to do my homework and my research. I don't think anybody here has heard of any problems. Have you? Again, some possible solutions are scheduled off-leash dog hours. It would ultimately save money and promote community harmony. I have heard of some people talking about the smell from the containers where the dog droppings go . A possible solution to that would be special containers for dog droppings to eliminate possible future complaints. You guys have an opponunity here to be leaders, to promote community and to make a good decision. You have an opponunity to be, not only leaders here in Englewood, but for other cities too, to sec Englewood as an example of how they solve problems. I strongly urge each of you to be fair and equitable to all citizens and family members of Englewood and to not single out a select few. Especially when you have not gone and seen what the park is and what it does and what it involves. I thank you for the oppol1Ullity to speak to you . I know you are tired, just like everyone else here . I thank you for not changing the agenda, to try to cut the meeting shon. Please make the right decision. Please take into consideration everybody, not just a select group of people. Thank you. There was applause. (o) Victoria LeBcrt, 240 East Cornell, said I am sorry as I know it has been a long cverting and I will try to make it quick. I just want to say a couple of things that I didn't hear anybody else say. One is the issue of the stress on Jason Park. It is kind of ironic that you close Bates Park, because there was stress on the park ... well it was one of the reasons ... and we all moved to Jason Park and now we are talking about closing Jason and if we all left there and went to another off-leash park it would triple the stress on that park. I also wanted to say that I contribute a large percentage of my dog's excellent behavior to off-leash parks. We have the opportunity to let her go away from me and then I call her back. I have never heard of a problem with the liOCCCf pmes that was mclllioned. I have never heard of a problem with a child being hlU1 by a dog or being harmed by the feces of a q . I support what these people say and I do think there are compromises. Some people are willing to pay for licenses to lalte their dogs to off-leash parks. Just as a suggestion. That is all I wanted to say . Thank you for your time, she said . There was applause. (p) Bill Gedeon. 460 West Quincy, said I have been there about 27 ~ years. Noc to repeal anythina anybody else has said, but I would imagine the cost of City allowing us the privilege of using the off-leuh parlt is minimal. Emptying garbage cans is about all I sec and for most of us we clean up after our dop and odlcr dop. We bring plastic bags for other people and I have seen people actually telling cigarette smokers to quit tlvowing their butts o n the ground. We have such an investment in Jason Park. I really wonder if you take that away from thi s. i f that commitment is going to be there anymore and your cost of cleaning up the park ia going to go up . Tlw's about all I have to say. other than I wish you would each come down there any time, any day to sec what it is like. Thank yo u. he said . There was applause. (q ) Nancy Ro ges, 2829 South Logan. said really the only thin& I would like to say is that there are a lot o f viable o ptions to make th is work. I understand that the Task Force has been in effect for, I think, about 6 mo nth s now. What I would strongly encourage you to do is hire a professional medialOr . I have been involved in uni o n nego tiations and we have used problem solving, where each side is allowed to have their interests heard and come 10 an agreement. because I don't think that the Task Force is goina to be able to reach a decision if there are two s ides without anyone helping them to mediate their own opinions. I think it is a waste of time . Thanks, she said . There was applause. (r) Jill T o maso. 32 18 South Logan Street. I just want to say that I support the dog park and expect a dec is io n to be made that is fair to everybody. That a compromise will be made thal is fair to all citiJ.Cm who utc the park. because we li ve here too and we pay taxes and I don't think you want to make a hormonal. prqJ11U11 woman upset. There was applause. (s) Jan B irmingham, 4180 South Jason Street, said I am directly acrou the street from the park . Altho ug h I have o nl y li ved the re a shon period o f time, I lived in Denver si nce 1979. My daughter and I used to go . " I-• ' . ... ,, ' • • -.. Englewood City Council June 7, 2004 Page 15 ·• • • ,~ LJ to Jason Park and play on the playground and we had pizza in the park all the time . I have always loved that park and when I had the opportunity to move across the street from it. I just cherished it. When I found out it was a dog park. I was even more thrilled . I see people come and that the dogs are happy to be there and they don't bark that much. There is more noise from the volleyball players than the kids or the dogs. They have a wonderful time . It is a wonderful facility . I have seen more dogs leave droppings in Washington Park than I have at Jason Park. because there is no peer pressure to pick up after your dog . People just go "oh, nobody's looking" and they walk away. I don't see that at Jason Park . I see people going over there and playing with their dogs. I see people going there every day . I sec some people going there twice a day. I just recently moved in. so I took some time off work to unpack and so I was watching all this and I very much look forward to taking my dog, either on or off-leash to Jason Park . Thank you very much, she said . There was applause. (t) Lisa Miller. 403 East Mexico Avenue, said, quite frankly, I can't say anymore than what everybody else has already said, other than to ask if anybody has done any research in any other city like Seattle, San Francisco, Chicago or New York City, where they have dog parks everywhere? Very successful dog parks. I think if we did some research and found out how these parks were very successful, we could have that here . It is simple. It could be a very simple solution. If you can't do your research, then we can do our research, because it is happening . It is happening in Central Park. How many people arc there? Kids and everything. So, it can happen in these very large cities . Denver doesn't compare to New York City. I think it can happen . That is all, she said. There was applause . (u) Chris Sexton, 30455 Conifer Road , Evergreen, said I am not a resident of your City. but I do enjoy the dog parks . I should probably tell you exactly how that comes to be . I am president of the Colorado Disc Dogs. A Frisbee dog club, based here in the front range and all over the State . I am also a founder and board member of the UFO, which is an international Frisbee dog organization. We run the world cup series which, last year, took a stop in Littleton. but we enjoyed a night of rccrcatior, and social activities with competitors from all over the country at Sheridan Park, which I believe is part of the Englewood park system . I wonder if any of you folks were in politics 30 years ago? Some things happened back then that arc fairly significant. I want to start off by talking about some logical things that were pointed out in the informational meeting . The issue that the dog people arcn' t going away . Never. They arc going to be there all the time ... on-leash or off-leash . And they don't impact the quality of the park grass. The water issue is different from the dog impact issue. And spreading it around to everybody is a much more equitable solution . 1 brought up 30 years ago. because 30 years ago, August 5, 1974, a crazy guy by the name of Alex Stein took his crazy dog and they jumped over the fence at Dodger's Stadium and onto the field, the seventh inning stretch. and he started throwing Frisbees for his dog . In this day and age he would have 1'ccn arrested and thrown in jail real quick. but back then, Joe Garagiola, calling the game, thought it was very novel and they let it go on, on national television, for about· 10 minutes . It was the start of a revolution and that revolution was dog ownership. kind of. It didn't create a multi-million dollar sport that is on television all the time, it didn't create an elite class or breed of dog . What it did was create this really fun activity that people arc able to enjoy with their dog . When they got involved, suddenly they discovered their dogs and they found out that there is a bond between o wners and their dogs . Everybody here understands that. I bring up the Frisbee because that is what I am involved in . I don 't want to go too far down that road or we could be there all night. But this led to agility and the fly ball. Frisbee is kind of the granddaddy of all the dog sports and the revolution wasn't in the dog sport. the revolution was the bond with people and their dogs. The revolution came at a time when your choice in dog food was to go down to the feed mill and pick up 50 pounds of Purina and split it among your friends . We have moved to highly sc ientifi c diets and billions and billions of dollars . In 2002, $95 billion was spent on dog products by Americans . These arc people who have taken dogs into their lives and they have become a part of their lives . To deny them. as a gro up of people , access to some privileges, where they arc not really causing problcms ... it doesn't make a loc of sense . So I just want to say that I really support you guys and in the position you arc at now . Because , you guys arc at co mpromise ... yo u have a hicvcd compromisc ... you arc thcrc ... you have parks where people can go with their dogs and you ha ve places where you have to keep the dog on lease or keep the usage out. By closing that down to pcoplc ... as it has been pointed out ... and you concentrate your focus where the dogs arc going to be ... it is going to get worse . I have seen it happen. pcrsonally ... first hand . I lived in Fort Collins for ten years and when they finally ope ned one dog park . it was a loc of fun for the first few days and then when the grass was gone and there wu only din left. because II wa half an acre and that was the only place you could legally go. it wun't so much fun n) more . But d1 tnbuung that wear. you arc going to sec a Joe better raourccs put to use by the people here . nother I u that I hould pomt out here is reputation . For a long time the City of Denver had a rq>Ul8IIOII for being ,cry anti -dog and that rcputauon still exists with them . They have made some tcps forward. some ,-cry sood ·~ ,, • ' • Englewood City Council June 7, 2004 Page 16 ·• • • steps by opening up their dog parks, but their dog laws arc draconian . The dog parks arc a good step, but everybody knows about the undercover dog police that they had in Washington Park. What kind of mentality do you have to have to do that ? Now, I understand why they do that. It is because of the bad apples and the bad apples do spoil it fo r everybody . We have a lot of very progressive groups here that try to minimize the bad apples and re-educate people. That is not a road that anyone wants to go down . We do not want to sec Englewood become that place where the dog thing is just not working. The dog thing is working and it is not the issue you think it is . I really support you guys and the position of compromise that you arc at right now. Keep that compromise and keep working with the people and keep those options open for everybody . Shutting the door ... that's draconian . Keeping it open ... that 's progressive . As a resident of Colorado and the Colorado lifestyle that I have enjoyed my whole life, and being involved in lots of different sports where there is multi -use and different groups interacting .. .I was a mountain biker for a long time and I saw the horse/biker/hiker issues jog around each other. They find their level. .. they do ... and I trust that you guys will have the wisdom to find that level yourself. I thank you for the time here and I support you and your decisions of compromise. Thank you, he said . There was applause . (v) Chri sti Goodman, 30455 Conifer Road , Evergreen, said I am here because I am a member of Colorado Disc Dogs and we use one of your parks, once a month . for our Frisbee gatherings . So that is the genesis of my interest . However , I wanted to point out that I have been a dog trainer for over 20 years . Clearly, all these people here arc pro off-leash dog park, but even the people who disagree with off-leash dog parks, would agree that since there arc dogs in our community, well behaved dogs, safe dogs, arc our ultimate goal . And that is dog owners and people who want to be left alone by well-behaved , well-socialized dogs. As a dog trainer I can only stress the importance of soc ialization to a well-behaved dog . It doesn 't happen on a leash . I have taught many dog training classes, I have been to many dog training classes and that kind of dog to dog interaction only happens off-leash . For whatever reason . the leash is a psychological barrier for dogs getting well socialized. So you arc not going to have as well behaved dogs, if you have no off-leash areas for dogs to socialize. Also, being the owner of two extremely acti ve Australian Shepherds, I know that a tired dog is a good dog . So the things that have been mentioned earlier about barking. behavioral problems. digging and fence fighting ... everything that dogs get into trouble for, can be solved with a lot of regular exercise . Like the guy said earlier, I can't jog that fast or that long, which is IClually why I started playing Frisbee. I wanted to poim out. as a citizen, that I am very proud of the Englewood attitude to wards dogs. or I have been, and I pointed it out to all of the people who came from all over the country last year to our big event in August , that we have some of the most progressive dog attitudes in the country, here in Englewood and many of them were very j ealous. I would really hate to inform them that that has gone away . I didn 't come to the ear lier meeting . but I wanted to point out. regarding the turf issues. that I heard from the IUrf manager at Mile Hi Stadium that when we go and do half time performances for them they arc thrilled to death. because the dogs cause th e least amount of damage o f anybody who comes into the stadium . Thank you very much for yow-time. she said . There was applause . (w) Euge ne Norman sa id this has been a very interesting dog day evening. I have been a resident of Englewood for 75 years . I th ink there arc dog people and cat people and then arc j ust people people. I consider myself to be a people person. We ... you and I.. .us ... America ... the who le world , according to the laws of physics, we exist or manifest in. at best . a voi d. What we do wi th , and in th a t illusion, is us . All of us creatin g. What we create is a world you sec befon: yo u. Wc ... you ... us ... mc, we all create our lives on both subjective and objective le vel s in spa ce time . We can have relative heave n or he ll and it is dependent on ego or lack of. We humans ha ve the capacit y to create miracles. But first ,.'C must find our ce nte r ... God ... one thought. The concept of free people and free enterprise i a paradox, a catch-22 situation , tha t has been the cause of action by the Mortcal in both the past and the present. Money control us. whereas it is ... we together ... who must control money and our relative ignoranc e as well . Our rela ti ve wisdom must be give n fieedom . Capitali sm and plutocraey conuol us. We need to control capi tali m and plutocracy beyond our silly egos and unth inking greed . Wants are a bottomless pit, needs are more amenable . My intent in trying to communicate. is si mpl y an attempt to go beyond ego. both mine and youn. Ego barriers can be quue detrimental at umcs to the se lf. the se lf tha t we arc . When one lowers their qo ... thoughts, emoti ons. evas ions and manipulations can be observed and objec tified more eas il y. All of us should try it. I would like to present. .. ! don't know whether you would call it a theory. a hypothesis I guess ... but look at me first u a human bein g who feel empathy and compassion for all of you. but then abltractly see me as a an emperor. see me as your emperor. Allow me to pre$Cffl I manimal number of ideas, relatively new ideas . to all of you and al l of you. at o ne 11mc . Just vote ye or no on those fc,o• Ideas tha1 I ,o-ould present . Then the ones that you voce yes on ... implement those Mkas . It ,o-ould be a mancr of cormna from a centcr ... our center ... as Amenca ... u individuals in Amenca I l'Cllll don 't ha,e any ego. I ma sound hke I have an ego. but I don't. I'm just tryina to ' .. .• • • -· 0 Englewood City Council June 7, 2004 Page 17 ·• • 0 0 communicalC with all of you . I mean look at our lives . Look at how absurd, at times, our lives really arc. Total absurdity. If we came up with just a few brand new ideas and then just vole ... yes or no ... on the few ideas. That would give you power. It would not give me power. My ego would not cnlCr into the situation at all. It would be you individually who would acquire the power, beyond greed and beyond hypocrisy, beyond a lot of the negative that we have in this country. I hope that all of you think about what I present tonight. There was applause. 8. Communications, Proclamations and Appointments (a) A letter from Deborah Howard indicating her resignation from the Englewood Cultural Arts Commission was considered. COUNCIL MEMBER WOLOSYN MOVED, AND IT WAS SECONDED, TO ACCEPT THE RESIGNATION OF DEBORAH HOWARD FROM THE ENGLEWOOD CUL11JRAL ARTS COMMISSION. Mayor Garren asked if there were any comments or questions. There were none. Vote results: Motion carried. Ayes: Council Members Barrentine. Moore, Bradshaw, Garrett. Wolosyn, Yurchick, Tomasso Nays: None 9. Publk Hearin& No public hearing was scheduled before Council . 10. Consent Apnda MAYOR GARRETT REMOVED ITEM 10 (c) (I) FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA. COUNCIL MEMBER BRADSHAW MOVED, AND IT WAS SECONDED, TO APPROVE CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS 10 (a) (I) AND 10 (b) (I). (a) Approval of Ordinances on First Reading (i) COUNCIi... BILL NO . 32, INTRODUCED BY COUNCIL MEMBER BRADSHAW A BILL FOR AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING ACCEPTANCE OF A TRANSPORTATION/lITD..ITY EASEME NT ALONG SOUTH ELATI STREET FROM THE REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION DISTRICT TO THE CITY OF ENGLE WOOD . COLORADO . (b) Approval of Ordinances on Second Read ing (i) ORDINAN CE NO . 3 1. SERIES OF 2004 (COUNCIi... BII...L NO . 27 . INfRODUCED BY COUNCIL MEMBER BRADSHAW ) AN ORDINAN CE APPROVING S'JPPLEMENT NO. 156 TO THE SOUTHGATE SANITATION DISTRICT CON NECTOR 'S AGREEMENT FOR THE INCLUSION OF LAND WITHIN THE DISTRICT BOUNDARIES . Vote results: Moti o n carried . A ye s: Council Members Barrentine. Moore, Bradshaw. Ganett. W o losyn, Yurchic k . Tomasso Nays : None ' .. ,, • • Englewood City Council June 7, 2004 Page 18 11. Regular Agenda (a) Approval of Ordinances on First Reading ·• • • 0 (i) City Clerk Ellis presented a n:commendation from the Department of Finance and Administrative Services, City Clerk's Office, to adopt a bill for an ordinance submitting to a vote of the registered electors of the City of Englewood a proposed amendment to Article I, Section 12, of the Englewood Home Ruic Charter pertaining to Elections. She explained that this was the item we discussed at Study Session last week. We arc trying to correct an election timing problem that was created when TABOR was passed. TABOR provides for an election on the first Tuesday in November of odd-numbered years. Our Charter states that our general municipal elections will be held biennially in November on the first Tuesday after the first Monday. We have a conflict in 2005 and 2011, whereas there is no Monday preceding the first Tuesday and we would end up having to bold our regular election a week after the County's coordinated election. Holding an election a week later creates a lot of administrative issues that would make that very difficult. The Election Commission recommends passage of this ordinance, she said. Mayor Garrett asked if Council had any questions for Ms. Ellis. There were none. COUNCIL MEMBER WOLOSYN MOVED, AND IT WAS SECONDED, TO APPROVE AGENDA ITEM ti (a) (I) • COUNCIL BILL NO. 29. COUNCD... BD...L NO. 29, INTRODUCED BY COUNCD... MEMBER WOLOSYN A Bll.L FOR AN ORDINANCE SUBMITTING TO A VOTE OF THE REGISTERED ELECTORS OF THE CITY OF ENGLEWOOD AT THE NEXT SCHEDULED MUNICIPAL ELECTION A PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO ARTICLE I, SECTION 12, OF THE ENGLEWOOD HOME RULE CHARTER. Vote results: Ayes: Council Members Barrentine, Moore. Bradshaw, Garrett. Wolosyn. Yurchick, Tomasso · Nays: None Motion carried. (ii) Director Ross presented a recommendation from the Department of Public Works to adopt a bill for an ordinance authorizing an lntcrgovcmrncntal Agreement with the City of Littleton for the purchase of the "Hcrbenson" propcny for the Littleton/Englewood Wastewater Treatment Plant. He said that 35 years ago, we entered into a lease with the Hcrbenson family for about 17 .9 acres of land, where the Bi-City Administration, the Englewood Servicenter and the Colorado Humane Society buildings sit. It was a very favorable lease for those 35 years, but, unfonunately, according 10 the terms of that, if we renewed it at the end of the next 35 year period, they would.own all the buildings and there arc tens of millions of dollars of infrastructure there. Staff rccomrncndcd and, Ci ty Council concurred , that, while we were in kind of a favorable situation, we should see if we could nego tiate the purchase of that propeny. Time was on our side, and the person who controlled it was in his 50's and he decided he would like to get a fair amount of cash and be able to use it, instead of turning it over to his successors and heirs . So, we made the deal and we arc now here to finalize the purchase of the southern 8 .8 acres of the propcny that is going to be used for the Wastewater Administration Treatment activities. If you have any questions, I would be glad to answer them. he said. Council Member Bradshaw asked if this tics everything up. Director Ross said yes . Ms . Bradshaw said this is the final o ne. Mr. Ross said yes . CO NCIL MEMBER BRADSHAW MOVED, AND IT WAS SECONDED, TO APPROVE AGENDA ITEM 11 (a) (ii) • COUNCIL BILL NO. 26. COUNCrL BILL NO. 26, INTRODUCED BY COUNCIL MEMBER BRADSHAW ' .. .. • • 0 Englewood City Council June 7, 2004 Page 19 A BILL FOR AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING AN INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF LITTLETON, COLORADO AND THE CITY OF ENGLEWOOD PERTAINING TO THE "SECOND AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITIES OF LITTLETON AND ENGLEWOOD, COLORADO, FOR JOINT WASTEWATER TREATMENT FACILITIES." Mayor Garren asked if there were any questions or comments. There were none . Vote results: Motion carried. Ayes: Nays : Council Members Barrentine, Moore, Bradshaw, Garren, Wolosyn, Yurchick, Tomasso None (iii) Director Ross presented a recommendation from the Department of Public Wnrks to adopt a bill for an ordinance submitting to a vote of the registered electors of the City of Englewood a Ballot Question to sell or transfer property owned by the Englewood Water and Sewer Utilities to the Cities of Englewood and Littleton for use by the Littleton/Englewood Wastcwaier Treatment Plant and the Englewood Servicenler. He said in July of 1973, the cities of Littleton and Englewood entered into an agreement to operaie and jointly own the Wastewaler Treatment facility. This agreement calls for the City of Englewood to take the lead in all property purchases and then the City of Littleton is to reimburse us 50% of all our expenses thereafter. Well, portions of the property that have been acquired, were acquired with funds used by the Sewer Fund, as well as the Wala Utility . Because of the Charter, we need IO have a vote of the people in order to complete those transfen. So we arc asking you to pass this ordinance, submitting this to a vote. Mayor Garren asked if there were any questions for Mr. Ross. There were none. COUNCIL MEMBER BRADSHAW MOVED, AND IT WAS SECONDED, TO APPROVE AGENDA ITEM 11 (a) (W) • COUNqL BILL NO. 30. COUNCIL BILL NO . 30, INTRODUCED BY COUNCIL MEMBER BRADSHAW A BILL FOR AN ORDINANCE SUBMITTING TO A VOTE OF THE REGISTERED ELECTORS OF THE CITY OF ENGLEWOOD A BALLOT QUESTION AT THE NEXT SCHEDUUID MUNICIPAL ELECTION TO SELL OR TRANSFER PROPERTY OWNED BY THE ENGLEWOOD WATER AND SEWF.R UTILITIES TO THE CITIES OF ENGLEWOOD AND LITTLETON FOR USE BY THE LrrnErON/ENGLEWOOD Bl-CITY W ASTEWA TER TREATMENT PLANT . Vote results: Motion carried . Ayes : Council Members Barrentine, Moore, Bradshaw, Garrett. Wolosyn, Yurchick, Tomasso Nays : None (b) Approval of Ordinances on Second Reading (i) Council Bill No . 28. an emergency ordinance authoriuna a temporary monimwn on sccuons of the Englewood Municipal Code pertaining to allowed hours and days of operation of Fannc:n Markets in the City of Englewood was considered . COUNCIL MEMBER WOLOSYN MOVED, AND IT WAS SECONDED, TO APPROVE AGENDA ITEM 11 (b) (I)· ORDINANCE NO. 32, SERI~ OF-._ ORDINANCE NO . 32 . SER!F.S OF 2004 (COUNCIL BILL NO . 28. INTRODUL1ID BY COUNCIL MEMBER WOLOSYN ) t .... .. • • Englewood City CouncU June 7, 2004 Page20 AN EMERGENCY ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING A TEMPORARY SUSPENSION OR MORATORIUM OF TITLE 16, CHAPTER 5, SECTION 5, SUBSECTION (E), NUMBER (2), PARAGRAPH (c), OF THE ENGLEWOOD MUNICIPAL CODE 2000, PERTAINING TO FARMERS MARKETS FOR A PERIOD OF SIX MONTHS . Vote results: Motion carried . (c) Ayes : Nays : Council Members Barrentine, Moore, Bradshaw, Garrett, Wolosyn, Yurchick, Tomasso None Resolutions and Motions (i) Director Gryglewicz presented a recommendation from the Department of Finance and Administrative Services to adopt a resolution approving a Supplemental Appropriation for year-end 2003 to comply with City Charter requirements. He said these are the 2003 ending supplementals. Mainly these arc timing issues or items that occurred during the year that weren't part of the formal budget process for 2003 . There is one for the General Fund, the Donors Fund, the Storm Drainage Fund and the Servicenter Fund. I can go through those individually if you would like, he said . Mayor Garrett asked if Council had any questions for Mr . Gryglewicz . There were none . COUNCIL MEMBER BRADSHAW MOVED, AND IT WAS SECONDED, TO APPROVE AGENDA ITEM 11 (c) (I)· RF.SOLUTION NO. 52, SERIES OF 2004. RESOLUTION NO . 52 , SERIES OF 2004 . A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE 2003 YEAR END SUPPLEMENT AL APPROPRIATIONS TO COMPLY WITH CITY CHARTER REQUIREMENTS . Vote results: Motion carried . Ayes : Council Me unbers Barrentine. Moore. Bradshaw, Garrett. Wolosyn, Yurchick. Tomasso Nays : None (ii) Director Gryglew icz presented a recommendation from the Department of Finance and Admin istr ative Ser vices to approve , by motion . the use of the "Modified Approach" u defined by Govanment Acco untin g Standards Board (GASB ) Statement Number 34. He said th is is required by GASB 34, for Council to formally . by motio n, approve th e use of th e modified method under GASB 34. Mayor Garrett asked if there were any questions for Mr . Gry glewicz. There were none . CO UNCIL MEMBER WOLOSYN MOVED, AND IT WAS SECONDED, TO APPROVE TIIE USE OF THE "MODIFIED APPROACH" AS DEflNED BY GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTING STANDARDS BOARD (GASB) STATEMENT NUMBER 34. Vote results : Motio n carried . Ayes : Nays : Counc il Members Barrentine, Moore. Bradshaw, Garrett, Wolosyn, Yurch ic k, Tomasso None (iii ) Director Gryglewicz presented a recommendation from the Depanmeni of Financ:e and Admini trative Service to approve . by motion. a donation ofSl .000 to the Tina Elplrza Memorial Puad. The fund ha been set up in the Englewood Credit Union . He ell plained that we had a number of depanmeia thal wallled IO t .· .. ,, • • 0 Englewood City Council June 7, 2004 Page 21 ·• • • n ... t ' -~ r--1 ~--..-,' donate, but as Counci l normally docs that by motion or as part of their budget, we thought it appropriate that it come through Council on behalf of all the departments and the Council. Mayor Garrett asked if there were any questions for Mr. Gryglewicz. Council Member Yurchick said will this come out of our fund we set aside or is this something in addition to that? Director Gryglcwicz said this will come out of the Contingency Funds ... they arc already budgeted. COUNCIL MEMBER WOLOSYN MOVED, AND IT WAS SECONDED, TO APPROVE A DONATION OF $1,000 TO THE TINA ESPARZA MEMORIAL FUND. Vote results: Ayes: Nays: Motion carried. 12. General Discussion (a) Mayor's Choice Council Members Barrentine, Moore, Bradshaw, Garrett, Wolosyn, Yurchick, Tomasso None Mayor Garrett did not have any matters to bring before Council. (b) Council Members' Choice (i) Council Member Barrentine: I . She said I want to thank Lieutenant Collins for addressing several complaints that I got about noise revolving around the marching band activities at the High School. Everybody was very happy with his comments and, apparently, he did a very good job because they didn't feel the need to come tonight They were very complimentary of him and hopefully we can address this next year so that it doesn't go quite so late at night. 2 . She said thanks to Jerrell Black and his staff for a very successful public opening of Pirates Cove. (ii ) Council Member Moore said I just have a general comment. I don't know how we ended up so deep in thi s issue tonight. The whole dog park issue has been deferred to be handled in a more logical, thoughtful process. The discussion tonight should have been just to draw up a process ... do wc ·need to act quickly or not? It is frustrating that we are back to debating all of the fundamental issues of the dog park when we have already, as a Council, realized that we have dedicated so much time to that and that we need to move on and allow it to work through di ffercnt channels . I am not sure how we can control it. I am not sure what steps need to be taken o r what we need to focus on. Do we need 10 act in an expedient manner because of the drought or not? But for the rest of it, thi s is no t the process we agreed to deal with. It is taking up a lot of time that this Council needs to be s pending on other maners. So I just wanted to express that opinion, I would like to see it somehow handled in a more structured manner than we a ppear to be heading towards ... again. Thank you . He said I have one question. If we are not vo ting next time with respect to the dro ught .. .I know I don't need to see the issue put on the agenda, so I do n't kno w if we would at least want to revisit whether or not we want to put this on the agenda next week . I am not heari ng the Parks Department recommending that we take action right now because of the drought issue. And if they arc not recommending it, then I don't know why we would need u5 be talking about it at the next Study Session. So I'll at least throw that o ut. .. that there is a majority that would rather just not see it voted on. Council Member Yurchi c k said I thought we had agreed that it wasn't the drought , but that it was the wear and tear and that water and the drought was a separate issue ... from talking to Dave. Council Member M oore said that is why I feel we do n't need to vote on it. Reflecting more on Dave's comments. the Parks Department is not pu\hing for an immediate solution. If they aren 't pushi ng for an immediate solution, the n let 's let thi s th ing play o ut the way we have already decided that it would . That is my opinion. he said . . ... .. • ' ' .. ' • • Englewood City Council June 7, 2004 Page 22 • • Council Member Barrentine said but the Parks and Recreation Board, made up of citizens and neighbors of this community, arc making that recommendation and Dave did have some supporting issues that he brought up and it made me think we ought to address it. Council Member Moore said when you first joined Council, one of the very valuable things that I think you did, ifl recall correctly, was trying to make sure we focused on the issues. And, that is what I would just suggest. Yes, the Commission raised the issue, but it is too big of an issue to try to get it done this quickly and in this manner. I have said enough. Council Member Barrentine said we did ask for some additional information and we had one of our Boards make a recommendation. I just think we should follow through and at least hear the additional information from them. Council Member Moore said I think we just have a lot of people stirred up . Council Member Wolosyn said I would like to point out that the Committee that we did appoint to deal with part of this issue asked us to postpone, not to disregard, that recommendation. I think that postponing is consistent and not disrespectful. But, Council Member Bradshaw said, I think the Task Force has mudded their waters. They asked for direction a month ago, as they didn't know what they were really supposed to be doing. My concern is that if it is an issue, I would like staff to say ... it is a drought issue ... and tell us that, instead of the iUusion that it is. Mayor Garrett said my concern ... and I go to John's point. .. is that we did this very quickly last fall . Okay things happened and turned on a dime. If I was a person who enjoyed off-leash privileges, and I'm not, but I would be very skittish of what this Council could do. And I would show up at every meeting, at every opportunity and talk all day long. I think that is the conditioning that we set for ourselves last year. Now, wc can talk about the drought, but you say, we arc going to suspend your privileges. Well we shut Bates Logan down in one meeting, without them really knowing that we were about to do that. So, I would be here if I were them. The other issue I have is with thc Commission. They did no! ask for & recommendation, or even input. from the Depanmcnt before that happened. They had a few citizens show up, make some comments and the person that talked about the condition of the park was actually one of the members who voted against the resolution. That is one reason why I think we should have more, input and more delay. When we had the Study Session though, there were four people on Council who would like to put it on the agenda. That is the will of the four . To me that is enough and we should put it on the agenda and 'talk about it . · Council Member Moore said absolutely. I was just curious if any of those four had changed their minds during the night. Council Member Yurchick said convince me . Council Member Barrentine said speaking for myself. I am still going to stick with wanting to have the information. We have stewardship over this asset for the City and if there is a concern or problem, I want to know what the issues are . And to address what you said ... it was always going to happen. What happened last time .. .Jason was always going to be on the table this spring. I think everybody knew that. And the other side will be here neltt time and they will go back and fonh again, until a firm decision is made one way or another. Unless, there arc no more problems ... unless there is no more odor and there is no more coniention and there is no more yelling between the groups. That is why the leash issue happened in the first place. The City didn't have a leash law and there were concerns and problems. We don't try to be proactive in those ways. wc try to address the concerns that the people arc bringing here. I am sorry. I knew when I got on this Council thal this was noc goina to go away. I wish that it had and that Jason Park wasn 't an is ue . People prediclCd that it would when Baies Logan closed. But. ii is noc some thing that is going to go away and as much as I would like to stick my head in the sand. it is noc going to help an)1hing. So. I believe that the Olher side and other opinions will be expressed at our next meeting as well. Council Member Moore said 10 > ur point Doug. ,.c set ourselves up for it last fall . We had discussions about that, we realized the cffc t that II had . There still nught be certain thinp thal we could do to reassure the public of what o ur process is going t be on th1 rnattn. If ,.c arc diving bacL 11110 thi • then let's decide and ~·s do it and let's 11 ,. ' . ... ! • • • ~- 0 Englewood City Council June 7, 2004 Page 23 0 [J least talk about how we arc going to do it, to make it effective. I don't want the battle to be ... sec who can run the longest filibuster on the topic. If we arc going to do it. if we arc diving into this, then let's do it right. Council Member Wolosyn said that is what I tried to say at Council tonight and there are other facts that we have never really looked at. .. other possible solutions. It is a big picture and that is how I feel it should be looked at. Saying the parks should be closed to dogs because of drought, is the same as the decision to not have athletics from other municipalities during the drought. It is not dealing with the dog issue. If it is going to be perceived as dealing with the dog issue, I would like to deal with it up front and I think that takes more than a couple of weeks. Council Member Tomasso said the same thing happened at the beginning of soccer season. The parlul were closed for pre-practices to prevent damage to the parks. The last time I was in Jason Park was mid-May at the end of soccer season and the ground looked really stressed at that point. It is getting hotter. It was really hot today. My grass, no matter how much water I put on it, looks stressed and nobody walks on it. So I am thinking this is not a dog issue, it is a stress issue, it is the drought issue and that was a recommendation that came from the Board . Mayor Garrett said if we banned athletics, that is the same as banning off-leash privileges. lf you arc going to limit off-leash privileges, when we limit athletic activity, that is a different solution. Which means you say that on these days , we will have an off-leash program and on these days wc will not have an off-leash program. That is a limitation as opposed to a ban. I think that is what I am hearing a lot of ... don't ban us. Or, Council Member Tomasso said, we limit the number of parents that can go to T-ball. You arc only allowed two parents to keep down the wear and tear on the grass. It is either that or wc put more water into the park. Council Member Bradshaw said water is not going to solve it. This is a chance for this Council to finally set guidelines that everyone knows about. Ms. Wolosyn said about what ... about the drought? Ms . Bradshaw said about whether wc arc going to allow off-leash after dark, whether we arc going to do odd/even days. There have been a lot of good ideas presented tonight. What about off-leash at night and before 9 a .m. There arc a lot of different ways you can do this . Council Member Wolosyn said then that is different than voting on the recommendation from Pules and Recreation . Council Member Bradshaw said the information that Parks and Recreation had at that time, and one of the people who voted against it, even agreed that this park was stressed. Council Member Barrentine said I didn't hear anybody on Council say they wanted to vote or not vote on the drought issue. l think we asked for some additional information. My stewardship of our assets of this City come first and if I've got people who, in their profcss,onal opinion, believe that we need to do something for that park to preserve our assets. then l would like to hear that information. That is all I have asked for . l never said what I wanted to do with the dog park . I guess the fact that it is being referred to as a dog park has already led us into where w~ are headed . But that is separate from what was brought up tonight, with our recommendation from the Parks and Recreation <;ommission and the comments that were made by the staff. That is a separate issue. It will happen anyway, but it is a separate issue for me. So. Co unci l Member Wolosyn said. when we vote next week it will be couched m terms ... bccausc of drought. Mayor Garrett said no, it is going to be couched in terms of, do we want to suspend privileges. We have a recommendation. we will receive information and each Council member will make their own decision. Council Member Wolosyn said wasn't the recommendation from Parks and Recreation about the drought? Council Member Barrentine said I didn't even know that we said wc would vote . I thought that the issue would be brought back and yo u asked for it not to be voted on the first time it was brought up. Mayor Garrett said it will be an agenda item that people can vote on or not vote on. And the way l look at it. each Council member will make their own decision as to why they arc voting the way they do. It may be drought related or 1t ma y be related to something else. That is a Council member choice. t ... .. • • Englewood City Council June 7, 2004 Page 24 ·• • 0 Co uncil Member Bradshaw said we have a Parks and Recreation meeting this Thursday. I will ask for verification. Council Member Yurchick said I don't care if we vote the 21", but I'm just tired of mcs.~ing with it and I want it to come to a conclusion one way or the other. Council Member Bradshaw said it is time for us to say, we will have off-leash privileges in these parks on odd numbered days. I mean it is time for us to say .. .look we tried the pilot program with everything open. Now we have recommendations from people out here saying, we want to work with you. We don't want to lose the privileges and the Task Force is not going to do that. Council Member Wolosyn said maybe some of us want just one dog park centrally located. Maybe I'm wrong, but I feel that if we want to deal with this issue in a final way, it has 10 be in a larger context. Ms. Bradshaw said how do we do that? Ms. Wolosyn said apparently there arc two locations that they consider viable, so we postpone a decis ion until wc hear what they say about the two locations and wc see what Parks and Recreation says. I am not against considering some sort of community use. Bui I would probably want fences or maybe two or three hours in the morning. It is a big issue. If it is not going to be divisive, we all have to decide ways so that everyone can have a little of something. I feel that we have been in a reactive mode. Mayor Garrett said we have asked for additional information dealing with the drought issue, which I think is important. We will put that on the Study Session. When we come to the meeting, any Council member who decides to move something forward can, as we always have that opportunity during Council Members Choice. Council Member Moore said we like 10 give warning. but we will just count this as fair warning. Mr. Garrett said everyone kn o ws we are going 10 be talking about this next week ... we have announced this ... but we will focus in on the drought issue and get the information dealing with that. Council Member Bradshaw said al the Parks and Recreation meeting Thursday night, I will ask for clarification. (iii) Council Member Tomasso said tomorrow night the Summer Reading program: Camp Englewood Activities will be in the CityCenter Plaza. It is from 6:30 p.m. to 8 :30 p.m ., with camp fire songs, hot dogs, a parade and clown. (iv) Counc il Member Yurchick said for some reason the ACE meeting has been cancelled the last two months in a row. I would like to find out what is going on. It just said it was cancelled this week with no reason whether there was quorum or not or if they arc having problems. Ci ty Manager Scars said I will get back to Council and let you know. ' (v) Counc il Member Wolosyn said Bill Clayton, who is associated with the House of Hope, called me . The House of Hope received a $50 ,000.00 grant from the Daniels Fund to replace all the windows in the building and also to build a handicapped accessible bathroom on the main floor. As work has progressed, prices have escalated and he thinks they are going to be o ut of budget and he called and asked ... and then followed up with a letter, which I have given to the Mayor ... for us to consider waivi ng the permit fees for the windows project and the handicapped accessible bathroom. I am bringing it forth to Council. I don't have any objection, even though I d o n't have a figure for the permits. I g uess I would like to have the amounts that it would cost, but on the face of it ... we have a prett y good partnership with that organizatio n and I think they provide a needed service, in a very community building manner. If we can help them. I ask my fellow Council people to do so. But I think that, probably. to reall y consider this , we need the amount of the permit fees . City Man.a ger Sears sai d I guess I have a question about that. They are in the process of finalizing that permit in an expeditious fashion and if we consi der thi s in two weeks , I don't know if that is going to be fast enough . Council Member W olosyn s aid Bill told me the windows were already in or they arc in the process of putting them m and he told the contractor to pay the fee s . So, he may be looking at a reimbursement. Council Member Bradshaw said that is different . Ms. Wolosyn said I don't know if the contractor paid the fees . .... .. t 1 ' • • Englewood City Council Jwae 7, 2004 Page2S Mayor Garrett said he probably couldn't pull the permit unless he paid the fee . City Manager Sears said I guess the question is should we stay the fee and they won't pay it and we don't require them to pay it until we meet on the 21 •. Then if, at that meeting, you decide they have to pay it, then they are going to be obligated to pay it. Is that acceptable to the Council? Council Member Wolosyn said that sounds good . That is really the only thing we can do. Council Member Bradshaw said Mr . Clayton knows how the permits work. City Manager Sears said we will bring this back to Council, but we will keep the project moving. Ms. Wolosyn said thank you . 13 . City Manqer's Report (a) City Manager Sears said I just want to let Council know that Amy Doe-Torres, from the City Manager's office, together with Parks and Recreation and the Department of Community Development, have put together a Summer Fun For Everyone display advertisement for the RTD Southwest Light Rail from June 4• through Julys•. All three departments worked on this project. (b) City Manager Sears said I received FasTracks CD's and a book from RTD in case anyone is interested . They didn't say who they were for . 14. City Attorney's Report City Attorney Brouman did not have any matters to bring before Council. 15 . Adjournment ARRETf MOvm TO ADJOURN . The meeting adjourned at 10:10 p.m. I.ft.; PLEASE PRINT PUBLIC COMMENT ROSTER AGENDA ITEM 7 DATE: JUNE 21, 2004 UNSCHEDULED VISITORS MAY SPEAK FOR A MAXIMUM OF FIVE MINUTES 0 0 . ~NAM=E=--__ __::;A=D=D=RE:.:iSScz-________ ~· -= so"' t o G ,c,{l f: ' .· .. .. • • . • -.. AS AN ENGLEWOOD RESIDENT WHO LIVES ADJACENT TO JASON PARK, I WISH TO FORMALLY STATE MY SUPPORT FOR MAINTAINING ENGLEWOOD'S OFF-LEASH DOG PARKS. ~:J~ 1/_~f{)~ ~~Jg).~ ~~(\~ s\uc-.s» ~i'l-7-P:o 7rym /) ~?A_;:;, @F)~ /!~(; ;J . /;jy,4~ /'(; JI ,t lu fr-,t1t-e-fon f J. 1t1A tu-f'~~e- .. ' "' . ~ . . ' ; ,. .. .' • • AS AN ENGLEWOOD RESIDENT WHO LIVES ADJACENT TO JASON PARK, I WISH TO FORMALLY STATE MY SUPPORT FOR MAINTAINING ENGLEWOOD'S OFF-LEASH DOG PARKS. ~ :J.tdul j[~ff~ ~Jb~ ~:s:t),..,.~~11 ·~D+~~ lm;n /J /;;A/ @ f)~ Address /!~(, ;J . z{y_4~ I'( ' JI,, Iv ft'i'rir1.f on f /. . I')., · ll'l li v-> .P~ # • • AS AN ENGLEWOOD RESIDENT WHO LIVES ADJACENT TO JASON PARK, I WISH TO FORMALLY STATE MY SUPPORT FOR MAINTAINING ENGLEWOOD'S OFF-LEASH DOG PARKS. ~ .il-tdul U~&~ ~~J&~ -»»i,.ts~ ,\uc,<» ~~ lrym/J~? @?)~ Address /18.~ ;J · lk.4-4... I'( II ,t W fr-i"r.re_fon f J. • t .. • • AS AN ENGLEWOOD RESIDENT WHO LIVES ADJACENT TO JASON PARK, I WISH TO FORMALLY STATE MY SUPPORT FOR MAINTAINING ENGLEWOOD'S OFF-LEASH DOG PARKS. ~ .J.u!J U~&~ ~~~&~ ~~ts~'~Dh~~ 1ctm/J~ 'tJ.10 s:. u,11" .sf. , /18.~ ;J . t{'y,f!&:~ I'(, JI ,t lAJ .fl'i'nr1.fon f J. _rio""--'--......... FJ~~~~--_ 4\-)..~ 5 l,·~,.~ $t ¥4 t (Q, • • AS AN ENGLEWOOD RESIDENT WHO LIVES ADJACENT TO JASON PARK, I WISH TO FORMALLY STATE MY SUPPORT FOR MAINTAINING ENGLEWOOD'S OFF-LEASH DOG PARKS. ~ .J.u!ul jf_~ if~ /J:&~J&~ -~ts~·~£»>~ TCT@? /J !;;;j? fli) F)~ Address 11~r, ;J · /k,4../A._ l'C JI ,t tu .fr-,r.t-e.fon f /. ,,1, Lv· r'~~e- • • • AS AN ENGLEWOOD RESIDENT WHO LIVES ADJACENT TO JASON PARK, I WISH TO FORMALLY STATE MY SUPPORT FOR MAINTAINING ENGLEWOOD'S OFF-LEASH DOG PARKS. Name cfk>~ ~ ~ 1/-v, /' (1<D/\ ~ J!!.tdJ U~&~ ~~~~~ ~~t;~&•~D+~~ TQW/J/;;_zt:? @[)~ Address ¢t16 cfd~~ tf/£/0 5 )-.j@ A ~f 11~r;,. ;J · ~4./A_ /IC 11,, tu f,-i'r.r-1.ion f /. • • AS AN ENGLEWOOD RESIDENT WHO LIVES ADJACENT TO JASON PARK, I WISH TO FORMALLY STATE MY SUPPORT FOR MAINTAINING ENGLEWOOD'S OFF-LEASH DOG PARKS. Nome ~~ ~~ ~'. 1d-01"4<271\ ~ii~ u~ &~01, /f;:t~Jb~ -~ts~·~s»~~ tam /J /;;;;zt:;:, @F)~ Address tfJc/0 5 /.-.} fo. A c;+. l/~10 S . U,1t,r .sf. ' ;1~r, ;J . /L&'4-/C 11,t IA) fl'i't1rf_ion f 1. ,,1, Lv-Y'~~e- • • In Support of Maintaining Off-Leash Dog Privileges Presentation to City Council By Susan Pacek, Englewood resident and homeowner June 21, 2004 . • .. • ., • •· . ·O ;O : • ·• • .. . , Background 0 (J • . . . . . ' "' .. •. . . . . . \, ' I . • 2 % years ago a leash law was instituted and 5 parks were identified to accommodate off-leash privileges for a 1 yr pilot program • Program was well-received and made permanent Sept 15, 2003: Council Member Garrett stated that "it [ off-leash dog park policy] was actually converted from a pilot program to a permanent program" Task Force • Initiated at the end of 2003 • Charge was to identify a 'formal dog park' • January 27, 2004 initial meeting • Working toward a solution for 6 months , Anticipate a formal recommendation at next meeting : June 29 Petition ' . . \, . . . . . • April 14 petition submitted to Parks & Rec Commission • Petition requested that Jason Park be removed from the no leash law for dogs • Stated reasons for their request • Petition • 15 individuals signed the petition • Only 9 households were represented 11 Only 4 of the 24 households who directly bound Jason Park signed the petition " --·• • • . . . . ·~·. · ... • I .. . . ·O .~ • . . . -.J . .. .. Door-to-Door Surveys • June 6 & 10: door to door surveys conducted .. 16 out of 24 households who directly bound the park support maintaining off-leash dog activities at Jason Park · 2 initially against dog activities would change their position if specific restrictions were implemented ,, ' ... ,.:.,..'"';. '"'~._.~ .. ·• • • ,.,.... .... , t I \ \ \ s-' .. . : .. .,. . .. • • . ,.. • . *. . . . . .. • ... . . LIP AN B·G Kennel { nm suivc-:yt:dl 2 households who in·itially opposed were willing to support with restrictions JASON • . .J \, -- • Questions for Council 1. Why would Council entertain closing Jason Park when the majority of the households who are directly impacted by activities in the park are in support for maintaining off-leash privileges? 2. Why would Council entertain the extreme step of closing all off-leash dog parks when concern was only expressed over Jason Park? • -- ·• • • 0 0 • .. · ·" ... • . ,· I -. : ... 'J . . ', . . . . Finding Workable Solutions • Every controversial issue can be resolved with creative planning How do we get there? -Compromise -Preserve public parks for all public -Develop a win-win solution -Cohabitate -Work toward a positive outcome -Work together Quotes from Council ' • Bradshaw: "I think we can't do a win-lose, I think we have to do a win-win in our community." -Oct. 20, 2003 • Nabholz: "I think a compromise can be reached. That is why I think we all need to work together." -Sept. 15, 2003 Moore : "I do like the prospect of the compromise". -Oct. 20, 2003 Bradshaw: "I still think people need to learn to cohabltate, peacefully." -Sept. 15, 2003 • Quotes from Council • Bradshaw: "I think that it is important for us to preserve public parks for all the public, not just people with children, not just people with dogs and that we have to learn to work together on this. I hope that both entities can come together, and work toward a positive outcome." -Sept. 15, 2003 ~ . . --=·- Quotes from Council • Nabholz: "I must admit, people who used the dog park really cleaned it up." -Sept. 15, 2003 · Bradshaw: "Gomes told me that they went to the off leash park and found 5 deposits and went to a leashed park, Romans, and found 45." -Sept. 15, 2003 • ... . \, .: . . . . " 2003 Englewood Comprehensive Plan Goal: Provide sufficient parks and recreation facilities to serve the needs of Englewood citizens .by encouraging a variety of park classifications ·• • . .. · .. • . • . ···!·.·\ .. • . . . , . • ., . . . . . '~ ! . • ... . • . • . • . •.· . . . ' \, ) How Many People Care Abou't Dogs? Denver Post: May 20, 2004 1 45.9% Jefferson County residents ·1 45% Adams County residents ··: 40.6% Boulder County residents -38.5% Douglas County residents . 31.8% City/County Denver residents ·· 52.8% Arapahoe County residents • - 0 • • .. • ..... ,·' .. D . . .. . . •.• · . .. ,I' • • • . : • • • ~. . . . . . ~ .. .. ··': ... · ... ,·:.: .. • . J . . . . ' . ·~ .. . .. . : : .. . . ' '\,. • • .. # .• : . .. . :,\. . . . . Recommendations to Council • Allow the Task Force to continue with their efforts and formalize a recommendation to identify a park dedicated to off-leash dog activities •• Maintain Jason Park as a multi-use park that includes off-leash dog privileges and institute specific restrictions that address the concerns of those who directly bound the park • .,. . .. . ' . \, Recommendations to Council • Address any issues brought forth on the other 3 off-leash dog parks on a case-by-case basis and develop a park-specific plan, if necessary ' • Institute an Englewood dog license to off-set applicable costs • Institute a Dog Park Association/Non-profit 501C3 I believe there is a solution for co-habitation. I would like to see people move towards that. -Council Member Wolosyn (Sept. 15, 2003) Kermit and Virginia Fikan 1176 West Princeton Place Englewood, Colorado 80110 June 21 , 2004 Englewood City Council Meeting Re: OFF LEASH PRIVILEGES IN ENGl,EWOOD PARKS '!'": City Council Members My wife and I bought this property in September of I 959; we were one of the first people in the development and we are the original owners (1 I 76 West Princeton Place). We own and pay property taxes on four properties in Englewood. The house that we have lived in since I 9S9 borders on Jason Park. In fact, we were here before Jason was a park! At that time it WIIS a sheep pasture. My wife and I ARE FOR OFF LEASH PRIVILEGES AT JASON. We ha~e enjoyed seeing the different kinds of dogs and talking with the people as they come through the park. Our peat-grandkids love it! The dogs have replaced the geese and the dogs don't do one-tenth of the damage that the accse ever did! We find that the owners of the dogs are diligent about cleaning up aftel' their dogs. We are in favor or kecpin1 the parks open to off leash privileges. As long time Englewood residents and taxpayers, we hope the City Council will reconsider any ideas of taking the off leash privileges away at Jason and the other off leash parks in Englewood . We feel the offleub privileges are a good thin&! Kermit Fikan Virpaia FUwt Good evening. My name is Jane Coleman, and I live at 3901 South Galapago, En~lewood. Colorado. ! d(m't know what l can say tonight that hasn't already been said. We have explained to you the benefits of the off leash privileges at Jason Park and the other Englewood Parks that are off leash. We have presented the residents' approval of the off leash privileges -- 92% --92% of the residents that are directly adjacent to Jason Park have resoundingly voiced and signed their approval of the off leash privileges. They feel the greatest impact of the dogs and people visiting the park and still 92% support the off leash privileges! We have shown you pictures of the turf at Jason and other off leash parks, plus also offered a comparison to parks that are not off leash --and Jason is in better shape visably than the comparisons! We have shown pictures of huge flocks of geese enjoying the soccer field, prior to the off leash privileges. Of course, as has been noted, no one "owns" the geese so no one can be blamed, but the damage they can create is there just the same! We have related the wonderful experiences that are available by walking your dog at Jason and other off leash parks. Such as: • Friendships have been forged ; people moving into the area because of off leash privileges; young and old adults relishing the fresh air and sunshine that comes with exercising themselves and their dogs at the park; • a good mental and physical uplifting by just getting out of the house; • socializing the dogs to make better dog citiz.ens; • policing the parks, thereby making them safe for those using the parks and surrounding areas, AND for those that are anti-off leash; • the willingness to work together with the City and cooperate in any way possible to maintain and keep the parks clean and safe; • following the restrictions that have been placed on the parks for the playground, children and ball fields; • the large numbers --52°!.. of the Anpahoe County families ownin1 dop; all working toward s the betterment for the City and citizens of Englewood . The television states that Colorado is approachin& the end of the 6-year droupt. With the recent rains, and with the continued cooperation of people in the Englewood area, we will get through this , showing little or no damage to our lawns and the turf at the parks . With the Englewood parks watered with non-potable water, there is even less chance of water-shortage damage. The Parks are there for everyone! Not to sit empty, day after day . That would be a Use Waste and a waste of the taxpayer's money. • We have offered solutions to the off leash situation; and are open to alternatives. such as restricted hours, registration, volunteer Park associations. help in providing necessary facilities, etc . • We have people here who are willing to abide by the rules; • to take care of the parks and protect them; • to use them to the full advantage that they were intended; • to appreciate and work with City officials to protect the assets they have pledged to maintain; • to provide willing hands to help with that protection; • to work to a solution that will afford the majority of the people the salisfaction of their parks. At the last City Council meetina, I stated, "COMPROMISE. The off leash 1POOP1 have said repeatedly that they were willing to compromiae. Put a compromiae on the table; and let's come to some sort ofan agreement. Get a mcdialor ifnecnHry. The OffLwb Tak Force was a start; and we need to continue with om efforts to me the Jmks system in its maximum." Again I state, and I speak for both off leash groups at Juoo Park, and I want to make this crystal clear, WE ARE WILLING TO COMPROMISE. It is my belief that the City Council will look at the overall picture; that the Council will realize that the majority of Englewood citizens are wanting off leash privileges and this majority will cooperate in every way possible to maintain and support them. Thank you. • • June 21, 2004 Hello, My name is Jill Wilson and I live at 3061 So Grant, Englewood, Colorado . I would like to bring up two main issues : "Soluti ns for the Park" and "Expectations of the City Council". I want you to know that this is a program that works; the AKC has a web page, telling people how to create an off-leash dog park. They support the concept. We have addressed all the issues and recommended the following compromises to make this a successful venture that can be enjoyed by every member of the community: • Park Sites • Keeping the four existing dog parks, plus the Task Force's choice. • Fenced in areas would help contain the dogs . It also would allow a specific place where the community could meet. • Schedules times would also work, in the morning from 6:00 to 9:00 and in the evening, from 5:00 to 8:00. In addition to these compromises I would like to address some questions that have been raised over the last year regarding concerns about the dog park, such as : Health, Safety, Budget, Educating Dog Owners, and City Liability . · Health : • Right now there are waste pick up bags supplied by the community . • Covered trash cans . • Scheduling a monthly park clean up day for the dog park users. Safety: • Code enforcement patrol, who are already doing an excellent job. • Community monitoring, which is already done across the country at dog parks . • When the parks have people in them, it is a good, inexpensive way to deter crime . Budget: • Charging fees for residents and non-residents, similar to what the Parks and Rec do now . • The dog park users could organize fund raisers . • Donations ' .. ·' • • Another vital issue that must be handled is the Education of Dog Owners: • This can easily be addressed by passing out flyers throughout the community with pet owner information. • Having dog trainers come to the park and give mini training sessions. City Liability: • Post a sign up with the Rules. • Owners are legally responsible for their dogs and any injuries caused by them. • Puppies and dogs must be properly licensed, inoculated and healthy. • Animals should wear a collar and ID tags at all times. • Owners must clean up after their dogs. • Dogs showing aggression towards people or other animals will be removed from the park. Animals who exhibit a history of aggressive behavior will not be permitted . • Puppies using the park must be at least four months old. • Owners should not leave their dogs unattended or allowed out of sight. If young children are permitted in the dog park, they too should be under constant supervision . • Dogs in heat will not be allowed inside the park . • Owners must carry a leash at all times. Dogs should be leashed before entering and prior to leaving the park. • Violators will be subject to removal from the park and suspension of park privileges. My expectations for the City Council are that they represent everyone: • Dog parks are a great place for owners to meet other people with common interests. The love people share for their dogs reaches beyond economic and social barriers and helps to foster a sense of community . • Dog owners deserve a part of the "Park Pie" with the other special use groups like baseball, soccer and basketball . On the Englewood's web page there is an Organiz.ational Chart, at the top are Citizens of Englewood . City Council are elected positions , voted in to serve aU the citizens . Thank you ' • • June 21. 2004 Englewood City Council: I have a BS In Horticulture and Forestry and 35 years in the "green" Industry. I am also a certified arborist, and a member of the International Society of Arborlculture, Colorado Weed Management Association, Front Range Urban Forestry Council, Colorado Tree Coalition, and I am a Colorado Department of Agriculture Certified Pesticide Applicator. In my 35 years In the business, typically what I see Is more damage done to turf from the heavily programmed sports (e.g., soccer, football, baseball) than I do from responsible dog usage. Feces and urine can cause damage to turf due to excessive nitrification; however, when responsible owners clean up after their pets , and with the typical frequency of irrigation that occurs in most park lands, dog "spotting" can be minimized. Furthermore, in my experience. dog spots are easier to repair than compacted soil and excessive wear that occur. for example, within the goal mouth of a soccer field . They are also typically less visible. Repair of these areas often requires aeration, soil modification, over seeding/resoddlng and fertilization, as well as restricting the use to allow such areas to recover. • t .. • • The National Recreation and Park Association published an article by Maya Avrasin entitled "Cause for Paws: A Look at Pooch-Friendly Parks". In this article, the author states that "dog parks are increasingly seen not as luxuries, but necessities". The article goes on to further state "according to the dogpark.com website, which has a comprehensive list of dog parks nationwide, there are almost 700 dog parks in the country". Communities all over the front range have either implemented off-leash dog programs or are looking to starting them. So why is the Englewood Council considering eliminating all of our off-leash privileges based upon a petition signed by 9 households instead of implementing restrictions to address the concerns raised? Isn't working toward a win-win solution that accommodates all Englewood residents work working toward? c:;,4,,,-/ /£,,,,1111/:4~ ~~ .. t ..• • • - ... ., . --•' . . , -· '' I ' \. \ . '' \ ... • • PROCLAMATION WHEREAS, homeownership is an important part of the American Dream, and local jurisdictions are committed to helping more Americans achieve that dream; and WHEREAS, encouraging Americans to own a home has been a longstanding national policy, predating President Abraham Lincoln's signing of the Homestead Act; and WHEREAS, homeownership encourages personal responsibility, more stable neighborhoods, better schools, and a decline in crime rates; and WHEREAS, the City of Englewood is committed to working with available resources to provide families with the tools and information they need to accumulate wealth and overcome barriers to homeownership; and WHEREAS , through a combination of partnerships with Federal and State governments, businesses, community leaders, and programs for down payment assistance, tax incentives and homeownership education, we are helping many area residents buy homes and pursue a better quality of life ; and WHEREAS , during National Homeownership Month, we join with municipalities throughout the co untry in encouraging all Americans to learn more about financial management and to explore homeownership opportunities in our community . NOW, THEREFORE, I, Douglas Garrett, Mayor of the City of Englewood, Colorado, do hereby proclaim June 2004 as Homeownen Month and call upon the residents of the City of Englewood to join in recognizing the imponance of providing all citizens a chance to achieve !,he American Dream . GIVEN under my hand and sea l the 21st day of June, 2004. Douglas Garrett, Mayor •• ,. .. .... - • • 0RDINANC6 NO. SERIES OF 2004 BY AUTHORITY COUNCIL BILL NO. 32 INTRODUCED BY COUNCIL MEMBER BRADSHAW AN ORDINANCE"A~AMei!Ut'Af . TRANSPORTATION/UTILITY EASEMENT ALONG soum ELATI STREET FROM THE REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION DISTRICT TO THE CITY OF ENGLEWOOD, COLORADO. WHEREAS, with the passage of Ordinance No. 36, 2002 the City Council of the City of Englewood, Colorado accepted an easement that allowed construction of the RTD Elati Maintenance Facility located at 2701 South Elati Street; and WHEREAS, the City of Englewood requires public improvements, such as sidewalks and easements from development that creates the need for the improvements; and WHEREAS, the subject easement for public purposes includes that portion of the new sidewalk that is not currently in the Elati Right-of-Way and five feet behind the sidewalk for traffic control devices, fire hydrants and utilities; and WHEREAS, the passage of this Ordinance authorizes the acceptance of the Transportation/Utility Easement dedicated by the RTD along South Elati to capture the exiting sidewalk and utilities built along South Elati Street; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ENGLEWOOD, COLORADO, AS FOLLOWS: Sectjon 1. The Dedication Of Easement from the Regional Transportation District to the City of Englewood, Colorado, attached hereto as Attachment l, is hereby accepted and approved by the Englewood City Council. Sectjon 2. The Mayor is authorized to execute and the City Clerk to attest and seal the Dedication Of Easement for and ori behalf of the City of Englewood, Colorado. Introduced, read in full, and passed on first reading on the 7th day of June, 2004. Published as a Bill for an Ordinance on the 11th day of June, 2004 . Read by title and passed on final reading on the 21st day of June, 2004. -1- • • --·• • • DEDICATION OF EASEMENT 0 (J THIS DEDICATION OF AN ELEVEN-FOOT (11 ') WIDE TRANSPORTATION/UTILITY EASEMENT ALONG SOUTH EL£! STREET to capture thee "ting sidewalk and utilities built along Elati Street, made this.l(: day of ___i::.:..i..::::,,.. __ , 2004, by and between the REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION DISTRICT, 160 Bl c Stteet Denver, Colorado 80202 (RTD), and the CITY OF ENGLEWOOD, a municipal corporation of the State of Colorado, Englewood (Grantee); WHEREAS, Regional Transportation District (RTD) is, fee owner of real property located in the County of Arapahoe, State of Colorado, as described in Exhibit A; and WHEREAS, it is essential that Englewood have continuous and uninterrupted use of the eleven-foot (11 ') wide Transportation/ Utility Easement along South Elati Stteet to capture the exiting sidewalk and utilities built along South Elati Street and provide for future utilities without interference from any other party; and WHEREAS, any damage or interruption to the eleven-foot (11 ') wide Transportation/ Utility Easement along South Elati Street would result in significant actual and consequential damages; and NOW, THEREFORE, for and in consideration of the benefits such an casement would provide the Grantor's adjacent property and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged by RTD, for itself, its successors and assigns, hereby DEDICATES TO GRANTEE (CITY), ITS SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS, SUBJECT TO THE TERMS AND CONDmONS SET FORTH HEREIN, AS FOLLOWS : An eleven-foot (11 ') wide Transportation/ Utility Easement along South Elati Street described in Exhibit A attached hereto. I . Grantor shall construct no pennancnt improvements in the Easement Area but shall maintain, repair and renew its landscaping in the Easement Area at its own expense and shall make no substantive changes except with prior approval of Grantee . Grantor shall maintain the curb, gutter and sidewalk pursuant to the requirements of the Englewood Municipal Code. 2 . The construction of any improvements by Grantee in the Easement area shall be constructed, operated, maintained, repaired, extended, renewed and/or reconstructed, in conformity with plans, specifications and method of construction prepared by Grantee. 3 . Grantee shall bear the entire cost and expense incurred in connection with the construction, maintenance, repair, and renewal and any and all modification, revision. extension, relocation, removal, or reconstruction of Grantee's improvements, now or hereafter made in the Easement Area except for the existing curb/guner and si dewalk . Grantee shall return all of Grantor's improvements to the condition existing prior to Grantee's work upon completion of Grantee's work . Grantee shall repair any damage to the curb, gutter and s idewalk resulting from Grantee's work. !· t .... .. • • 4. Grantor warrants that it is the fee simple owner of the property described in Exhibit A and that Grantor has full right, title, and authority to grant the easement and right of way to Grantee. Grantee acknowledges Grantor has a fee simple interest that property described in Exhibit A and further acknowledges that Grantee has no rights to any portion of the property described in Exhibit A other than as described herein. Grantor reserves the right to use the Easement Area for purposes not inconsistent with the grant herein. 5. Grantee shall not impair subjaccnt and lateral support of Grantor's property. 6 . Each and every one of the benefits and burdens of this grant of easement shall inure to and be binding upon the parties hereto and their legal representatives, successors, and assigns. 7. Grantee does not relinquish any authority, rights, or privileges it may exercise as a Colorado home rule city. 8. This agreement supersedes any and all aareemcnts, written or oral, heretofore entered into between the parties or their predecessors. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Dedication of Easement the day and year first above written. GRANTOR: REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION DISTRICT . ' , <·t:~·~t:.' = Clarence W . Marsella, General Manqcr STATE OF ) /,./J ) ss. COUNTY OF -JJ-4:Ja::..i~.:;.i~!:::.,V~--) The foregoing "trumcn\wu ackno~ed before me ~ day of }1t '$ ___ , 2004 by •. W , J'/.(Ll2{ , of the Regional Transportation Dis '· t . Witness my hand and official seal. g{A-J I !J t ,j( th:Ju.v Nowy Public My Commission expires: • • - ,,· CORRECTION THE PRECEDING DOCUMENT OR BLANK FRAME HAS BEEN REMICROFILMED TO ASSURE LEGIBILITY AND ITS /MA GE APPEARS IMMEDIATELY HEREAFTER. ORDINANCE NO. SERIES OF 2004 BY AUTHORITY COUNCIL BILL NO . 32 INTRODUCED BY COUNCIL MEMBER BRADSHAW AN ORDINANCE AUTIIOM!IMtJ ~ A TRANSPORTATION/UTILITY EASEMENT ALONG SOUTH ELATI STREET FROM THE REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION DISTRICT TO THE CITY OF ENGLEWOOD, COLORADO. WHEREAS, with the passage of Ordinance No. 36, 2002 the City Council of the City of Englewood, Colorado accepted an casement that allowed construction of the RTD Elati Maintenance Facility located at 2701 South Elati Street; and WHEREAS, the City of Englewood requires public improvements, such as sidewalks and casements from development that creates the need for the improvements; and WHEREAS, the subject casement for public purposes includes that portion of the new sidcwallc that is not currently in the Elati Right-of-Way and five feet behind the sidewallc for traffic control devices, fire hydrants and utilities; and WHEREAS, the passage of this Ordinance authorizes the acceptance of the Transportation/Utility Easement dedicated by the RTD along South Elati to capture the exiting sidcwallc and utilities built along South Elati Street; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ENGLEWOOD, COLORADO, AS FOLLOWS: SccJjon I . The Dedication Of Easement from the Regional Transportation District to the City of Englewood, Colorado, attached hereto u Attachment l, is bcrcby accepted and approved by the Englewood City Council. Section 2. The Mayor is authorized to execute and the City Clcrlt to attest and seal the Dedication Of Easement for and on behalf of the City of Englewood, Colorado. Introduced, read in full , and passed on first reading on the 7th day of June, 2004. Publ ished as a Bill for an Ordinance on the 11th day of June, 2004. Read by title and passed on final reading on the 21st day of June, 2004. -1- Published by title as Ordinance No. __, Series of 2004, on the 25th day of June, 2004 . ATTEST: Douglas Garrett, Mayor Loucrishia A . Ellis, City Clerk I, Loucrishia A. Ellis, City Clerk of the City of Englewood, Colorado, hereby certify that the above and foregoing is a true copy of the Ordinance passed on final reading and published by title as Ordinance No. __, Series of 2004. Loucrishia A. Ellis -2- ATTEST Loucrishia A. Ellis, City Clerk GRANTEE: CITY OF ENGLEWOOD, COLORADO a municipal corporation Carter:sBurgess 987082.060.1.3219 August 12, 2002 Revised: April 13, 2004 ·• • • Propertv Description 11 .00 Foot Wide Sidewalk Parcel 0 707 1711, si.-. s .... 2300 0..-. Calon,oa B0202 ·Jol0• Pl,one: J03 .B20.S2ol0 Faa: JOJ.820.2402 -.c·b.com An eleven (11.00) foot wide strip ofland being a portion of Lots l, 2 and 3, General Iron . Works Subdivision, recorded in Book 87, Page 25, Reception Number 2609250 at the Arapahoe County Clerk and Recorders Office, being in the Northwest Quarter of Section 34, Township 4 South, Range 68 West of the Sixth Principal Meridian, Arapahoe County, Colorado being more particularly described as follows: COMMENCING at the Northeast Comer of the Northwest Quarter of said Northwest Quarter of Section 34 (2" aluminum cap in range box marked PLS 24942 -2000); WHENCE the Northwest Corner of said Section 34 (3 V." aluminum cap set in range box marked PLS 22571 -1993) bears S89°30'04"W along the northerly line of said Northwest Quarter of Section 34 a distance of 1325 .42 feet (Basis of Bearing-assumed); THE. CE S89°30'04"W along said northerly line of the Northwest Quarter of Section 34 a distance of204.92 feet to the Northeast Comer of said Lot 3, General Iron Works Subdivisio n, beingrlle POINT OF BEGINNING; TH.DICE S00° 14'08"E along the easterly line of said General Iron Works Subdivision, also being the westerly line of South Elati Street a distance of 479.55 feet; THE:-.ICE N88°57'28"W a distance of 11.00 feet; THENCE N00°14'08"W along a line being 11.00 feet westerly of and parallel with said easterly line of General Iron Works Subdivision a distance of 479.25 feet; THE:-.iCE N 89°30'04"E along the northerly line: of said Lot 3, General Iron Works Subdivision. also being said northerly line of the Northwest Quarter of Section 34 a distance of 11 .00 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING. Containing 5 ,272 square feet, (0 .121 Acres), more o r less. P .. ! of 1 K 70 ::0 1 CBSt:R. EY'.RTDAL T.~ Maint-Fx\Addl Task.s\Sidcwalk E ·~:"Q~.,E.' L '!\ ~~a.ck~ I )C .. J • I T A .. ' • • l'\7 LJC A.T.U.U. -a,- 111\t: ...,,._ 2 • BEARING S00'14'08 N88"57'28 N00"14'08 N89°30'04 DISTANCE 479.55' 11.00· 479.25' 11.00· 0 (J i ·-·•tt. ELATI MAINTENANCE FACILITY ARAPAHOE COUNTY, COLORADO SEC 34 , T4S, R68W, 6TH P.M . EXHIBIT 11 .00 FT . SIDEWALK PARCEL ,-!ID INITIIO. S10WU<-EXH8T2-R£V1 t Of ' 400 I • • I COUNCIL COMMUNICATION Date June 2 1, 2004 INITIATED BY Agenda Item 1Q o.f D epartment of Finance and Administrative Services City Clerk's Office Subject Adoption of the Colorado Municipal Records Retention Schedule STAFF SOURCE Frank Gryglewicz, Director of Finance and Administrative Services Loucrishia Ellis City Clerk COUNCIL GOAL AND PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION City Council reviewed this proposal to adopt the Colorado Municipal Records Retention Schedule at the May 24, 2004 Study Session. RECOMMENDED ACTION Approve a resolution adopting the Colorado Municipal Records Retention Schedule for the City of Englewood with the following local exceptions: ..,. Schedule 1.9 Construction Drawings and Plans • Nonresidential Approved drawings and Plans We will comply with the International Building Code, Chapter 1, Section 106.5 retention schedule of Hone set of approved construction documents shall be retained by the building official for a period of not less than 180 days fr om date of completion of the permitted work, or as required by state or local laws.• ..,. At the current time, Information Technology (IT) records will be exempted and we will establish our own e-mail policy. BACKGROUND, ANALYSIS, AND ALTERNATIVES IDENTIFIED The Colorado State Archives adopted the Colorado Municipal Records Retention Schedule, for sta tewid e use by Colorado municipalities, in September, 2001. This Sche dul e has been approved by the State Attorney General and the State Archivist. Adoption of th e Colorado Municipal Records Retention Schedule provides for a uniform retention policy for all municipal records . It is an on-line comprehensive schedule for the destruction of nonpermanent municipal records and the retention of municipal records of enduring and historical value. To access the schedule: Web site address : www.colorado.goy/dpa/dojt/archjves [dick on left side bar : "Records Management Services.• Several choices will drop down, click on ·Municipal Records Management Manual." If the left side bar does not come up, go to "Text Only" on the blue bar at t he top.I If we adopt thi s Schedule, it w ill supersede all previous retention schedules . FINANCIAL IMPACT one LIST OF ATTACHMENTS R olution ' .. .. ' . i • • RBSOUJ'RONNO. SERIES OF 2004 A RESOLUTION NS llllfG RECORDS RETENTION SCHEDULE BY THE CITY OF ENGLEW WHEREAS, the Colorado State Archives adopted the Colorado Municipal Records Retention Schedule, for statewide use by Colorado municipalities in September 200 I; and WHEREAS, this Retention Schedule is recommended for adoption by Home Rule cities; and WHEREAS, the adoption of the Colorado Municipal Records Retention Schedule provides for a uniform retention policy for all municipal records; and WHEREAS, all of the Departments of the City of Englewood have reviewed this Colorado Municipal Records Retention Schedule and the recommended schedule will contain some exceptions, which will better serve the City; NOW , THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ENGLEWOOD, COLORADO, THAT: Section I . The City Council of the City of Englewood, Colorado hereby authorizes the adoption of the Colorado Municipal Records Retention Schedule with the following local exceptions: Schedule 1.9 -Construction Drawing And Plans -Nopresjdcntw Approved drawings and p)ans The City of Englewood will comply with the International Building Code, Chapter I, Section 106.S retention schedule of"one set of approved construction documents shall be retained by the building official for a period of not less than 180 days from date of completion of the permitted work, or as required by state or local laws". At the current time, Information Technology (IT) records will be exempted and the City will establish its own e-mail policy. Section 2. The City Manager is hereby authorized to sign said Approval Request Form on behalf of the City of Englewood. ADOPTED AND APPROVED this 21st day of June, 2004 . ATTEST : Douglas Garrett, Mayor Loucri shia A. Ellis, City Clerk .. ' .. • • I, Loucrishia A. Ellis, City Clerk for the City of Englewood, Colorado, hereby certify the above is a true copy of Resolution No._, Series of 2004. Loucrishia A. Ellis, City Clerk .. • t • • COUNCIL COMMUNICATION Date Agenda Item June 21, 2004 10 C ii Initiated By City of Englewood, Finance and Administrative Services Department COUNCIL GOAL AND PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION The City Council has not acted on this issue in the past RECOMMENDED ACTION Subject Resolution casting the City of Englewood's vote as employer regarding Fire and Police Pension Association IFPPAl oronosed amendments Staff Source Frank Gryglewicz, Director .. Staff recommends City Council cast its vote regarding the proposed amendment to the Statewide Defined Benefit Plan (SWDP), as outlined below. The vote must be certified to FPPA by June 28, 2004. BACKGROUND, ANALYSIS, AND ALTERNATIVES IDENTIFIED The FPPA has submitted to its active plan members four proposed amendments to the Statewide Defined Benefit Plan . An election has been held to determine if the proposed amendments should be adopted. Any amendment must be approved by an affirmative vote of 65% of the active plan members, and more than 50% of their employers to be adopted. Members who do not vote are counted as a "no• vote. The amendment and results of the employee vote is as follows: Amendment 1: Memben will self direct the Separate Retirement Account (SRA) monies In their accounts in any investment options offered by FPPA, once the memben have retired (Normal, Early, or Vested Retirement) or entered DROP. Currently -SRA monies are commingled for investment purposes in the Fire & Police Members' Benefit Fund and earn investment return based on the performance of the fund, or members may choose the rate of a short-term investment selected by the FPPA Board. Employee vote: In favor : 33 Against: 10 Eligible members who did not vote: 5 Cost of amendment as percent (%) of payroll: O"k Amendment 2: Remove the requirement on the current amendment that a participant In the Statewide Deferred Retirement Option Plan (DROP) who terminates employment and becomes a retiree, or surviving spouse of a deceased participant, must select a payment option with 30 days of emplo,ment termination or the lump sum payment method shall be utilized. Minimum distribution would be required as provided by the IRS. t .. .. • • Currently -A participant in the DROP who terminates employment and becomes a retiree, or the surviving spouse of a deceased participant, must select a payment option within 30 days or retirement. If no selection is made by the retiree or surviving spouse within 30 days of retirement, the lump sum payment shall be utilitized. Employee vote : In favor: 41 Against: 2 Eligible members who did not vote: 5 Cost of amendment as percent (%) of payroll : 0% Amendment 3: To allow members who have an SRA account and/or DROP account to make a one- time, irrevocable election at retirement or separation of service, whichever comes later, to purchase a monthly benefit from the Statewide Defined Benefit Plan. This amendment would allow a member who is eligible for normal, deferred, or early retirement to elect to transfer all or part of his/her SRA account and/or DROP account to make a one-time, irrevocable election at retirement or separation of service, whichever comes later, to purchase a monthly benefit. Funds may not be transferred from outside the Statewide Defined Benefit (SWDB) to purchase a monthly benefit. The funds transferred to the SWDB Plan are to be considered Member Contributions for purposes of refund contributions under Colorado Revised Statute (C.R.S.) 31-31-403 (6) and 31-31-404. The purchase must be in one lump sum, which must be transferred prior to the distribution of benefits from the Defined Benefit Component Once the Member's monthly payment amount is calculated, it will be considered to be a portion of the Member's normal, deferred or early retirement under C.R.S . 31-31-403 . it may be reduced if the member elects one of survivor options offered under the Plan . As part of the pension, the purchased monthly benefit may be adjusted for a Cost of Living Adjustment pursuant to C.R .S. 31-31-407. Once the monthly benefit is purchased, the Member may not convert back to a lump sum payout An application to purchase a monthly benefit shall be filed by the Member with FPPA on the Applicable Fo rm . The M ember must provide any documentation that is required by the Board to complete the p urchase. Currently -This possible amendment wi ll be a new plan provision. Emp l oyee vote: In favor : 4 1 Agai nst: 2 Eligible m embers who d id not vote: 5 Cos t of amendmen t as perce nt (%) of pay roll : 0% The City Counc~I has the option to v o te the same as the employees, or vote in favor or against any of the proposed amendments . Th e Employers ' v otes are c ounted se parately from th e members. To pass, th e amendments mus t be approved by an affirmative vote of at least 6 5% of the active memben and more than 50% of thei r employers. • • FINANCIAL IMPACT This action does not directly impact the City's financial condition because there is no additional cost for the amendments. LIST OF AlTACHMENTS Proposed resolution Fire and Police Pension Association Plain Language Summary of 2004 Proposed Amendments Fire and Police Pension Association Board of Directors Resolution No. 20044 Fire and Police Pension Association Board of Directors Resolution No. 2004-5 (The Employer does not vote for the creation of the Statewide Health Care Defined Benefit Plan .) Fire and Police Pension Association Board of Directors Resolution No. 2004-6 t • • - Plain Language of the Statewide Election Items for members of the Statewide Defined Benefit Plan Fire and Police Pension Association of Colorado FP~ 5290 OTC Parkway Suije 100 Greenwood ViMage , Colorado 80111 ·2721 3031 n ... 3712 ton free 800/ 332·3772 fax 3031771 ·7622 www.lppaco org ·• • • Ti I I ~-J Creation of the Statewide Health Care Defined Benefit Plan Implements the St2tewide Health Care Defined Benefit (SWHC) Plan to provide assislance in paying health care costs after retirement Member contribution is 1% of base sola,y. Amendment I ------------- Members will self direct the SRA monies in their accounts in any in\'eSIJII ent option offered by FPPA, once the members have retired (Normal, Early, or Vested Retirement) or entered DROP. Cummt Plan Provision In the current plan, SRA monies are c.ommingled for lmeslment purposes in the Fire & Police Members' Benellt Fund and earn investment relllm based on the perlormanc:e of the fund, or members mzy choose the nae of a shon-term inveslment seleded by the FPPA. Board. Cost of tins possible amendment ( as annual% of })a)~ = 0% Amendment 2------------- Remoye the requirement on the current amendment that a participant in the Slalewlde Deferred Retirement Option Plan (DROP) who tenninales employment and becomes a retiree, or the suniviog spouse of a deceased participant, must select a payment optioo within 30 days o~oo or the lump sum payment method shall be utili7.ed. Minimum distribution would be required as provided by the IRS. Cu,-rent Plan Provision A parucipant in the DROP who terminates employment and becomes a retiree, or the surviving spouse of a deceased participant, .must select a payment option within 30 days of retirement If no selection is made by the retiree or surviving spouse within 30 days of retirement, the lump sum payment method shall be utilized. Cost of this possible amendment (as annual % ofJJaJ') = 0% Amendment 3 --------------- To allow members who have an SRA account ao<Vor a DROP account to make a one-lime, irrevocable election at retirement or separation of service, whichever comes 121er, to purchase a monthly benefit from the St2tewide Defined Benefit Plan . I his possible amendment uill /Je a 11eu •pla11 pr01:i.,io11. Cc,.,t of thi.,·possihle ame11dme11/ (a.rnnnual % of pa;~ = 0% 4/9/IM ' ·"'· t ' i • • 0 •• • • FIRE AND POUCE PENSION ASSOCIATION BOARD Of DIRECTORS RESOLUTION NO. 2004-4 Res.2004-4 WHEREAS, Section 31-31-408, C.R.S., as amended, authorizes the Board of Directors of the Fire and Police Pension Association ("the Board'') to modify the pension benefits and the age and service requirements for pension benefits set forth in Part 4, Article 31, Title 31, Colorado Revised Statutes, as amended, with respect to the members of the Statewide Defined Benefit Plan ("the Plan''); and WHEREAS, Section 31-31-408, C.R.S., as amended, sets forth certain conditions which must be met before the Board may adopt any modification to the Plan, including approval by at least sixty-five percent of the active members of the Plan and more than fifty percent of the employers having active members covered by the Plan; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the authority granted in Section 31-31-408, C.R.S., as amended, the Board bas adopted Rules establishing the procedure which the Board will follow with respect to its adoption of any modification of the Plan; and WHEREAS, FPPA Rul~ 704.01 requires that the Board provide a copy of the language of each proposed plan modification to employers for distn"bution to each member of the Plan; and WHEREAS, if adopted, the proposed amendments will only affect the Statewide Defined Benefit Plan; NOW, TIIEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Board hereby proposes the following modifications to the Plan which shall be submitted for approval to Plan employers and Plan members pursuant to the provisions of Section 31-31-408, C.R.S., as amended, and FPPA Rule 704 . Amendment One: Self Direction for SRA monies for retired and DROP memben A new Section 31-31-406.5 to be adopted as follows : 31-31-406.5 Self Direction of sepante retirement accoant. If a retired maaber elects to receive payment of the member's sepante retirement accout faada ila periedic installments or elects to defer receipt of funds, tile anpaid balaace ha ~e mealier'• separate retirement accoant will continae to accrue actul eaniap hued oa dlle meaber's direction for the investment of tile sepante retirement accoant. The separate retireaeat account assets shall be llelcl for investment purposes u part of tile fin ud poHce meaben' self-directed investments fuad, aabject to sacll nlel u .. y be adopted for tile administntion of tlte member self-directed illvatments. The Board sllall be autlaorized to ' t t • I • • -~ •• • • Rcs .2004-4 charge each account a fee for tbe administntioa of the sepante retirement accouat. The Board shaU direct the investment of the member's separate retirement account until tbe member provides direction on the investment of the account. A new Section 31-31-405(4.5) to be adopted as follows : (4.5) For purposes of this Section 31-31-405 C.R.S., memben of the deferred retirement option plaa sh.U be deemed to have terminated service. Section 31-31-409.5(8), as adopted as part of Amendment 5, Fire and Police Pension Association, Board of Directors Resolution No. 98-2, dated February 23, 1998, to be amended as follows: (8) Upon commencement of the member's participation in the DROP, the member shall remain an active member. Nevertheless, the member shall earn no additional service credit or additional benefits under the Statewide Defined Benefit Plan. For parpeees of Section 31-31- 405 C.R.S., a member participating in the DROP slaaU be deemed to have terminated service. Amendment Two : Removing the reguiremcot that a DROP participant select a payment option within 30 davs of tennjnatjon. Amend Sections 31-31-409.5 (13), as adopted as part of Amendment 5, Fire and Police Pension Association, Board of Directors Resolution No. 98-2, dated February 23, 1998, to read as follows : (13) (a) A participant in the DROP who terminates employment or reaches the fi'Yc- yc:ar limit for partjcipation shall become a retiree and sball receive, at the retiree's option, a lmnp sum payment &om the retiree's individual DROP ICCOllllt equal to its balance plus net investment earnings and losses, or equal monthly inslallmcnt payments from the retiree's individual DROP account over a period not to exceed the retiree's life expectancy or the joint life expectancies of the retiree and the retiree's designated beneficiary. At the end of the insllllment period, a final disbursement of remaining funds in the DROP account shall be made . IHI& seleetien is made hy the tetuee withie 39 ~ efNIHelBE; lhe 111811' 111181 P8)'IMRt melhed ahall he lffil ii!ed . (b) Notwithstanding any provision to the contnry, aay diltribatioa oder •e DROP shall be made in accordance witla Cede Sectioa 481(a)(9) aad the replatiou establisbed there under u they are amended ud 1111.U comply witla tbe followiac nla: (i) To the nteat reqaired by Code SectioD 481(a)(9) ud Ille repladeu promulgated there uader, paymeat of the beaefits of a Member lllal bepa Ht later dwt the "required beginning date." For parpeHS of dais Sectioa, "reqllired bepaaiaa date" means April l of the caleadar year foUowiac •e later of die calndar year la wi-. Ille Member reaches ace seventy and one-llaH (7~), or die caleadar year ill wlaicll die Mmlter r etires. 2 l./Boar d/2004Rcsolullon'2004--4 OJ -11,-()4 .• I , • ' • • 0 ·• • • I~ ( I I· \ i-~ Res2004-4 (ii) No payment option may be selected by a Member anless the amounts payable to the Member are expected to be at least equal to the minimum distribution required under Code Section 401(a)(9). (iii) The amounts payable must satisfy the minimum distnoutioa incidental benefit requirements of Code Section 40l(a)(9)(G). Amend Sections 31-31-409.5 (14), as adopted as part of Amendment 5, File and Police Pension Association, Board of Directors Resolution No. 98-2, dated February 23~ 1998, to read as follows: (14) If the meml,er dies dur'.ng the peried efthe me&1her'e p&flieipatiee ill die DROP 1111d the memher's designated heftefieia,y is the meml,er's 1R1P1hsiftg spew te wham the memher was legally mel'fied at the time efthe meml,er's deat&; the memher'e deeigaatzd heaefieimy shall reeei·,e, at the heeefieilll')''B eplie&, a lump 11111B paymeet iiem die retil'ee'e iadwidual 'QRQP aeeellBt ~UBI te ils hal&Ree 1311111 aet ilv1e&aBeat Nl'lliBgs aatl leeaee, sr 81111111 meathly installmeet payments tfem the Rlliree's iBdividual ImOP aeeellftt e•,er a pmied aet te Heeed the speuse's life er life eHJleetaftey. lfee seleeliee is made l,y the deeigaatetl heaefieia,y ·.vitlli& 39 tlaye efdeefh efthe memher, the l111BJ3 !NIB JlltYIRBRt 1P-'!tlied shall he \11:ileed. (a) In the event or the Member's death, any remaining benefit shall be distributed according to the followin& ,abject to compliance witli Code Sectioa 401(a)(9) and regulations there under. (b) H the Member bad hep• receiving periodic payments fro• •e Pio that were not annuitiud, the baluce or the Accouats 1laall be paid to the Desf&uted Beneficiary at least u rapidly u ander die payment optioa selected by tile Meaber. (c) If die Member ud bepa rec:eiviac paymeats iD tile form or a peuioa or muity, the Designated Bnefldary daal be beand by all ratric:tiou applicable to tbe pension or auuity, and •e fora of paymeat lelectecl there uder, md remaiabl& payments, if any, shall be paid to die Desipated Beneftdary in the nae awuer. (d) If the Member dia before diatribatiou llave eo-ced, a Spouse Desipated Beneficiary may take a la•p ... distribatiea or may delay die co ... ceaeat of benefits until not later than Dec:ember 31 of the year the Member would uve attailled age seventy and one-half (70Ys) and may elect to receive peri4klic payments over the Spouse's life expectancy. (e) If the Member dia before distribatiou laave cenuaeaced, a Desipated Beneficiary other than a survivin& Spouse may take a lamp ••• or a perioclic payment. la the case or a lump sum, payment mast be made no later titan December 31 of the caladar year containing the fifth anninnary or the Member'• death. la tbe cue of a periodic payment distribution, payment mast commence no later tbaa Deceaber 31 of the year followin& the year of the Member's death, and ill no eveat be payable over a period 10D1er than the Dtsipated Beaeficiary's life upectucy at the time tile diltrib•tioa coaaeaces. l ,• ~ ' • ' • • (f) If tile Meaber ha not desipated • Dellpated Beaefldary or tile Plan is mble to locate tile Deaipated Beaeflciary apo• deatll, Cite Member's remalabts interest will be paid in a lamp nm to the Member's estate. (I) Notwitbstudillg the forecoia1, uy payaat to u estate alad be made ia a lamp mm. · Amendment Three: Allow mcllase of a monthly benefit from 1he SRA account and the DROP accougt. . A new Section 31-31-410.S to read u follows: 31-31-410.S bmm of MoaWy Bgeflg. A Member wlao la ellpble for llonul, deferred, or early ntbeaeat ,uy elect to trnafer al er put of lmllter SRA Accout ud ldllber DROP baluce wffliD tile Statewide Dellaed Beaetlt Plan to plll'CUN a molltllly beaeftt. Fllada may Dot be trauferred fl'om Mltllde tile Statewide Dellaed Bellellt Plu to pan:uae a moatlaly beaeflt. (a) TIie fuda tnuferred are to be co...._... part of die ... _., accamalated coatribatlou for pupoeea ofC.R.S. f 31-31-tOl('). (b) At ntiJ ••t or aeparatioa of Nnice, wllidt wer co-later, a Member may make a oae-tiae, lrrwocable electioa to ,.._.. a _.., beaellt. TIie pvdaue alllt be ill OM ... p 1U1, wllia mat be tnaar.nd prier .. die receipt of dellaed bmeftb. . (e) Oace die M_._., -dalJ payaeat aawd la alclllated, it wll lie couidend to be a portio• of tile Member's,_.. llllder C.Jt.S. H 31-31-413 (1) (IIGl'IUI ntinaeat). (3) (deferred aetilmat). (4) (early actlaa•t). or c.R.S. I 31-31-414(2) (•eated nthea•t). It aay lie nheed If tile a&her elecla w .r die .....tvor .,._ offered ader C.R.S. f 31-31-<tl4(5){a) oftlae Sta1:Mride Deftlled Beaellt Pia. . . (d) As part or die ...... tile p•rdlaled -tlaly lleaeftt IDIIJ be adjusted panaaat to C.R.S. f 31-31-W7 oftlae StatMride 0....... Beaetlt Pin. (e) Once die ... tkly beaeftt is pudlaaed, die Meaber .. , aot CHVa1 back to • l••P 1am payo•t. ' (f) AD applieatioll to p•rdlue a moatlaly beMllt alaall be flied by die Member witll tile Pin Adaialatrater • die Applicable ,...._ De M__. aut pnrille uy doeaaatatioa tut is nqaind by tile Beard te coaplete tile,...._.. • ' .. • • Upon approval by the members and the employers, these amendments shall become effective ~1 -0, /1 U>o!'" IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my band on this 24• day of March ,2004. STA TE OF COLORADO ) ) ss. CoWlty of Arapahoe ) FIRE AND POLICE PENSION ASSOCIATION, a political subdivision of the State of Colorado By.~·~ LeoJ.Jo · Board of Directors The foregoing Resolution was acknowledpd before me tins 24* day ofMan:b. 2004, by Leo J . J~n, Chairman of the Board of Direc:ton, Fll'C and Police Pension AS10Cia1ioa. a political subdivision of the State of Colorado. Witness my hand and official seal. My commission expires: /<R_ ,-I -ol 4' 2 ' • • FIRE AND POLICE PENSION ASSOCIATION BOARD OF DIRECTORS RESOLUTION NO. 2004-5 Res.2004-5 WHEREAS, pursuant to the authority granted in Section 31-31-408, Colorado Revised Statutes, as amended, the Board of Directors of the Fire and Police Pension Association ("the Board") has proposed certain modifications to the pension benefits set forth in Part 4, Article 31, Title 31, Colorado Revised Statutes, as amended, with respect to the members of the Statewide Defined Benefit Plan ("the Plan"); and WHEREAS, the proposed modifications to the Plan are set forth in the Board's Resolution No. 2004-4, adopted by the Board on March 24, 2004; and WHEREAS, FPPA Rule 704.02(b) requires that prior to an election by employers and members on any proposed modification to the Plan. the Board shall provide employers with a certification that the proposed modifications comply with the requirements set forth in Section 31-31-408, Colorado Revised Statutes, as amended; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Board hereby certifies that the proposed modifications to the Plan set forth in Board Resolution No. 2004-4 comply with the requirements set fol1b in Section 31-31-408. 1be Board finds and determines the following: I. The proposed modifications will maintain or enhance the actuarial soundness, as specified· in Section 31-31-102 (1 ), of the Plan. 2. The proposed modifications do not require an increase in the employer and member contribution rates established as of January 1, 1980, pursuant to Section 31-31-402. 3. The proposed modifications do not adversely affect the Plan• s status as a qualified plan pursuant to the "lntcmal Revenue Code of 1986," as amended. 4 . The proposed modifications do not adversely affect the· pension benefits of retired members. 5. The proposed modifications do not reduce the Plan's normal retirement age below that permitted by Section 31-31-403 (I) (b). , t ... • • FIRE AND POLICE PENSION ASSOCIATION BOARD or DIRECTORS RFSOLtmON NO. 2004-6 WHEREAS, Section 31-31-904, C.R.S., u ammded, autbori7.CS the Board of Directors of the Fire and Police Pension Association (the "Boenf') to develop, nurintain, and mnend a statewide bealtb care defined benefit plan (the "Plan") with respect to the members of the statewide 1etinment plans; and WHEREAS, Section 31-31-904(2), C.R.S., sets forth certain conditions which must be met before the Board may establish the Plan, including approval by at least sixty-me percent (65%) oftbc active members oftbc ptopoaed Plan; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the authority granted in Section 31-31-904, C.R.S., as liDCoded, the Board bu adopted FPPA Rule 714 cstablisbing the procedure which the Board will follow with respect to its adoption of the Plan; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVE>, that the Boanl hereby proposes the Statewide Defined Bmcfit Health Care Plan and diiects that an election shall be conducted of all staewide rctilemcnt plan members woiking 1600 hours or mor,e per year, pursuant to the provisions of Section 31-31-904, C.R.S., as amended, and FPPA Ruic 714. FPPA staff is authorimi to take all actions nccc:may to conduct said election. Upon approval by the members and all subsequent actions iequircd by law, the Plan. sball become effcc:tive Janumy l, 2005. IN WITNF.8S WHEREOF, I have hereunto act my band on this 24• day of Mardi, 2004. FIRE AND POUCE PENSION ASSOCIATION, a political subdivision of the State of Colorado By.~~~ Lcc>J . • Board of Directors t • • -- RESOLtmON NO. SER1ES OF 2004 0 0 A RESOLUTION IN WHICH THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ENGLEWOOD,• COLORADO HEREBY CASTS ITS EMPLOYER'S VOTE IN FAVOR OF THE FIRE AND POLICE PENSION ASSOCIATION'S (F.P .P.A.'S)PROPOSED AMENDMENTS NO. I, NO. 2ANDNO. 3 . WHEREAS, pursuant to the authority granted in C.R.S. 31-31-408, the Board of Directors of the Fire and Police Pension Association (F.P.P.A.) ("Board") has proposed certain plan amendments to the pension benefits set forth in Part 4, Article 31, Title 31 C.R.S., and as amended, with respect to members of the Statewide Defined Benefit Plan ("the Plan") said proposed plan amendments including three separate amendments to the Statewide Defined Benefit Plan; and WHEREAS, the proposed modifications to the Plan is set forth in the FPPA's Resolution No. 2004 ..,·, adopted by the Board on March 24, 2004; and WHEREAS, F .P.P.A . Board of Directors, as determined in its Resolution 2004-5, adopted on March 24, 2004, has certified that the proposed plan amendments will maintain or enhance the actuarial soundness of the plan, do not require an increase in the employer and member contribution rates, do not adversely affect the Plan's status as a qualified plan, do not adversely affect the pension benefits of retired members, and do not reduce the Plan's normal retirement age below what is permitted by law; and WHEREAS, the Englewood members ofF.P.P.A. held an election and voted in favor of F.P.P .A .'s proposed Amendments No . 1, No. 2 and No. 3; five (5) members did not vote and those votes were counted as "No" votes; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ENGLEWOOD, COLORADO, THAT: Section I . The City Council of the City of Englewood, Colorado hereby casts its Employer's vote in favor ofF.P.P.A. 's proposed Amendment No . 1 -"Self-direction of SRA," members will self direct the SRA monies in their accounts in any investment options offered by FPPA, once the members have retired (Normal, Early, or Vested Retirement) or entered DROP. Section 2. The City Council of the City of Englewood, Colorado hereby casts its Employer's vote in favor ofF.P .P.A.'s proposed Amendment No. 2 -"DROP Payment Option," removing the requirement on the current amendment that a participant in the Statewide Deferred Retirement Option Plan (DROP) who terminates employment and becomes a retiree, or surviving spouse of a deceased participant, must select a payment option with 30 days of employment termination or the lump sum payment method shall be utilized. A minimum distribution would be required as provided by th e IRS . ... • • Section 3. The City Council of the City of Englewood, Colorado hereby casts its Employer's vote in favor ofF.P.P.A.'s proposed Amendment No. 3 -"Purchase of Monthly Benefits," to allow members who have an SRA account and/or DROP account to make a one-time, irrevocable elections at retirement or separation of service, whichever comes later, to purchase a monthly benefit from the Statewide Defined Benefit Plan. ADOPTED AND APPROVED this 21st day of June, 2004. ATTEST: Douglas Garrett, Mayor Loucrishia A . Ellis, City Clerk I, Loucrishia A. Ellis, City Clerk for the City ofEnglewood, Colorado, hereby certify the above is a true copy of Resolution No.__, Series of 2004. Loucrishia A. Ellis, City Clerk .. • . . ' • COUNCIL COMMUNICATION Date: Agenda Item: Subject : Waiver of Direct Subgrant June 21, 2004 10 C iii Award -Juvenile Accountability Incentive Block Grant, FY2003 Initiated By: Staff Source: Safety Services Chris Olson, Director of Safety Services COUNCIL GOAL AND PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION Previous approval of waivers for FY's 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002. Involves a cooperative effort with the 18"' Judicial District for the operation of the Juvenile Assessment Center at the Arapahoe Co. Detention Facility. RECOMMENDED ACTION Resolution to allow the Director of Safety Services to sign the Waivers of Direct Subgrant Award for FY 2003-2004 (Grant cycle 5) and 2004-2005 (Grant cycle 6). BACKGROUND, ANALYSIS, AND ALTERNATIVES IDENTIFIED Englewood is eligible to receive a grant allocation in the amount of $17,437 with a cash match of $1 , 93 7 for the 5"' year and a grant of $16, 190 with a cash match of $1,799 for the 6"' year. These subgrant waivers are consistent with the actions of other municipalities and counties In the 18"' Judicial District. Both the Municipal Court and Safety services rely heavily on the JAC to handle a wide variety of juvenile intake issues . FINANCIAL IMPACT $1,937 owed from the 5lh year grant period, plus the $1,799 match from the 6"' year grant period for a total of $3,736. Payment to be made from the current Safety Services budget. LIST OF ATTAC HMENTS Proposed Resolution . ~ t ... • • SERIES OF 2004 A V Al.OF DllliiCT FOR THE COLORADO DIVISION OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE JUVENILE A; WHEREAS, the 18111 Judicial District Juvenile Assessment Center moved into its permanent facility as a part of the Arapahoe County Detention Center complex in April, 2002; and WHEREAS, this facility bas become a "one stop shop" for youth, families and law enforcement agencies within the 18111 Judicial District, with outreach activities at local schools, law enforcement and community agencies; and WHEREAS, the Englewood Municipal Court and the Englewood Safety Services Department rely heavily on the Juvenile Accountability Center to handle a wide variety of juvenile intake issues; and WHEREAS, this Subgrant Waiver is consistent with the actions of other municipalities and counties in the 18111 Judicial District and provides a total contn"bution to the Juvenile Assessment Center ofS275,999, for the period October I, 2004 -September 30, 2005 the grant cycle; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Englewood approved the waivers for the ycan 1999, 2000, 2001 and 2002; and WHEREAS, the passage of this ·Resolution will authoriu subgrant waivcn for the Federal Fiscal ycan of October 2003 -September 2004 togcdicr with the City's matching contribution of S 1,937 will transfer the City of Englewood's grant allocation in the amount ofSl 7,437 (Grant Cycle S) to the 18111 Judicial District Juvenile Asscsamcnt Center; and WHEREAS, the passage of this Resolution will authoriu subgrant waivers for the Federal Fiscal years of October 2004 -September 2005 togcdicr with the City's matching contribution of $1,799 will transfer the City of Englewood's grant allocation in the amount ofS16,190 (Grant Cycle 6) to the Is• Judicial District Juvenile Assessment Center; and WHEREAS , the Englewood Safety Services Dcpanmcnt bas included these matching funds in their budget; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ENGLEWOOD, COLORADO, THAT : ~-The Director of Safety Services is hereby authorized to sign and attcat said Waiver Of Direct Subgrant Award Juvenile Accountability Incentive Block Grant (JAIBO)-Grant Period: October I , 2003 -September 30, 2004, (Grant Cycle 5) on behalf of the City of Eqlcwoocl. attached hereto as Exhibit A. t .. • • ~-The Director of SafeSty Services is hereby authori7.cd to sign and attest said Waiver Of Direct Subgrant Award Juvenile Accountability Incentive Block Grant (JAIBG) -Grant Period: October 1, 2004 -September 30, 200S (Grant Cycle 6), on behalf of the City of Englewood, attached hereto as Exhibit B. ADOPTED AND APPROVED this 21 • day of June, 2004. ATTEST: Douglas Garrett, Mayor Loucrishia A. Ellis, City Clerk I, Loucrishia A. Ellis, City Clerk for the City of Englewood, Colorado, hereby certify the above is a true copy of Resolution No .__, Series of2004. Loucrisbia A. Ellis, City Clerk • • --.... • - WAIVER OF DIRECT SUBGRANT AWARD JUVENILE ACCOUNT4BD.JIY INCENTIVE BLOCK GRANT (JAIBG) For the Federal Year 2002 Award GllANI' PERIOD: OCTOBER l, 2003 -Sl!PTBMBBl. 30, 2004 St~1 Year Cycle Fiscal Year 2001 .Uocmd dinict Subgraat award mlClllllt ofS 17,437.00 md NqlMlll9 that (JAlBG Allocaliaa) our unit gowmment's fimlb be awarded to QJlla saw PWrisf Aerr 7 I t blniel PWrisa (Deli ..... lmd anitot~) The JAIBG Plan submitted by 1llia delipatecl lead unit of gowawnmt includel the needs of our unit of aowmment and our award amount will be spent far our benefit duaup this plan. cominue to monitor and participate in 1h11 plan impl-rwPJl0 OIL All c:aah mab:b mocillled with our allocad amount will be man,d ID throup 1he mbmiaacl plaa. Af .. tdad M I ; fer tlail UaJt o(Gonnnnt lChalt-a{eo..y Ca .,..,..: .W..,.: CU, Manapr, orC/ta/rc,/Cily COllllcil tfiro"** ~ of ,w,+1** ~)] I HEREBY CERTIFY nlAT nm INFORMATION PROVIDED ON THIS PAGE JS CORllECI'. Name: Chris Olson Signature:---------- RETURN 1lDS BY MAU.. OR. FAX TO: Cm Gawd, Jwvmile Jaltice Spemlill Colorado I>ivilim of Crimiml JUllice 700 ICipliaa, SIi:. 100, o._., CO I021S Trtle: Safety services Director n.: _____ _ Fa: (303) ZJ!J.4491 ,I ' • . . I ,•• t ; . • • .. ... JUVENILE ACCOUlff.ABILl'lT DfCBN iiVB BLOClt GIIAl'IT tJAJBG) l'or tile l'edenl Year 2002 Awmd Grant Period: Octobm-1. ---8eptemlMrr so. 200& 11• Year...,_ ADocatJaa . t AleDCY federal Gqllt ¥etch Xllll Arapahoe County $86.557.00 $9,817 896.174 .. ... Englewood 817,437 81.937 $19,374 Gleenwood Village $9.244 $1,027 $10.271 Douglas County 821.614 82.40!l $24,016 Ltttlet...n 813.893 $1.544 $15.437 Aurora (Arap. 80%) $138.595 815.399 $153.9&1 Glendale $4.988 8552 85.520 Sbm1dan 84.341 $482 84.823 Pooled l!!IIHil IUl,aa1 Elbert County. !Wnbdh, KJawa. Simi& aa.m 820,.248 UncoJn Count;f, Uman. HUCo, Geuaa Cheny Hilla VUJa&e Faxtldd. Columbine Valley Parker. Castle Rock Lone Tree. Larkspur Total t;IJ,j.872 _. NII *!19-.111 • • • WAIVER OF DIRECT SUBGRANT AW ARD JUVENILE ACCOUNTABILITY INCENTIVE BLOCK GRANT (JAIBG) for the Federal FI.SC3l Year 2003 Award (6th Y~r Cycle) TO: Colorado Division of Criminal Justice, Colorado Depanment of Public Safety The Englewood City Council hereby waives its right to its Federal (Unit of Government) rtSCal Year 2003 allocated direct subgrant award amount of S 16,190 and requests that (JAIBG Allocation) our unit of government's funds be awarded to the Office of the Disqict Attorney, Eightcemh Judicial (Desipared lead unit of government) District. The JAIBG Plan submitted by this designated lead unit of government includes the needs of our unit of government and our award amount will be spent for our benefit through this plan. Representation of our unit of government fully participated in the plan development and will continue to monitor :md participate in the plan implementation. All cash match associated with our allocated amount will be assured to through the submitted plan. Authorized Offldal for this Upit of Gov,npppa,t: (Chair of Cowuy C~n: Mayor. City M-,.,. or Chair of Cily Co1111Cil ( pl'Ollid6 ~ of appror>ria# tMhorily JI I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE INFORMATION PROVIDED ON nns PAGE IS CORRECT. Name: Chris Olson Title: safety services Director Signature: ________________ .Date:------- RETURN THIS BY MAU. OR FAX TO C.uol Ciuuld. Juvenile Justice Specialist Cokndo Division of Criminal Justice 700 Kiplin&, Sic . 100, Denver, CO 80215 Fu: (303)239-4491 ! .. _) 'Tl 9 ' • • JUVElflLE ACCOUlffABILITY llfCDTIVE BLOCK GRANT (JAIBG) For the Federal Year 2002 Award Grant Period: October 1, 2004-September 30, 2005 6th Year Buqet Allocation . t yepcy Pederal Grant llatch ~ -~ Arapahoe County $68,900 $7,656 $76,556 .. .. Englewood $16,190 $1,799 $17,989 Greenwood Village $7,203 $800 $8,003 Douglas County $17,287 $1,921 $19,208 Littleton $10,002 $1,111 $11,113 Aurora (Arap. 80%) $108,367 $12,041 $120,408 Glendale $3,877" $431 $4,308 Sheridan $3,325 $369 $3,694 ~l~Fung1 11~.2g 11,472 U4,120 Elbert County, Elizabeth, Kiowa, Simla . Lincoln County, Limon, Hugo, Genoa Cherry Hills Village Foxfield, Columbine Valley Parker, Castle Rock Lone Tree, Larkspur Total •248.399 *27.600 •a1s.n, • • COUNCIL COMMUNICATION Date Agenda Item Subject June 21, 2004 11 a i Case PUD 2003-01 Englewood Estates Planned Unit Development -1" Reading INmATEDBY STAFF SOURCE Mike Duggan Distinctive Builders, LLC Anthony J. Fruchtl, Planner 4495 South Santa Fe Drive En1dewood Colorado 80110 COUNCIL GOAL AND PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION There has been no previous Council action concerning this matter. PREVIOUS PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION The Planning and Zoning Commission considered the Englewood Estates Planned Unit Development at a public hearing on February 3, 2004. The Commission voted to forward the PUD to City Council with a recommendation for approval with the following conditions: 1. Applicant shall obtain and provide documentation for the utility easement for the water line on the adjoining property along the west property line. 2. Fence along West Quincy Avenue cannot be constructed within 20 feet of the West Quincy Circle property line. 3. PUD District Plan -Development Standard A states: "General Regulations: The Provisions found in this Zone District shall be subject to the requirements and standards for Zone District R-1-C of the City of Englewood Municipal Code as amended, unless otherwise provided for in this PUD or an amendment hereto." The above requirements have been addressed. The Commission also considered a Major Subdivision preliminary plat for the Englewood Estates Subdivision, which would divide the property contained within the proposed PUD into seven (7) residential lots. The Major Subdivision is not part of this Ordinance request Council will consider the subdivision request by Resolution upon approval of the PUD. RECOMMENDED ACTION Staff recommends that Council adopt the proposed Planned Unit Development and set July 19, 2004 as the date for Public Hearing to consider testimony on the proposed Englewood Estates Planned Unit Development. BACl<GROUND A conceptual site plan for the Englewood Estates Planned Unit Development was submitted for City commen ts in April 2001 . A preliminary plan was presented at a neighborhood meetin9 on October ' ... .,. . ... , .• • • 9, 2001, as required by the PUD Ordinance (16-4-5 of the former Zoning Ordinance). During the meeting, concerns with the proposed PUD were brought to the attention of the developer. In April 2003, a revised conceptual site plan was submitted for City comments. The revised PUD addressed the concerns brought forth by the neighboring property owners during the October 9, 2001 neighborhood meeting. The formal PUD application was submitted on April 4, 2003, with the applicant holding an additional neighborhood meeting on August 5, 2003 to review the proposed site plan with the neighborhood. The District Plan and the Site Plan have been combined and submitted as one document for concurrent review, as provided for in the PUD Ordinance. The subject property of the Planned Unit Development is a vacant parcel of approximately 1.19 acres. The site is located in an area bounded by West Quincy Avenue on the north, West Radcliff Avenue on the south, South Lipan Street on the east, and South Navajo Street on the west Adjacent properties to the north, east, and south are zoned R-1.C Singl'H'amily Residence District, and contain single-family homes. Adjacent properties to the west are zoned 1-1 and are used as automotive sales and engine repair. The subject property was annexed into the City of Englewood in 1955 and was zoned R-1-0 Residence District In 1963, this area was rezoned to the current R-1.C classification. ANALYSIS: The Planned Unit Development is a rezoning process that establishes specific zoning and site planning criteria to meet the needs of a specific development proposal that may not be accommodated within the existing zoning or development regulations. The Englewood Estates PUD proposes seven (7) single-family residential lots on a private drive (West Quincy Circle) accessed from West Quincy Avenue. The proposed lots will range from 5,116 square feet to 6,750 square feet The average lot size of the PUD is 5,784 square feet. which is comparable to the adjacent R-1.C Single-Family Residence District which requires a minimum 6,000 square foot lot As stated above, access will be through West Quincy Circle and will travel in a #one wa~ direction entering at the west intersection of West Quincy Circle and West Quincy Avenue, and exiting at the east intersection of West Quincy Circle and West Quincy Avenue. All the lots will be accessed via individual private driveways that connect to West Quincy Circle. Additionally, a note has been placed on the District Plan that prohibits access to Lot 1 from West Quincy Avenue. West Quincy Circle, identified as Tract A, will be owned and maintained by the Homeowner Association, which is to be formed as a requirement of this PUD. FINANCIAL IMPACT The proposed subdivision will result in increased residential property tax revenues and development fees generated by future development of the seven residential lots. LIST OF ATTACHMENTS Bi ll for Ordinance Findings of Fact Staff Report: January 6, 2004 Exhibit A: Englewood Estates PUD 2 t • • -- CITY OF ENGLEWOOD PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION IN THE MATTER OF CASE #PUD 2003-01 ) FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS ) AND RECOMMENDATIONS RELATING ) TO THE ENGLEWOOD ESTATES PLANNED ) UNIT DEVELOPMENT, 1296 WEST QUINCY ) AVENUE ) ) INITIATED BY: ) Distinctive Builders, LLC ) 4495 South Santa Fe Drive ) Englewood, CO 80110 ) ) FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF THE CITY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION This public hearing on this matter before the City Planning and Zoning Commission was opened on January 6, 2004, continued to January 21, 2004 and further continued by telephone poll to February 3, 2004, in the City Council Chambers of the Englewood Civic Center. ianuary 6. 2004 Commission Members Present: Commission Members Absent: February 3. 2004 Commission Members Present: Commission Members Absent: Adams, Bleile, Diekmeier, Krieger, Mueller, Roth, Schum, Waggoner Welker Adams, Bleile, Diekmeier, Adams, Bleile, Diekmeier, Krieger, Mosteller, Mueller, Roth, Schum, Welker None Testimony was received from staff, the applicant. Rick Weed of Carroll and Lange, and Nancy Baker of 1294 West Quincy Avenue. The Commission received notice of Public Hearing, the Staff Report. and a conceptual drawing of the development, which were incorporated into and made a part of the record of the Public Hearing. After considering the statements of the witnesses, and reviewing the pertinent documents, the members of the City Planning and Zoning Commission made the following Findings and Conclusions . 1 t .. • • -- • FINDINGS OF FACT 1. THAT application for the Englewood Estates Planned Unit Development was initiated by Distinctive Builders, LLC, filed on April 4, 2003 . 2. 3 . 4. THAT public notice was properly given by publication in the Englewood~ on December 26, 2003 . A sign was posted on the pr.operty setting forth the date, time, and location of the Public Hearing. THAT testimony was received from Anthony Fruchtl, Planner and from Tricia Langon, Senior Planner, regarding the application to rezone the property from R 1 C Single-Family Residence District to a Planned Unit Development. THAT testimony was received from Mike Duggan, on behalf of Distinctive Builders, LLC regarding housing sales, parking. easements, fencing. sidewalks, and development of Englewood Estates . 5. THAT testimony was received from Rick Weed of Carroll & Lange, regarding utility easements, sidewalks, street lights, and turning radius within Englewood Estates . 6. THAT testimony was received from Nancy Baker of 1294 West Quincy Avenue supporting the development and a 6-foot fence around the development. CONCLUSIONS 1. THAT the proposed Englewood Estates PUD was brought before the Planning & Zoning Commiss ion upon application filed by Distinctive Builders, LLC. 2. THAT notice of the Public Hearing was property given by publication in the official Ci ty ne ws paper, and by proper posting of the property. 3. THAT tes timony rece ived from staff members, applicant representatives, and general public was made pa rt of the record of t he Publ ic H earing. 4·. THAT the proposed Englewood Esta tes PUD is found to b e in co mpliance with the District Plan requirements and the Comprehensive Pla n . 5. THAT all required documents, drawings, refe rrals, recommendations, and approval s ha e been re ceived . 5. THAT the proposed Englewood Es tates PUD is consis tent with adopted and general! accep ted standards of de elopment in the City of Engl ew ood. ' . '" .. • • 6. THAT the proposed Englewood Estates PUD is substantially consistent with the goals, objectives, design guidelines, policies and any other ordinance, law or requirement of the City. DECISION THEREFORE, it is the decision of the City Planning and Zoning Commission that the Planned Unit Development requested by Distinctive Builders, LLC for property at 1296 West Quincy Avenue, be recommended to the Englewood City Council for approval. The decision was reached upon a vote on a motion made at the meeting of the City Planning and Zoning Commission on February 3, 2004, by Mr. Schum, seconded by Mr. Bleile, which motion states: Mr. Schum moved; Mr. Bleile seconded : To forward Case #PUD 2003-01, Englewood Estates to City Council with a recommendation for approval with the following conditions: 1. Applicant shall obtain and provide documentation for the utility easement for the water line on the adjoining property along the west property line. 2. Fence along West Quincy Avenue cannot be constructed within 20 feet of the West Quincy Circle property line. 3. PUD District Plan -Development Standards A state : #General Regulations: The Provisions found in this Zone District shall be subject to the requirements and standards for Zone District R-1-C of the City of Englewood Municipal Code as amended, unless otherwise provided for in this PUD or an amendment hereto.· AY ES; NAYS : Adams, Bleile, Diekmeier, Krieger, Mosteller, Mueller, Roth, Schum, Welker N one A BSTAIN: N one ABSENT : N o ne The motion carried. These Findings and Concl usi on s are effective as of the meeting on Fe b ruary 3, 2004. BY ORDER OF THE CITY PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION Cyndi Krieger, Chail .. • • C ·• • • 0 n ':&:..__), {' T y 0 F ENGLEWOOD COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT TO: THRU: FROM: DATE: Planning and Zoning Commission · / Robert Simpson, Director, Community Development(1Y Anthony J. Fruchtl, Plann~ January 6, 2004 SUBJECT: Case PUD 2003-01 · Public Hearing· Englewood Estates Planned Unit Development Case SUB 2003-04 · Public Hearing • Englewood Estates Subdivision APPLICANT and PROPERTY OWNER: Distinctive Builders, L.L.C. 4495 South Santa Fe Drive Englewood, Colorado 80110 PROPERTY ADDRESS: 1296 West Quincy Avenue CURRENT ZONE DISTRICT: R-1-C Single-Family R<!'sidence District LEGAL DESCRIPTION: See Planned Unit Devel~pment District Plan . REQUEST: The applicant has submitted a Planned Unit Development (PUD) application to rezone the property from R-1-C Single-Family Residence District to PUD. The applicant has also submitted an application to subdivide the property contained within the PUD . PROCEDURE: Since information required and testimony necessary for both cases are parallel, the requests are being considered within a single hearing. but will require two motions. A decision on the PUD must occur first, as this process creates the new zone district and establishes standards for lot area . A decision on the subdivision of the land within the new district may occur only after approval of the PUD. 1000 Englewood Parkway Engl~. Colofildo 80110 PHONE )03-762-2)42 FAX 30)-78J.689S www.•.-w11llt ·"'I ' .. .. • • ·• • • c--. (_J RECOMMENDATION: Case PUD 2003-01: The Community Development Department recommends that the Planning and Zoning Commission approve the proposed Englewood Estates Planned Unit Development. Case SUB 2003-04: The Community Development Department recommends approval of the Preliminary Plat of the Englewood Estates Subdivision and that the applicant be directed to submit a Final Plat for review. If the Commission requires no changes from the Preliminary Plat to the Final Plat. staff recommends that the Final Plat be administratively reviewed and the application be forwarded to Council with a recommendation for approval. PROPERTY LOCATION: The subject property of the Planned Unit Development is a vacant parcel of approximately 1.19 acres. The site is located in an area bounded by West Quincy Avenue on the north, West Radcliff Avenue on the south, South Lipan Street on the east, and South Navajo Street on the west. Adjacent properties to the north, east, and south are zoned R-1-C Single-Family Residence District, and contain single-family homes. Adjacent properties to the west are zoned 1-1 and are used as automotive sales and engine repair . The subject property was annexed into the City of Englewood in 1955 and was zoned R-1-D Residence District. In 1963, this area was rezoned to the current R-1-C classification. BACKGROUND A conceptual sit e plan for the Englewood Estates Planned Unit Development was submitted for City comments in April 2001. A preliminary plan was presented at a neighborhood meeting on October 9, 2001, as required by the PUD Ordinance. During the meeting. concerns with the proposed PUD were brought to the attention of the developer (See Neighborhood Meeting Summary Page 4). In April 2003 , a revised conceptual site plan for the Englewood Estates PUD was submitted for City comments . The revised PUD addressed the concerns brought forth by the neighboring property owners during the October 9, 2001 neighborhood meeting. The formal PUD application was submitted on April 4, 2003, with the applicant holding an additional neighborhood meeting on August 5, 2003 to review the proposed site plan with the neighborhood. The District Plan and the Site Pl~n ha e been combined and submitted as one document for concurrent review, as pro ided for in the PUD Ordinance. A preliminary subdivision plat, based on the P D, was also submitted. ANALYSIS: The Planned Unit De elopment is a rezoning process that establishes specific zoning and si te planning cri teria to meet the needs of a specific development proposal that may not be accommodated within the existing zoning scheme or development 2 ' .. • • - 0 ·• • regulations . The PUD provides the opportunity for unified development control for multiple properties. The PUD is composed of a District Plan, which is the set of zoning regulations that will apply to the proposed development project This District Plan is coupled with a Site Plan that specifies the general site design and requirements of the proposed development. The Planning and Zoning Commission's purpose in this request is to focus on whether the proposed land use and zoning regulations are appropriate for this development and the community. The proposed use is limited to single-family residences with accessory structures. Home office, as an accessory use, is also proposed. Extraneous development issues, such as elevations, building and plant materials. are not part of this procedure. The Englewood Estates PUD proposes seven (7) single-family residential lots on a private drive (West Quincy Circle) accessed from West Quincy Avenue. West Quincy Circle will travel in a "one way" direction entering at the west intersection of West Quincy Circle and West Quincy Avenue, and exiti .ng at the east intersection of West Quincy Circle and West Quincy Avenue. "One wayH signs are proposed at each intersection as shown on the plan . All the lots will be accessed via individual private driveways that connect to West Quincy, Circle . Additionally, a note has been placed on the plat that prohibits access to Lot 1 from West Quincy Avenue. West Quincy Circle, identified as Tract A, will be owned and maintained by the Homeowner Association, which is to be formed as a requirement of this PUD . Access to the proposed lots will be through West Quincy Circle, which is not a public street, and will not be maintained by the City. Parking on the private drive will be limited to two (2) parking spaces located at the southwest corner of West Quincy Circle, and two (2) parking spaces located at the southeast corner of West Quincy Circle for a total of four (4) off-street parking spaces as indicated on the plan. Parking is not permitted anywhere else along West Quincy Circle, and Hno parkingH signs are proposed to be posted as indicated on the plan . The four (4) off-street parking spaces have also been designated for snow storage to prevent snow from being plowed onto West Quincy Avenue. The proposed Jots will range from 5,116 square feet to 6,750 square feet. The average lot size of the PUD is 5,784 square feet, which is comparable to the R-1-C Single-Family Residence District which requires a minimum 6,000 square foot lot. The proposed height of structures is 32 feet, which is compatible with the proposed residential height maximums in the Unified Development ode (UDC). Setbacks are established by development envelopes specific to each lot as shown on the PUD District Plan . In addition to the development envelopes, a provision that requires garage doors to be set back a minimum of twenty-four (24) feet from the edge of West Quincy Circle has also been added . 3 ' .. • • ·• • The full envelope produces individual lot coverage as follows: Lot 1: 55% Lot 2 : 54% Lot 3: 60% Lot 4: 60% Lot 5: 51% Lot 6: 42% Lot 7: 42% 0 0 Please note that although the development envelope is the area in which development may occur, it does not mean that the development will necessarily fill the envelope. Electrical service is available from Xcel Energy and will be underground. Drainage issues have been addressed and will be monitored in the development permit process . Water and sanitary sewer service has been reviewed and approved by the City of Englewood Utilities Department, and will be monitored in the development permit process. Signage identifying the development's name and property addresses is proposed . · Proposed landscaping requirements on the private Lots 1 through 7 are compatible with 16-5-26: Landscaping Standards of the Englewood Municipal Code requiring 1 tree and 5 shrubs for every 750 square feet of landscaped area along with minimum caliper and gallon sizes for trees and shrubs respectively . The formation of a Homeowner Association is required as part of this PUD request. The documentation will address such issues as maintenance of the private drive, boundary fence, landscaping and snow plowing. Further, the agreement must stipulate that any amendments to the original agreement also be recorded and a copy provided to the City. The agreement is a separate, private document and is not a part of the PUD Plan . However, a copy of the recorded document must be submitted to the City to be included in the Englewood Estates PUD case file. DEPARTMENT AND AGENCY REVIEW: Through the Development Review T earn (ORT) process, all comments and concerns pertainin g to the Building and Safety, Engineering Services, Public Works, Traffic, and U tilities hav e been addressed , and are reflected on the plan . The Community D eve lopm ent Departments comments are provided under the Analysis section ab ov e. NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING SUMMARY; On O ctob er 9, 2001 , Mike Duggan, a managing member of Distinctive Builders, l.L.C. (property owner), conducted the required pre-application neighborhood mee ting. The app lica nt presented a proposal for seven (7) single-family detached homes loca ted o n a private street. Fourteen (14) neighbors and/or property owners 4 ' • • attended the meeting. Attendees' comments and concerns focused on the following topics : 1. Building height 2. Fencelocations 3 . Traffic congestion ingress and egress 4. Roadway maintenance 5. On-street parking 6. Utility easements 7. Views of the mountains 8. Noise, dust and rodents mitigation Due to the length of time between the pre-application neighborhood meeting held in October, 2001 and the PUD submittal date (April, 2003), Mr. Duggan held an additional neighborhood meeting on August 5, 2003 to review the proposal with the adjacent property owners . Five (5) neighbors/property owners (all of whom were at the original neighborhood meeting) attended the meeting. Attendees reviewed the revisions to the PUD and Mr. Duggan addressed the following questions: Q : Will the utilities be underground? A: Yes, all the utilities will be underground. Q : Will the developer put up fencing around the boundary of the property? A : The developer will be placing a 6 foot solid wood fence around the boundary of the property. Q : Will Radcliff be made a thru street? A : There is no proposed extension of West Radcliff Avenue to make it a thru- street Q : What will the effects of the development be to the water pressure in the neighborhood? A: All utility issues had been reviewed by the City of Englewood Utility Division for compliance with all applicable codes. Q : Where will people park? A: Each individual lot will accommodate four (4) on-site parking spaces . Additionally, 4 parking spaces located at the southwest and southeast corner of West Quincy Circle have been provided. Q : What is the price point of the homes? A : The homes will be sold at market value . Q:. Will the views of the mountains be interrupted? A: The views of the mountains will be pres~ -ved as best as possible. PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT CONSIDERATIONS: When considering a Planned Unit Development application, the Commission must determine if the proposal meets District Plan and Site Plan criteria as established in the PUD Ordinance. 5 ' .... .. • • PUD District Plan Englewood Estates Planned Unit Development District Plan sets forth the zoning regulations within which the proposed development will occur. The Planning and Zoning Commission is required to make the following findings concerning the Englewood Estates PUD District Plan: 1. The PUD District Plan is, or is not,. in conformance with the District Plan requirements and the Comprehensive Plan. The proposed Englewood Estates PUD is in conformance with the applicable requirements set forth in Section 16-4-15: E 3 e. PUD District Plan, and the goals set forth within the Comprehensive Plan for maintaining the residential character of the established neighborhood. 2. All required documents, drawings, referrals, recommendations, and approvals have been received. All appropriate documents concerning the proposed Englewood Estates PUD have been received and approved. 3 . The PUD District Plan is consistent with adopted and generally accepted standards of development in the City of Englewood. The proposed Englewood Estates PUD District Plan is consistent with accepted development standards established by the City of Englewood. 4. The PUD District Plan is substantially consistent with the goals, objectives, design guidelines, policies and any other ordinance, law or requirement of the City. The proposed Englewood Estates PUD District Plan is in conformance with all other ordinances, laws and requirements of the City. 5. When the PUD District Plan is within the Englewood Downtown Development Authority (EDDA) area, the Plan is consistent with the EDDA approved designs, policies and plans . Not applicable . PUD Site Plan Englewood Estates Planned Unit Development Site Plan sets forth the site planning and design parameters within which the proposed development will occur. The Planning and Zoning Commission is required to make the following findings concerning the Englewood Estates PUD Site Plan : , I. The PUD Site Plan is, or is not,. in conformance with the District Plan requirement,s . The proposed Englewood Estates PUD Site Plan is in conformance with the Englewood Estates PUD District Plan . The PUD Site Plan establishes the lot arrangement, orientation, location, and the building envelopes on the lots . The Plan also iden tifies common areas. 6 ' • • 0 . 2. All required documents, drawings, referrals, recommendations, and approvals have been received. All required site plan materials have been received and approved. 3. The PUD Site Plan is consistent with adopted and generally accepted standards of development of the City of Englewood. The proposed Englewood Estates PUD Site Plan is consistent with the development standards set forth in the PUD District Plan. The Development Review Team reviewed the plan and determined that the proposal meets standards established or administered either through Ordinance or by Department policies. Standards for site access, utilities, and zoning have been met (See Analysis above). 4. The PUD Site Plan is substantially consistent with the goals, objectives and policies and/or any other ordinance, law or requirement of the City. The proposed PUD Site Plan is in conformance with all other ordinances, laws and requirements of the City. MAIOR SUBDIVISION PROCEDURE: Title 10, Land Subdivisions, of the Englewood Municipal Code requires that the Planning and Zoning Commission review the preliminary plat for a major subdivision at a public hearing. After the public hearing. the Commission may approve, conditionally approve, or disapprove the preliminary plat. If the preliminary plat is approved or conditionally approved, the applicant prepares a final plat incorporating any suggestions or conditions resulting from the public hearing. Upon submission of the final plat, the Planning and Zoning Commission reviews the final plat for conformance to any conditions imposed on the preliminary plat A public hearing is not required for this review . After this review, the Commission may either approve, conditionally approve, or disapprove the final plat If the Commission requires no changes from the Preliminary Plat to the Final Plat, staff recommends that the Final Plat be administratively reviewed and the application be forwarded to Council with a recommendation for approval. When the final plat is approved, it is forwarded to City Council with the Commission's recommendation. Upon approval by City Council. the plat will be recorded with the Arapahoe County Clerk and Recorder. When considering a preliminary subdivision plat, the Commission must consider the following: 1. The zoning of the property proposed for subdivision, tosetf,er with the zoninB of the areas immediately adjacent thereto. The proposed Englewood Estates PUD is bounded on the west by the 1-1 Light Industrial District. To buffer the uses that are aRowed within the 1-1 Light 7 - t .... , .. ' • • - Industrial District, the applicant has proposed a six (6) foot solid wood fence along the west boundary of the property. The proposed zoning for the Englewood Estates PUD limits development to single-family residences, which is compatible with the City of Englewood R-1-C Single Family Residence Zoned District which bounds the property on the north, south, and east. 2. The proposed layout of lots and blocks and the proposed dimensions thereof to demonstrate compliance with yard area requirements. The proposed lots are compatible with dimensions established by the Englewood Estates PUD District Plan. 3. The availability of all utilities, and the proximily thereof to the area proposed for subdivision. Public water and sewer along with electric, gas, and communication utilities are available to the subject property. 4. Topography and natural features of the land with special reference to flood plains. The subject property is not located within an identified flood plain zone. 5. The continuity of streets and alleys within the area proposed for subdivision, and the design and location of such streets and alleys, with relation to existing streets and alleys, both within and without the area proposed for subdivision, and the Master Street Plan. The proposed Englewood Estates PUD is an infill type of development As a result, there are no streets on the Master Street Plan that were proposed to service this 1. 1 9 acre area. Any streets built will be strictly to provide access to the lots created by this development. West Quincy Circle is a proposed one-way private street that is only wide enough to provide access to the proposed development that it is being built to serve. It is not possible to achieve alignment with Lipan Street to the north without seriously impacting the buildablility of Lots 1 and 2 of this subdivision. By moving the inbound portion of West Quincy Circle 160 feet from South Lipan Street, all ingress conflict points are moved away from the Quincy/South Lipan Street intersec tion. In many respects , West Quincy Circle is merely a driveway access for these seven homes . 6. All rights-of-way to be designated and located to facilitate the safe movement of pedestrians and bicyclists. Sidewalks are provided . 7. All bicycle and pedestrian facilities shall be selected, located and desi,ned in accordance with current City standards. 8 t .. • • 4 No bicycle facilities are required for this proposed subdivision. Sidewalks are provided. 8. The location of utility and other easements. See Preliminary Plat 9. The location of, and provision for, public areas, including land reserved for parks, schools and other public uses. No public reservation is required for this proposed subdivision. 10. The method of handling drainage and surface water. A drainage study has been completed as part of the proposed Planned Unit Development application. Drainage issues have been addressed and will be monitored in the development permit process. Attachments: Application Vicinity Map Planned Unit Development District Plan Preliminary Plat 9 City of Englewood . -.·: . N 1296 West Quincy Avenue •' -Subject property.shp ·• • • • ,. .... . . . . . . . ·•. . :!-/ . : ,_.:· _:·. · ... : . ·"' .. . . ·. . . . ., . . . ,·· . :' · .. · .. -~ .:. ~:.· ,::;:: :.:·: ~ .· ... ·.. :-. '· ·' .. •·• · .. :.· .= ..... •·. ' \, .'";.·. ·:-::. ;..\ ..... '> . ...:.-· ......,,~ . -~~ Vicinity Map 4275 C: ~---~-_ __, ~ 1211 42{9 42 8114 4301 4305 4315 ~~-~ r:: 4325 ~ ~ 4335 .. "' . .. "'" .. "'"' .. "'.. .. "'"" ' 110~ 4300 4301 4310 4315 4320 4325 4330 4345 • 4340 4365 ·• • • CJTY OF ENGLEWOOD COMMl,"l'llTYDEVELOPMENTDEPARTMENT 1090 Eap.,..ood Parbay Eaclew-. CO 18110 '762-2342/FAX 713-4895 www.d.aaglewood.ca.us 0 LAND DEVELOP~NT APPLICATION FORM Developmenl N11me : Enqlewood Estates Propfft)' Addrns: l 296 W QuiAcy ihra P1aaal Zo111111: ____ __,R""-_.,.1 _-""C.=---Acres · 1 • 1 9 Exil1ins Use: Vacant Land Lei•• Deocription· See Attacbrneot (attach sepa,ai. sbeat if aeaasary) .Application Type• Rezrming: from A.-/-C ro, _ _.P..,u,..p.._ _______ _ Modification of Plaaa.ecl Unit Denl~[_JAdmiaiauacive [_j Fornal Di.ilricr Pl&D 'Same: ____________________ _ Swxl.ivwOA:LJ PrcUll>lll&r)' Map LJ Fuaal Plat Vacuioa of:LJ Eas=m LJ Rlthl-of-way Coad>ticmaJ Use Pe.mat for _____________________ _ Otber, ____________________________ ~ Al"PLICA.'H lNFOR."lA Tl ON Name : !"1ike Dug_aslJl Firm· Disb.ncb.v~ lfoilders, L.L.c: Addu:u: _________ _!4~4:129..,.St......,S;;z;o!.l...o,.....Js"-"a .... out .. a:i.....~F.s:eL..JPJ..r..._ ______________ _ PhonciFu/E-MaiJ, JQJ-478-8441 JQJ-296-0203 fay mikadugg~A@~a~ltor.com Architect / Planoin1 Consull:anl tnrorm:ation Contact Person Name :----------------------------- Fann. --------------------------------------Addreu . ________ ...:._ ___________________________ _ Pboac/Fax Number/E-mail ___________________________ _ Ea1laNria1 Coasult:aot Jarormadoa , k d Contact Penoa Name· R l. C wee Firm: . ----'cl.o.ilaur~r~oi;uJ.J)-....,1111-..1.X,,.auoJJg~ewiur:iii.cc:...------------ ::=;~:\/E-rriail· 303-980-0200"5,S,:g)iB~B,, ,YH~ 1 s~.~~t~:e~j 1:far:i!£~~~m PROPERTY OWNER l:'IFOR..~ATION: LiSl Lepl ..-... Olld oddrns ohU penons uui compo,un wllo bold aa &111cret1 In die herein dcoc:nbcd property. whelhcr .. owner, ffl0'1Pt10r, 1 .... ,, oprio,,ft, holclenordnd(1) oltn111. occ. l'or corporate owners or parmenltips, anachcd scpuatc she-er ii~. JndJ,-idual(sJ Phone·----------------Nur.c: ----------------Finn:-------------------------------------- Addrc11 : ------------------------------------- Corporatloa/ParlAersbip Name of Corporauoa/Pannenbip•_;:;.;.;::..;~;;..::=;..:.-=-,...:::..::.,;=:.;;:=..L....;L;..:..• =L~·..;:C:,;•:.,_--....,,...,.......,,...,....,--, AddcesstCi1y1st:arc1Zip : ----=1..1..i....eil...._-1.1.1.1a.11....J1.&.....M:.i...e ..... -iiE1o1,n11,g1,,l1.Je1:.11w~o;uo,11di.1..,.,~c..io"-J;6uOLl.u.lJJP Stare oflle;jsrrarion· -----'...UU-1..U...<M.a.U.----------------------- Nu,xs ofOfficcn/Pannm Ni ch~al Dugg~A ( SigAor) (Pleueindi~tewbo .. Title Patrick Duggan will be s1e,w,111ny AC"•rnenrs 11 necessary) Troy Peterson Nar:iagiAg Na111bar Tille Managing Member Member CERTIFICATION: I hereby eent~ !bar, IO tlul 11.i ofmy ltnowleclp and belW. all lft(-..doft 111pplled wttll this appllcarioa 11 rruc a,,d accurate a,,d ehar COllllftt ormo,c pertOIU llrtt4 -.... ...;---Ille--actloa ...,., .._Uy be aceompli>hcd, l\u been pwttcd. Add 1nonal pcrmiu,oa b """'by-tad "'die City oll!ftsleweod sa/r,o ph:,,,lcally inspect dw ... l.,j ..:t prop,nty IDd <.:ab pliotolll"ll)hs :a, " for casa. \nbd\f"04,lpQdmin1 tonns\l1n.d 4c-v•lopnwnc .app <Soc J&n1,1,&I')' l. 19\17 -oJ ' • • • ORDINANCE NO . SERIES OF 2004 BY AUTHORITY ·" INTRODUCED BY COUNClL MEMBER~~~~~~ AN ORDINANCE APPROVING THE ENGLEWOOD ESTATES PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD) AT 1296 WEST QUINCY A VENUE IN THE CITY OF ENGLEWOOD, COWRADO. WHEREAS, Distinctive Builders, L.L.C., owner of the property at 1296 West Quincy Avenue, Englewood, Colorado, submitted an application to rezone the property from R-1-C Single-Family Residence District to PUD and to subdivide the property contained within the PUD; and WHEREAS, the Englewood Estates Subdivision divides the site commonly addressed at 1296 West Quincy Avenue into seven single-family building sites and establishes a private one-way street, known as West Quincy Circle, to provide access to the proposed development; and WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission held a Public Hearing on February 3, 2004 and took testimony on the subject property which is currently wned R-1-C Single-Family Residence District; and WHEREAS , the Planning & Zoning Commission recommended approval of the PUD with the following conditions : I. Applicant shall obtain and provide documentation for the utility easement for the water line on the adjoining property along the west property line . 2. Fence along West Quincy Avenue cannot be constructed within 20 feet of the West Quincy Circle propeny line . 3. PUD District Plan -Development Standard A. states: "General Regulations : The Provisions found in this Zone District shall be subject to the requirements and standards for Zone District R-1-C of the Englewood Municipal Code as amended, unless otherwise provided for in this PUD or an amendment hereto." WHEREAS, all of the requirements have been addressed; and WHEREAS, the Commission recommends approval of this Planned Unit Development; NOW , THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ENGLEWOOD, COLORADO, AS FOLLOWS : ~. The Planned Unit Development, for propeny numbered 1296 West Quincy Avenue, in th e City of Englewood, Colorado, is hereby approved . Englewood Estates Planned Unit Development plan is available for viewing in the Englewood City Clerk's Office, 1000 Englewood Parkw ay, Englewood , Colorado. Introduced, read in full , and passed on first reading on the 21st day of June, 2004 . -1- ' ..... .. t • • Published as a Bill for an Ordinance on the 25th day of June, 2004 . ATTEST : Douglas Garrett, Mayor Loucrishia A. Ellis, City Clerk I, Loucrishia A. Ellis, City Clerk of the City of Englewood, Colorado, hereby certify that the above and foregoing is a true copy of a Bill for an Ordinance, introduced, read in full, and passed on first reading on the 21" day of June, 2004. Loucrishia A. Ellis -2- • t .. • • ORDINANCE.NO. ~ SERIES OF 2004 ·• • BY AUTHORITY 0 CJ COUNCIL BILL NO. 26 INTRODUCED BY COUNCIL MEMBER BRADSHAW AN ORDINANCE AUTIIORIZING AN INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF LITTLETON, COLORADO AND THE CITY OF ENGLEWOOD PERTAINING TO THE "SECOND AMENDMENT 10 AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE cmES OF LITTLETON AND ENGLEWOOD, COLORADO, FOR JOINT WASTEWATER TREATMENT FACILmES." WHEREAS, the City of Englewood and the City of Littleton are joint owners of the Joint-Use Wastewater Treatment Plant, each owning and entitled to fifty percent {50%) of its operating capacity; and WHEREAS, by agreements dated July 2, 1973 and December 6, 1982 (amended May 7, 1984), the City of Englewood agreed to sell a one-half interest in the Bi-City Treatment Plant; and WHEREAS the Joint Use Agreement anticipated acquisition of property to accommodate planned expansions of the Joint-Use Wastewater Treatment Plant; and WHEREAS, the City of Englewood has agreed to transfer to the City of Littleton a one-half interest in and to said real property pursuant to said agreements; and WHEREAS, the actual ownership of the real estate and existing or future improvements on the site, shall be in tenancy in common between the Cities; and WHERAS, Englewood shall be repaid for fifty percent (50%) of all acquisition costs, including appraisals and condemnation costs; and WHEREAS, the Cities desire to formally provide for utilization of the property associated with the Englewood Wastewater Treatment Plant for future use as an expansion site for the Joint Use Wastewater Treatment Plant; and WHEREAS, the Cities desire to clarify current uses as well as anticipated uses due to the recent acquisition of the Herbertson Lease by the City of Englewood; OW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ENGLEWOOD, COLORADO, AS FOLLOWS: Section I . The City Council of the City of Englewood, Colorado hereby authorizes the Intergovernmental Agreement entitled "Second Amendment To Agreement Between The Cities Of Littleton and Englewood, Colorado, For Joint Wastewater Treatment Facilities" between the City,"lf Littleton and the City of Englewood , a co py of which is marked as "Attachment I" and attached hereto . Section 2. The Mayor and the City Clerk are hereby authorized to sign and attest said Intergovernmental Agreement on behalf of the City of Englewood. -1- ' .... ·' • • Introduced, read in full, and passed on first reading on the 7th day of June, 2004. Published as a Bill for an Ordinance on the 11th day of June, 2004 . Read by title and passed on final reading on the 21st day of June, 2004. Published by title as Ordinance No . _, Series of 2004, on the 25th day of June, 2004 . ATTEST: Douglas Garrett, Mayor Loucrishia A . Ellis, City Clerk I, Loucrishia A. Ellis, City Clerk of the City of Englew(!Od, Colorado, hereby certify that the above and foregoing is a true copy of the Ordinance passed on fmal reading and published by title as Ordinance No . _, Series of 2004 . Loucrisbia A. Ellis -2- • • -- • • SECOl'ID AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT BETWEEN 1llE Crr,ES D ~----l_J OF LI1TLETON AND ENGLEWOOD.._ COLORADO, FOR JOINT WASTEWATER TREATMENT FACILITIES . . AGREEMENT made this __ day of 200_ by and between the CITY OF LITTLETON, COLORADO, hereinafter referred to as "Littleto""• and the CITY OF ENGLEWOOD, COLORADO, hereinafter referred to as "Englc;wood". WHEREAS, Section 18(2)(a) and (b) of Article XIV of the Colorado Constitution and Section 29-1-201,,c;:.R.s., pcnnii and encourage governments to enter into con~ to make the most effective use of their resources for the benefit of the public; and WHEREAS, Section 29-1-203, C.R.S., authori.ie, the_ State of Colorado and ita political subdivisions to enter into contracts to provide functions or services, including the sharing of costs of such functions or services, which each of the contracting parties may be authorized to provide; and WHEREAS, on the 6• day of December, 1982, Littleton and Englewood (hereinafter collectively referred to as the "Cities") entered intQ an agreemen of ownership and operation of the Bi-City Wastewater Treatment Plant; and WHEREAS, the basic concept of this Agreement is that ncith« City shall be a customer of the other, but rather a joint facility shall be constructed and operated with OOllltrUCtion coats, costs of additions, and costs of operation and maintenance being divided between them in a fair and equitable manner as set forth hereinafter with greater specificity; and WHEREAS, the Cities, by previous agreement, are joint owners of the Joint-Use Wastewater Treatment Plant, each owning and entided to fifty percent (50%) of its opcraling capacity of approximately 20 million gallom per day (MOD) with Littleton entided to approximately 10 MOD and Englewood being cntided to approximately 10 MOD; 111d WHEREAS, the Joint Use Agreement anticipated acquisition ofpropcny to accommodate planned expansions of the Joint-Use Wastewater Treatment Plant; and WHEREAS, by agreements dated July 2, 1973 and December 6, 1982 (amended May 7, 1984), the City of Englewood agreed to sell a one-half interest in the Bi-City Treatment Plmt; and WHEREAS, the City of Englewood has agreed to transfer to the City of Litdcton a one- half interest in and to said real property pursuant to said agreements; and WHEREAS, the actual ownership of the real estate and improvements on the site, or that arc in the future constructed thereon, shall be in tenancy in common between the Cities; 111d WHEREAS, land to be acquired shall be purchased at a price agreed upon 111d COIIC\lrTed on by the two Cities; and 1 ' • • I CJ. WHEREAS, in the event Englewood cannot acquire the property by purchase and negotiation, Englewood shall proceed with condemnation of the properties, and the two Cities shall cooperate with each other in such action; and · WHEREAS, Englewood shall be repaid for fifty percent (50"/o) of all acquisition costs, including appraisals and condemnation; sod WHEREAS, the Cities desire to formally ptovide for utilization of tbe property associated with the Englewood Wastewater Treatment Plant for future use u an expansion site for the Joint Use Wutewatcr Treatment Plant; and '' WHEREAS, the Cities desire to clarify current uses u well u anticipated uses due to the recent acquisition of the Herbertson Leise by tbe City of Englewood; NOW,"THEREFORE, IN CONSIDERATION of the mutual promises and covenants hereinafter recited, the parties agrei,: , · Section 1. The current ownership of the property used by the Bi-City Wastewater Treatment Plant is II follows: Property held jointly by Ljttletpn/EngJewood: Exhibit A Property held soleJy by the City of Englewood: Exlulnt A Section 2. Current uses on the property held by the Bi-City Wutewater Tratmeat Plant sre shown on Exlulnt B: Section 3: After the pun:bue of the Herber11oa property by the City ofl!qlewood and the reimbursement of$462,639.30 by the City of Littleton owncnbip of the Bi-Ci\y Tteatment facility property will be u follows: Property held solely by the City of Englewood: Exlu1>it C Property held jojntly by Ljttleton/En@Iewood: Exlu1>it C ,. ·' ·'- • • Section 4. Future uses on the property held by the Bi-City Wastewater Treatment Plant are shown on Exllllnt D .. CITY OF ENGLEWOOD, COLORADO A'ITEST: By: _________ _ Douglas Garrett, Mayor Loucrishia A. Ellis, City Clerk CITY OF ~ON, COLORADO A'ITEST: BY.~-------~--,MayCII' , City Clerk · , . ' ·4' ... f! -.. • • -- ! I .... \ "' .. 31: .i I 0 .. .. > ;i " .. ' J y 1 ' C o ._, I I ...; . I I I \ ' I I I I I ' ' I I \ \ ' ' \ A .... "' C .. .i 0 .. .. > ;i .. ~ i:::s ~ I· .. ..... ...; a\. I \~ -.s::: I -/ ;:: \ 'I C I . I V) \ I \ \ \ \ \ ·' \ \ ·• • • r ,.._\' i I \ I ~ _ __) JOINT WASTEWATER TREATMENT FACILITY Exhibit A -Current Ownerships City of Englewood (from Herbertson) 17.9 aaes \ City of Englewood 3.4 acres .:_:: .::..: .... ,::y:_;~-:: ··"' ·~ . ·, Uttleton /er! -.. , : ., .. · .. io.a ·a l}t.J~J~~il t~~tiiJiiljj~t-·-~_r-_,_, __________ _ ,;.,"J',·-~~I?./ ~ng-~~. tjj;f :!f iiI~~ i _/) r, -----J \~ ,,.,,--- ( / ,( SCALE : 1 Inch • 300 feet ~ Property held jointly by Littleton / Enc;ilewood C:=J Property held solely by the C,ty ol Enc;ilewood UV!SfD DKfMll(ll 11 , lllOl ' • • • I I I I \ \ \ 1 Serv ice Center 2 Ut!Htt• 3 Weld ing Shop 4 '1cwncar Srorage 5 equ ipment Storage 6 ,.,.,,mat Shelter •• • • JOINT WASTEWATER TREATMENT FACLTTY Exhibit B -Current Use ;, II i' 14 " • Ill 1' ,: [pl j: 0 CJ C· uu ~Cantv eon.truc:tlon Yardi ·: •• 1 .... ····.:. . . ~ -~ • j! .u ,, • 7 P1rl<sG'""houM I Storage lldQ 9 Q\IOnMt Hut IO Tut 5torlQI • • • 11 Safety SeMc• 5~ 12 ,.,. Storago ,1 • s.w:. eentar· .......... ..... 13 s.lt~ 14 CNo,..,. ~ TW*I IS~llclt 11 ...... ~ ... 1,c.... .......... 1••--... II N ! SCAL!: 1 Inch • 300 !'Mt A -' -,1.- ltSollclllHandlng... 2S~ ..... JO '*""'-I Nr .......... lNdaeow 31 SOldl C.... T.,,.. 21 ,.-,a.-.. u Ml'llllic~ u....,...r....,.,... M~a.... ' • • \ \ N A ·• • • JOINT WASTEWATER TREATMENT FACILITY Exhibit C -Ownerships after transfer to Littleton -' -1, ._,I \ \ I \ City of Englawood 8.9 acres SCAL!: 1 lnc:h • 300 feet llfVISfO OfClMat• 11 , 100) . ' / / I I C:J Property held jOlntly by Uttleton / l!nglewood ~ Property held jointly by Uttteton / l!nglewood (2004 ~t) C:J Proi,ertv held solely by the Oty ol l!nglewood ' • • 1 ~tee Ce<°>tff 2 -3 e,d 51,op 4 -.cw StoreQC s !Qul~Sto.-. , Ano"'lll5'1eiler JOINT WASTEWATER TREATMENT FAOLITY Exhibit D -Future Use ' ,.,... Grftnhouse I Storate llclO • (luonSC Hut 10 ~ 11 s.Nt't SeNlc• Storage 1! ,.,. SlO<a9e J L/U ~Cj] IO ~---..J,---- ll Salt Dome lt ·-Admlll -25 ._..,., OM1W9 14 C-.. ,_...,,. SUIIOfl 20 ~ ......... lldt H Tl'tclllllll ,_. 1S ~ COrCKt T...... 21 ~ NI flolailoft lNclo.-27 IOlldl C:-"- 11 OllllftC1loft 11c111 12 ..._., o.tlef9 JI 0.illll'WII• ,-_ 17 Sludge~... 2) AeralllC ~ 11 C-.. ..,,... ... 24 _.,..,. ll'lcldlnt ,._ t • • BY AUTHORITY ~ SUBMITI'1N01'0 A VO'l1! Cit COUNCIL BILL NO. 29 INTRODUCED BY COUNCIL MEMBER WOWSYN OF THE CITY OF ENGLEWOOD AT THE NEXT SCHSDULED MUNJGIPAL BL~ A PROPOSBD ANBNINtliN'f '8 AAJIE!UA; 'ftcTloN 12, OF THE ENGLEWOOD HOME RULE CHARTER. WHEREAS, when the TABOR Constitutional Amendment (The Taxpayer's Bill of Rights) was approved by Colorado voters it created an election timing problem for statutory cities and some Home Ruic municipalities; and WHEREAS, TABOR provides for an election on the "first Tuesday in November of odd-numbered years"; and WHEREAS, the City of Englewood Home Ruic Charter states "a general municipal election shall be held on the Tuesday after the first Monday in November, l 9S9, and biennially thereafter"; and WHEREAS, without this amendment to the current 1anguap of Section 12 of the Englewood Home R¥Ic Charter in years when the first Tuaday in November will not be preccdcd by a Monday the City of Englewood would have to c:oaduct Eqlcwood's general municipal election a week later than the state' 1 gc:ncral lllllllic:ipal election; and WHEREAS, by the passage of this Ordinance would allow the City of EnaJewood to conduct their elections on the same date u the State election which will facilitate consolidated elections; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ENGLEWOOD, COLORADO THAT: Sectjon 1. · There is hereby submitted to the rcaistcred electors of the City of Englewood at the next scheduled municipal election on November 2, 2004, a proposed amendment to the Charter of the City of Enalcwood, which would amend the language of Article I, Section 12, lo read u follows -1- • • Question No. __ Shall the Home Rule Charter of the City of Englewood, Article I, Section 12, be amended to read as follows : 12 : ARTICLE I. GENERAL PROVISIONS Municipal elections. A general municipal election shall be held on Ille '.fliestiay after Ille fil'llt Me11tiay i11 Ne, emhe,, I 9S9, 811d hie1111ially lhel'llllfter dates specified jn State IAw . Special municipal elections shall be held in accordance with the provisions of this Charter. The polling places shall be open from seven A .M. to seven P.M. election days . Yes No Sectjon 2. Each elector voting at said election and desirous of voting shall indicate his/her choice by depressing the appropriate counter of the voting machine or by the appropriate marking upon paper ballots where used . Sectjon 3. The proper officials of the City of Englewood shall give notice of said next scheduled municipal election, such notice shall be published in the manner and for the length of time required by law, and the ballots cut al such election sbal.l be canvassed and the result ascertained, determined, and certified u required by law. Sectjon 4. Only if the question is approved by the registen:d electors of the City of Englewood shall the Section be amended and the Charter, as amended, certified to the Secretary of State. • SecJjon S. For purposes of Section 1-11-203.S, C .R .S., this Ordinance sbal.l serve to set the title and content of die ballot issue set forth herein and the ballot title for such question shall be the text of the question itself. Any petition to contest the form or content of the ballot title may be filed with the District Court and a copy served on the City Clerk within five days after the title of the ballot question is set by th e City Council on final reading of this Ordinance. Sec1jo n 6. If any secti on, paragraph, clause, or other portion of thi s Ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid or unenforceable, the invalidity or unenforceability shall not affect any of th e remaining portions of this Ordinance. Introduced, read in full , and passed on first reading on the 7th day of June, 2004. -2- ' ... .. • • Published as a Bill for an Ordinance on the 11th day of June, 2004. Read by title and passed on final reading on the 21st day of June, 2004. Published by title as Ordinance No . _, Series of 2004, on the 25th day of June, 2004 . Douglas Garrett, Mayor ATTEST : Loucrishia A. Ellis, City Clerk I, Loucrishia A. Ellis, City Clerk of the City of Englewood, Colorado, hereby certify that the above and foregoing is a true copy of the Ordinance passed on final reading and published by title as Ordinance No. _, Series of 2004. Loucrishia A. Ellis -3- • • ·• • 0 ... BY AUTHORITY Ol:DINANCE NO. SERIES OF 2004 - COUNCIL BILL NO. 30 INTRODUCED BY COUNCIL MEMBER DRADSHA W AN ORDINANCE SUBMITTING TO A VOTE OF THE REGISTERED ELECTORS OF THE CITY OF ENGLEWOOD A BALLOT QUESTION AT THE NEXT SCHEDULED MUMICIPAL &LECTION TO SELL OR TRANSFER PROPE!R'J'Y OWNED BY THE ENOLEWOOD WATER AND SEWER urn:JTIEs TO THE CITIES OF ENGLEWOOD A!ffi U'm.B'roN FOR USE BY THE LITTLETON/ENGLEWOOD WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT. WHEREAS, Section 18(2)(a) and (b) of Article XIV of the Colorado Constitution and Section 29-1-201, C.R.S., permit and encourage governments to enter into contracts to make the most effective use of their resources for the benefit of the public; and WHEREAS, Section 29-1-203, C .R .S., authorizes the State of Colorado and its political subdivisions to enter into contracts to provide functions or services, including the sharing of costs of such functions or services, which each of the contracting parties may be authorized to provide; and WHEREAS, on the 61b day of December, 1982, Littleton and Englewood (hereinafter collectively referred to as the "Cities") entered into an agreement of ownership and operation of the Bi-City Wastewater Treatment Plant; and WHEREAS, the basic concept of this Agreement is that neither City shall be a customer of the other, but rather a joint facility shall be constructed and operated with construction costs, costs of additions, and costs of operation and maintenance being divided between them in a fair and equitable manner as set forth hereinafter with greater specificity; and WHEREAS, the Cities, by previous agreement, are joint owners of the Wastewater Treatment Plant, each owning and entitled to fifty percent (SO"/o) of its operating capacity of approximately 20 million gallons per day (MGD) with Littleton entitled to appr9ximately 10 MGD and Englewood being entitled to approximately 10 MGD; and WHEREAS, the Joint Use Agreement anticipated acquisition of property to accommodate planned expansions of the Joint-Use Wastewater Treatment Plant; and WHEREAS, by agreements dated July 2, 1973 and December 6, 1982 (amended May 7 , 1984), the City of Englewood agreed to sell a one-half interest in the Bi-City Treatment Plant; and WHEREAS, subject to voter approval, the City of Englewood bas apecd to transfer to the City of Littleton a one-half interest in and to said real property purs uant to sai d agreements; and -1- t • • • - ·• • • 0 WHEREAS, the actual ownership of the real estate and improvements on the site, or that are in the future constructed thereon, shall be in tenancy in common between the Cities; and WHEREAS, Englewood shall be repaid for fifty percent (50%) of all acquisition costs, including appraisals and condemnation; and WHEREAS, the Cities desire to clarify current uses as well as anticipated uses due to the recent acquisition of the Herbertson Lease located on South Platte River Drive by tbe City of Englewood; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ENGLEWOOD, COLORADO THAT: Section 1. There is hereby submitted to the registered electors of the City of Englewood at the next scheduled municipal election on November 2, 2004, a ballot question to sell or transfer property owned by the Englewood Water and Sewer Utilities to the cities of Englewood and Littleton for use by the Littleton/Englewood Wastewater Treatment Plant, to read as follows: Question No. __ Shall the property described in Ordinance No. 30, Series of 2004 be sold or transferred from the City of Englewood Water and Sewer Utilities to the cities of Englewood and Littleton, jointly, for the use of the Littleton/Englewood Wastewater Treatment Plant? Yes No Sectjon 2. Each elector voting at said election and desirous of voting shall indicate his/her choice by depressing the appropriate counter of the voting machine or by the appropriate marking upon paper ballots where used. Section 3. The proper officials of the City of Englewood shall give notice of said next scheduled municipal election, such notice shall be published in the manner and for the length of time required by law, and the ballots cast at such election shall be canvassed and the result ascertained, determined, and certified as required by law . Section 4 . For purposes of Section 1-11-203 .5, C.R.S ., this Ordinance shall serve to se t the title and content of the ballot issue set forth herein and the ballot title for such question shall be the text of the question itself. Any petition to contest the form or content of the ballot title may be filed with the District Court and a copy served on the City Clerk within five days after the title of the ballot question is set by the City Council on final reading of this Ordinance . -2- . .. I- 0 . ' ... • • Section S. If any section, paragraph, clause, or other portion of this Ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid or unenforceable, the invalidity or unenforceability shall not affect any of the remaining portions of this Ordinance. Introduced, read in full, and passed on first reading on the 7th day of June, 2004. Published as a Bill for an Ordinance on the 11 •h day of June, 2004. Read by title and passed on final reading on the 21st day of June, 2004. Published by title as Ordinance No. ___J Series of 2004, on the 25th day of June, 2004. Douglas Garrett, Mayor ATTEST: Loucrishia A. Ellis, City Clerk I, Loucrishia A. Ellis, City Clerk of the City of Englewood, Colorado, hereby certify that the above and foregoing is a true copy of the Ordinance passed on final reading and published by title as Ordinance No. ___J Series of 2004. Loucrishia A. Ellis -3- .. t ... • • - '· COUNCIL COMMUNICATION Date Agenda Item Subject June 21 , 2004 11 Ci Development Review Application Fee Schedule INITIATED BY Community Development I STAFF SOURCE Anthonv I. Fruchtl Planner PREVIOUS couNqL ACTION On July 21, 2003, Council approved Resolution 70, Series 2003, which updated previous application fess . RECOMMENDED ACTION Staff recommends that Council consider and approve by resolution the proposed Development Review Application Fee Schedule, as attached with Exhibit A. BACKGROUND The Unified Development Code (UDC) adopted on February 23, 2004, required modifications to the previously adopted Development Review Application Fee Schedule. The proposed modifications are highlighted in gray on the attached Exhibit A and are described as follows : Landscape Fee in lieu Thi s fee was previously located within the text of the landscape requirements of the former Zoning Ordinance. It has been moved to be included with other fees, and is increased from $1.15 to $1.50. Limited Use Permit Thi s is a ~ land use application that was created with the adoption of the UDC, and was in advert e ntl y le ft out the fee schedule prev iously adopted . The application fee is consistent wi th si milar a pplications requiring similar de grees of review, administration and recording. Adminis trative Adjustment St aff is proposing a redyctjo n in th e req uire d fee from $22 5 to $1 25. Th e proposed re du c ti o n will bring the appl ication fee in line wi th the established fees for both a variance and an a p peal. Te mporary Use Permit Staff is pro po sing a reduction in th e required fee from $150 to $75. The proposed re duct io n in the required fee brings th e a ppl ication fee in line with si m b r applicatiom requiring similar degrees of review, adm inis trati on an d recording. FINANCIAL IMPACTS Th e pro posed fees in cre a e th e pote ntial for City reven ues. AITACHMENJS Ex hibit A: Dev lo pme nt Review Appl ication Fee Schedule Resolut ion ' ... •' • • USvt,UTION NO. __ SERIES OF 2004 A RESOLtmoN APPROVING THE DEVELOPMENT REVIE\¥-APPf.teNl'K)N;JililR SCHEDULE FOR COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT. WHEREAS, the development application and associated fees were established by City Council in the early l 980's; and WHEREAS, City staff conducted a survey for assessment of fifteen municipalities along the front range regarding their development fees; and WHEREAS, the Englewood City Council passed Resolution No. 70, Series 2003, which updated previous application fees; and WHEREAS, the City of Englewood adopted the Unified Development Code (UDC) which requires additional modifications to the Development Review Application Fee Schedule so that it is compatible with the UDC; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ENGLEWOOD, COLORADO, THAT: Section I . City Council hereby approves the Development Review Application Fee Schedule, attached hereto as Exhibit A . ADOPTED AND APPROVED this 21st day of June, 2004. ATTEST: Douglas Garrett, Mayor Loucrishia A . Ellis , City Clerk l, Loucrishia A. Ellis, City Clerk for the City of Englewood, Colorado, hereby certify the above is a true copy of Resolution No. ___, Series of 2004. Loucrisbia A. Ellis, City Clerk • • 0 City of Englewood u D EXHIBIT A Development Review Application Fee Schedule (Changes are in gray. All other fees remain the same.) Zonin2/Rezonin2 Annlication Tvoe Annllcatlon Fee Amendment to an Approved PUD or TSA $600 + $300/acre Expansion Base District Rezone $600 + $300/acre Over All Conceot Plan $750 Planned Unit Development $1450 Transit Station Area $1450 L d S bd 0 • ' an u IVISIOn an dD eveopmen Annlication Tvoe Annllcatlon Fee Administrative Property Combination $175 Administrative Subdivision S200 Annexation $650 + $300/acre Boundary Line Adjustment $240 ., Maior Subdivision S1000 Minor Subdivision $600 Vacation of Easement $125 Vacation of Ri2ht of Wav $450 W 'tt R ri en eaues s Aoolication Tvoe Annllcatlon Fee Address Assi2nment Reauest $50 Chan2e of Address Reauest S50 Encroachment A11.reement $50 Encroac hment A2reement · Citv Council $150 Flood Plain Certificate of Compliance S200 Nonconformin2 Use Re1dstration sso Written Zonin11. Verification sso ' .. ·' • • 0 /1.1//tOVf !5 i1 J/iJ~ fo/!IIIS ;1(" foi, ~ \ .S»"-(_ J.l 'Pub Good evening Mayor and members of City Council before you is Council Bill No. 33 -A recommendation from the Community Development Department to adopt a bill for an ordinance approving the Planned Unit Development for Englewood Estates. Staff requests that City Council schedule a public hearing for July 19, 2004 to gather input on the proposed Planned Unit Development. If Council would like, staff is prepared to give a short overview of the project and answer any questions. The subject property is a vacant parcel of approximately 1.19 acres. Located at 1296 West Quincy Avenue approximately 1000 feet east if the intersection of Quincy and Windermere Access to the proposed development will be through a private Drive (West Quincy Circle) accessed from West Quincy Avenue . Adjacent properties to the north, east, and south are zoned R,-1-C Single-Family Unit Residential District, and contain single-family homes . Adjacent properties to the west are zoned 1-1 and are used as automotive sales and engine repair . The Englewood Estates application proposed 7 single family lots ranging is size from 5,116 square feet to 6,750 square feet. The average lot size of the PUD is 5,784 square feet, which is comparable to the adjacent R-1-C Single Family Residence which requires a minimum 6,000 sq ft. The proposed height o' the principal structures is 32 feet which is the same as residential maximum heights of the Unified Development Code. Setbacks are established by development envelopes specific to each lot as shown on the PUD District Plan . Please note that although the development envelope is the area in which development may occur, provisions within the PUD District Plan -Development Standards preclude the development envelope from being fully developed . Additional provisions to the Development Envelope require garage doors to be set back a minimum 24 feet from West Quincy Circle . Landscaping requirements are compatible with Section 16-6-7:: landscaping and Screening of th e Unified Development Code . .· .. ! I ,,. ,,. ' • • fA-/ I.<,., bi {o.vts ol,.l -~ ~dvl'- Good Evening Mayor and members of City Council, before you is Agenda Hem 11 c i, a resolution to approve the proposed Development Review Applications and Fee Schedule. Staff recommends that the City Council consider and approve by resolution the proposed Development Review Application fee Schedule u outHned in Exhibit A. With adoption of the Unified Development Code (UOC) on February 23, 2004, some modifications to the previously adopted Development Review Application Fee Schedule have been identified. landscape fee in lieu This fee was previously located within the text of the landscape requirements of the former Zoning Ordinance. It has been moved from the text of the UOC to be induded with other fees, and is increased from $1.15 to $1.50. limited Use Permit This is a nm land use application that was created with the adoption of the UOC, The application fee is consistent with similar applications requiring similar degrees of review, administration and recording. Administrative Adiustment Staff is proposing a r,:dyctjon in the required fee from $225 to $125. The proposed reduction brings the application fee in line with similar applications requiring similar degrees of review, administration and recording. Temporary Use Pennit Staff is proposing a r,:dyctjon in the required fee from $150 to $75. The proposed reduction brings the application fee in line with similar applications requiring similar degrees of review, administration and recording. ·• • • COUNCIL COMMUNICATION Date Agenda Item Subject June 21, 2004 11 C ii South Broadway Plan INITIATED BY STAFFSOURa Community Development Department Mark Graham, Senior Planner couNqL GOALS AND PRMQUS COUNCIL ACTION • Council approved the Englewood Comprehensive Plan June 2003. • Council initiated the South Broadway Plan in the 4th Quarter of 2002. • Council consi dered the draft South Broadway Plan in Study Sessions on March 15, and April 20, 2004. RECOMMENDED ACTION; Staff recommends that City Council accept the Findings of Fact and recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission, and approve a resolution adopting the South Broadway Plan as a Strategic Plan implem nting Englewood's Comprehensive Plan, Roadmap Englewood. BAQ<GIOUNQ; ·----~ The South Broadwa Plan was initiated by the City Council during the 4th Quarter of 2002. At that time th e goals of the proposed Comprehensive Plan provided a general vision for Business and Employment. Housing. Transportation, as well as the notion of "Revitalization, Redevelopment and Rein\-ntion. • Sh Broadway corridor-specific objectives were identified at the outset (and later dda pt ed) based on analysis and public participation : A. Re\-italize the corridor B. Support redevelopment of under-used properties C. Support multiple modes of transportation D. Increase diversification of City tax base E. Improve the variety of housing types and opportunities for workforce housing F. Pre pare five and ten year public and private investment strategies for the corridor R map Engl wood, (Roadmap) identified a series of "Community Challenges# facing first ring uburbs hke Englewood. The challenges include fiscal stress and aging infrastructure; particularly the ffldnd for h,gh levels of services, infrastructure and facilities supported by a small tax base. To ddr th challenges, Roadmap establishes goals such as increasing and diversifying the local tax nd ma inta ining or repla cing aging infrastructure to avoid deterioration and decline. The South Br dw.i Pl an supports these Roadmap policies by developing strategies to address the challenges. th , Ro adma p goals suggest: increasing the attractiveness of the corridor; improving walk-ability; ing the d esi gn requirements of the auto with those of transit users; and, specifically enhancing ped tnan amenities. ' · .. .•' '. f . • I • • 0 ·• ,. • 0 • " 2 Public Process The public was included throughout the South Broadway planning process. The public input sessions during the summer of 2003 were held at Vectra Bank and Nathan's. Those sessions were focused on business and property investment issues and the notification included all Broadway businesses and property owners. Draft and revised plans were also presented at several Alliance for Commerce in Englewood (ACE) meetings. Broadway Plan meetings held in the fall included residents and residential property owners within three blocks of Broadway. Questions and answers from the two fall meetings were mailed to attendees and posted on the City web site. An April 2004 meeting was held with notice in the Englewood Citizen and with direct invitations and copies of the revised plan to those who had attended earlier meetings. About three weeks before the meeting, the revised South Broadway Plan was posted on the City web site. Copies of the Plan were also emailed to the Auto Use Committee, a group of businesses appointed by Council to an ad hoc committee to discuss issues related to auto uses on Broadway. Legal notice was published in the Englewood Herald on April 30, 2004. In addition to the meetings held with the residents, businesses and other stakeholders, the Plan was discussed in several study sessions with the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council. ANALYSIS Maintaining and enhancing the quality of life in Englewood requires an interesting variety of businesses in a place with a sense of culture and history and opportunities to choose entertainment. retail and services. Public and private investment along Broadway is an indicator of Broadway's vitality . Property investments provide revenues that primarily fund the School District and County services. The City conversely is highly dependent upon retail sales tax revenues funding City services, infrastructure and facilities. Enhancing the retail function of Broadway is therefore an Important goal of the South Broadway Plan. The six objectives and their related strategies support that goal. Research for the South Broadway Plan included a broad range of topics, including: the local and extended trade area, urban design, buildings and infrastructure condition, property valuation and sales tax revenues. The market analysis considered the supply and demand for various goods, services and housing on Broadway. Possible programs for attracting investment in buildings and infrastructure were discussed with property and business owners along Broadway. Following the stakeholder meetings with the residents, however, it became apparent that the Plan would need to be re-written. Substantive changes were made in respons e to the public participation and feedback from the Commission and Council. The changes w e re intended to be responsive to public concerns and result in a practical, strategic and simplified document. This Plan is intended to guide the City with Broadway development and fiscal issues. The preface to the revised South Broadway Plan is one page of Broadway history from 1864 to present. Reoccurring historical themes are discussed, such as the c hanging role of Broadway and c hanging transportation modes. Historic public investments in Broadway, for s idewalks, street lights , paving and flood control enhanced Broadway as a commercial corridor. The history highlights the changing character of Broadway as well as the important role of the City in land use decisions. It is intended to help us understand our future. FINANCIAL IMPACT; Infrastructure maintenance, repair and replacement projects will utilize Capital Improvement Project funds and potentially Concrete Utility funds . Attracting investments in property, improving the mix of re tail businesses and diversifying the sales tax base are goals for improving the City tax base . LIST OF AUACHMENTS; Findi ngs of Fact South Br oadway Plan Resolution ' ... ·' • • • ··fj.· .. ~ 0 CITY OF ENGLEWOOD PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION IN THE MATTER OF CASE #CP-2003-02 FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS RELATING TO THE SOUTH BROADWAY PLAN INITIATED BY: COMMUNITY DEVELOP~ENT DEPARTMENT 1000 ENGLEWOOD PARKWAY ENGLEWOOD, CO 80110 FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF THE CITY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION September 23. 2003 Commission Members Present: Adams, Bleile, Krieger, Mueller, Roth, Schum, Welker, Waggoner Commission Members Absent: Diekmeier May 18, 2004 Commission Members Present: Adams, Bleile, Krieger, Mosteller, Mueller, Roth, Schum, Welker Commission Members Absent: None This matter was heard before the City Planning and Zoning Commission on September 23, 2003 and May 18, 2004 in the City Council Chambers of the Englewood Civic Center. On September 23 , 2003, testimony was received from staff, Anne Ricker of Leland Consulting Group, Doug Cohn of Bonnie Brae Hobby Shop, Connie· Sanchez of Glass Warehouse, Jim Bahne of Valley Motors, Harry Lester of Harry's Specialty Cars, Bill Barrow of Colorado Auto Dealer Association, Scott Smolarczyk of 3195 South Acoma Street, and Pete H o rrigan of Just Right Motors. The Commission received notice of Public Hearing, the Staff Report, and a copy of the proposed South Broadway Plan, which were incorporated into and made a part of the record. On May 18, 2 004, testimony was received from staff and Doug Cohn of Bonnie Bae Hobby Shop . The Commission received proof of publication, the Staff Report, and a copy of the rev ised South Broadway Plan which were incorporated into and made a part of the rec ord. .... .. t • ' • -. ·• - • • After considering the statements of the witnesses, and reviewing the pertinent documents, the members of the City Planning and Zoning Commission made the following Findings and Conclusions. 1. 2. FINDINGS OF FACT THAT the Public Hearing on the South Broadway Plan was brought before the Planning Commission by the Department of Community Development, a department of the City of Englewood. THAT notice of the Public Hearings were published in the Englewood Herald on September 12, 2003 and April 30, 2004. 3. THAT public input sessions were conducted during the Summer of 2003 which focused on business and property investment issues, and the notification included all Broadway businesses and property owners. 4. THAT public meetings were held during the Fall of 2003, and the notification included residents and residential property owners within three blocks of Broadway. 5. THAT the Broadway Plan 2003 is consistent with Roadmap Englewood: 2003 Englewood Comprehensive Plan. 6. THAT the Planning and Zoning Commission discussed the South Broadway Plan at four study sessions: July 22, 2003, August 5, 2003, September 3, 2003, and April 20, 2004. 7. THAT on September 23, 2003 the Planning and Zoning Commission voted 6-2 to forward the South Broadway Plan to City Council with a recommendation to adopt the South Broadway Plan . 8 . THAT on October 21, 2003 the Planning and Zoning Commission voted 7-1 that a rehearing be held on the South Broadway Plan . 9. THAT based on further analysis and public participation, a revised South Broadway Plan was brought forward to the Planning and Zoning Commission on May 18, 2004. 10. THAT the South Broadway Plan objectives are to: • Revitalize the corridor • Support redevelopment of under-used properties • Support multiples modes of transportation • Increase diversification of City tax base • Improve the variety of housing types and opportunities for workforce housing • Prepare five and ten year public and private investment strategies for the corridor .,. ' . .. .. • • 0 CONCLUSIONS 1. THAT the proposed South Broadway Plan was brought before the Planning and Zoning Commission by the City of Englewood Department of Community Development 2. 3. THAT proper notice of the Public Hearings were given by publication in the Englewood Herald on September 12, 2003 and April 30, 2004 · THAT the South Broadway Plan is needed as a strategic plan that implements the 2003 Comprehensive Plan. DECISION THEREFORE, it is the decision of the City Planning and Zoning Commission that the South Broadway Plan, as revised and presented to the City Planning and Zoning Commission on May 18, 2004, should be referred to the City Council with a favorable recommendation. The decision was reached upon a vote on a motion made at the meeting of the City Planning and Zoning Commission on September 23, 2003, by Mr. Welker, seconded by Ms. Krieger, which motion states: AYES : NAYS : TO APPROVE THE BROADWAY PL.AN 2003 AND FORWARD IT TO QTY COUNCIL WITH THE PL.ANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION'S RECOMMENDATION TO ADOPT BROADWAY 2003 AS A STRATEGIC PL.AN THAT IMPLEMENTS THE 2003 COMPREHENSIVE PL.AN WITH THE FOLLOWING AMENDMENTS: 1. ON PAGE 30, CHANGE "STIES" TO "SITES." 2. ON PAGE 33, DEFINE "BRT. • 3. ON PAGE 34, CLARIFY ISSUE OF LODGING LAND USE. 4. ON PAGE 37, CHANGE COLORS ON LAND DISTRIBUTION MAP. 5. ON PAGE 39, DELETE LAST BULLET POINT Adams, Krieger, Mueller, Roth, Welker, Waggoner Bleile, Schum ABSTAIN : None ABSENT: Diekmeier Further, a decision was reached upon a vote on the motion made at the meeting of the City Planning and Zoning Commission on October 21, 2003, by Ms. Krieger, seconded by Mr. Roth , which motion states: A REHEARING BE HELD ON CASE #CP2003-02, BROADWAY PLAN 2003. t • • AYES: NAYS: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: Bleile, Oiekmeier, Krieger, Mueller, Roth, Schum, Welker Waggoner None Adams Further, a decision was reached upon a vote on a motion made at the meeting of the City Planning and Zoning Commission on May 16, 2004, by Ms. Mueller, seconded by Mr. Bleile, which motion states: TO FORWARD CASE #CP2003-02, SOUTH BROADWAY PLAN TO CITY COUNCIL WITH A RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL. AYES: NAYS: ABSTAIN: ABSENT : Adams, Bleile, Diekmeier, Krieger, Mosteller, Mueller, Roth, Schum, Welker None None None These Findings and Conclusions are effective as of the meeting on May t 6, 2004. BY ORDER OF THE CITY PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION Cyndi Krieger, Chair Y ' ~ SERIES OF 2004 A RESOLunON Al>OP'l1HO THE Sotmf J!ltt'()AfflrAY ft.AN'AS -A ffl:A'l'!Olt: PLAN / IMPLEMENTING THE ENGLEWOOD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. WHEREAS, The City Council of the City of Englewood, Colorado bas established goals for enhancing business and economic climate within Englewood; and WHEREAS, sales taxes are the single most important source of revenues for the General Fund that pay for essential and emergency services in Englewood; and WHEREAS, the South Broadway Plan articulates the goal of implementing a strategic plan for revitalizing the corridor, supporting redevelopment of under-used properties, supporting multiple modes of transportation, increasing diversification of City tax bue, improving the variety of housing types and opportunities for workforce housing and preparing five and ten year public and private invesbnent strategics for the corridor; and WHEREAS, the Englewood City Council provided opportunities for citizens, property owners and bus!llesses to read and comment on the South Broadway Plan; and WHEREAS, the Englewood Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval of the South Broadway Plan at its meeting of May 18, 2004; and WHEREAS, this South Broadway Plan is a strategic plan which will further develop the overall Englewood Comprehensive Plan; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT Rf,.SOL VED BY THE CITY COUNCll. OF THE CI1Y OF ENGLEWOOD, COLORADO, THAT: ~-The City Council of the City of Englewood, Colondo hereby adopCs tbe South Broadway Plan, attached hereto as Exhibit A, as a strategic plan to further clarify the Englewood Comprehensive Plan. ADOPTED AND APPROVED TIDS 21 ST day of June, 2004. ATIEST: Douglas Garrett, Mayor Loucrishia A. Ellis, City Cleric 1, Loucrishia A. Ellis, City Cleric for the City of Englewood, Colorado, hereby certify the above is a true copy of Re sol ution No ._, Series of 2004 . Loucrilbia A . Ellis, City Clerk ' ..... .. • • --·• • • f, South Broadway Plan June 21, 2004 l ' \ h~s .. ..J \--. t_J A Strategic Plan for the Broadway Corridor Supporting Englewood's 2003 Comprehensive Plan, Roadmap Englewood Community Development Department City of Englewood, Colorado ' • • ·• • • CJ Histo,y Broadway has been changing ever since it was surveyed and carved in the sod by a horse drawn buggy. The dirt path was leveled by a log in 1864, just six years after gold was discovered in Little Dry Creek above the South Platte River . The new Broadway road linked sparsely populated senlements and orchards along Little Dry Creek to the more populous Denver at Cherry Creek. Before the IUm of the 20• century, Broadway became the road to recreation for Denver residents and Fort Logan soldiers. leisure pursuits included picnics, dancing. and beer gardens. Roadhouses and saloons were said to have flourished with gambling. shell games and drinking. Around the tum of the 20" century, the area south of Denver began to attract residents looking for affordable land for homes and healthy places to raise a family. It's reported that the major cause for forming the Oty of Englewood was a campaign to dean up the rowdy behavior along Broadway in order to make Englewood suitable for raising a family. Englewood incorporated in 1903, electing a mayor with an ilgenm to dean up the disreputable establishments, induding saloons and brothels. The Oty of Englewood wu founded on the desire to protect the health, safety and welfare of the community. Three years aft.er becoming a Oty, Englewood invested in Broadway improvements by building sidewalks and installing streedlghts in downtown. Railroad tracks in Broadway served horse drawn troleys from the lilte 1800s until 1916 when the route was electrified. The investment in public works projects conlinued with paving Broadway in 1926. By the 1920s, Broadway became an employment center with National Alm and later Alexander Industries employing over 700 people filming commercials and building airplanes. The Englewood City Band is said to have played Saturday night concerts in the bandstand on South ero.dway in the 19205. By 1937, the 3300 and 3400 blocks of Broadway were daimed to be the two busiest commercial blocks In the U.S. In 1940, the City of Englewood adopted its first Zoning Ordinmce regulating the "location, appearance, size, charilcter and use of bu~dings# to protect the general welfare of the community. The Englewood population grew to 9,609 by the 1940 U.S. Census. The 1940s brought cars to Broadway, not only u products for sale and services, but also as the increasingly popular mode of personal transportation. The growth in auto ownership led to ii growth in auto travel for business and vilcations. A boom in courtyard motels along Broadwily wu one response to the ilUto lri1Vel trend. Englewood grew rapidly in the 1950s. In 1950, the Englewood population was 16,869 residents which almost doubled to 33,398 residents by 1960. The 'SOs decade wu the most robust popuWlon growth period in Englewood history. During the 1950s, City Hall moved from Broadway and electric troleys were discontinued in filvor of diesel buses. Retailing grew substantially on Broadway south of Belleview in the lilte '50s with the construction of Brookridge Shopping Center and Gem, Englewood's first big box retail store. The convnunity celebrated fifty years as a City in 1953 by painting Broadway gold for the Oty's golden anniversary. Most developable land in Englewood was built on by 1960. The era of rHeVelopmeut had beaun. In 1964 Englewood voters decided to sell city park land for development into the Clllderela Oty Shopping Mall. The opening of the mall began a transition period for Broadwily which had been the center of commerce in Englewood for a hundred years. After more than 30 years on Broadway, the JC Penney department store relocated IO Cinderella City . Reftecting the dominance of the ilUto on Broadwily, increasingly common were drive-up and drive- thru businesses especially fast food. By the 1980s. Englewood recognized that Broadwily's strength and vitality ilS a shopping district wu erodina. The community financed drainage improvements to control further flooding by Little Dry Creek of Englewood's historic downtown. In the 1990s Englewood added parkin1, medians and landsuplng improvements to Bioadwi!y and upgraded street lighting. Broadway has changed remarbhly since the 1860s. Public investments in sidewllb, streelllghb. paving and lood control improve Broadway i1S a place to do business while protecting the health, ufety and welwe of the community. One hundred years ago, public sentiment about pmbllng. drinking and rowdy beNvior led IO incorporation as ,1 Oty with regulations and enforcement Sixty-four years•· EnaJ.-.ood ildopted repldons for buildings and land uses to protect the a-ill welfare of the axmiunity. Broadwi1Y is our "Miin Street." our - of plilCe, and ii ph~al reminder of past and future prosperity. The South Broadway Pwt is ii vision for improving Broadway as an interestin1, active and commercially successful corridor for the 21• Ceneury. ' ... .. • • ·• • • South Bro adway Plan 2004 S/18/2004 2 Goals are the •vision • of the Englewood Comprehensive Plan, Roadmap Englewood. Objectives focus on particular aspects of a Goal. The South Broadway Plan (SBP) incorporates many Roadmap goals and objectives and indudes the following project specific objectives: A. Revitalize the corridor B. Support redevelopment of under-used properties C. Support multiple modes of transportation D. Increase diversification of City tax base E. Improve the variety of housing types and opportunities for workforce housing F. Prepare five and ten year public and private investment strategy for the corridor The Englewood Comprehensive Plan identifies a three part strategy, the three Rs, for the growth and development of Englewood: Revitalizing. Redeveloping and Reinventing. No single action or project will revitalize the South Broadway Corridor. Rather, revitalization depends on a long-term series of actions and projects that take advantage of market opportunities, improved technologies and processes and Slraleglc public investments that will reward Englewood with enhanced quality of life and private investment SuccessfuUy implementing the South Broadway Pwi depends on identifying the unique opportunities of the corridor and the commercial districts and providing appropriate public support for actions lhat help Englewood meet its goals and objectives. It is the Broadway Plan's vision that the corridor wil be a place that the Englewood community views as their Main Street It should be a place that is smaller-scale, walkable, induding interesting and a diverse set of businesses, a place to live dose to or above your business and dose to transit and a place that is a focus of creativity. The Plan should be implemented in a manner that builds community goodwill; enhances quality-of.life; provides opporlllnities for public participation; allows a greater public role in the revitalization effort; sends the message of success; and, creates an increasingly attractive environment for private investment and development A. Revttalln the corridor luve klemiflcalk>o Revitalization is an appropriate strategy for Broadway areas where assets such as roads. sidewalks, buildings. and parking are in good repair and not functionally obsolete. Physical improvements, such as. buildings. IMldsc.aping. parking lots, sidewalks and ro.ds. .i have a useful life and with regular maintenance and periodic updates the useful life of these improvements may be extended. Many Broadway p,oper1ies get replar maintenance and repair and many buildings are periodiully updated. Englewood leverages a handful of building ~-upgrades each year to demonstrate the value of this kind of investment Some Broadway physical improvements became obsolete with changes in regulations. technology and market demand. for example: requirements for handicilP accessibility, incrused elec1rial system demands. and increued parking demand adversely ~ rNny older properties. Similarly, the demand for handicap ramps in sidewalks, enhanced medians , upgraded street lighting and public parking may require substantial capital investment in public improvements. While deferred mainteNnee and obsolde facilities -sitns to shopper1, business owners and investors !NI an area may be dedlnin1, the opposile is .iso true. Shappen. business owners and inveslDrs perceive investments in buildings and infr astructure positively .and rn.iie choices accordingly about where they shop, locate their business and invest their money. Roadmap Englewood advises us to •recoa,,ize the imponance of infr astructure to ensure the economic viability of Enpewoods business community.· Research for the South Broadway Plan included evaluating Broadway impfovements as the basis for making rec ommendations for futu re investment S1ra1nies for •evi 1allzio 1 !be corridor 1. Use SBP evaluation of improvements to identify strategic public improvemen ts and to initiate discussions with property owners. businesses and o ther taxpayers iibout public and prlv• Broadway ilSsets. and idenlify actions for addressing d e ferred !Nlfltenance, replacement or upgr.ides as ilPll'Ol)Nte. Disamions may indude finandna mechanisms for o n going maintenance. repair and investment such as Busineu Improvement Districts (B1Ds) and the City 's capital iml)fo vements budget ' 1. 1 Identify resources for infrastructure maintenanc e,.repair .and repl«ement pro;«ts. Work wiltwi the Gty and with other public ilgendes IO idenlify proa,..i eligibility and ID schedule work. 1.2 E.sW>lish Broadway development stilndards. Define tti. role of the weet ~ district based on the vi S10n and desired character for the district. 1.J Develop policies for linlong parluna lots IO businesses and for impOYtng xceu ID ~ay. )Clint access agreements. minimum fro ntilge rtqlllfements and drivew"Y width and tpKing ~ wil help to impro e vehicle and pedestn.,n s.i~ty. ' .. I , • • 0 •• • • . \ -~ r---. i.,_J South Broadway Plan 2004 5/18/2004 3 1.4 Review the 2002 Transportation Study recommendations for Broadway and if necessary update the study with recommendations that are consistent wid'I the SBP, district character and best practice. 1.5 Evaluate accessibility and business impacts of inlroducing transportation changes such as Bus Rapid Transit (BRT), shuttle and other public transportation programs. 1.6 Enforce existing zoning regulations. 1.7 Provide technical assistance with designs for building. parking and landscaping improvements. 1.8 Provide technical assistance with financing for property improvements. 1.9 Develop a parking strategy for the South Broadway corridor 2. Encourage existing business retention and expansion consistent wid'I Broadway goals. 2.1 Facilitate improving the commercial building stock. 2.2 Increase the value and appearance of the Broadway corridor through public and private investment 2,3 Provide technical assistance for marketing and business promotion 2.4 Enhance historic preservation, arts and entertainment as economic catalysts. a. Support 1'9devefoprnent of unclerused prope,tlH Jssue lds:nJific,ali9o Business and re-development opportunities exist on Broadway often in the form of underused properties. Retailing is dispersed; many uses do not contribute to the commercial success; traffic levels and street configurations inhibit two-sided retailing; buildings, lot size and their configuration do not fit current development practice. Strat§ies and Actions IP reposjtion underused properties for rednd9oromJ: 1. Actively engage in attracting new businesses to the city. 1.1 Focus business attraction activities on categories of business where there is substantial "leakage• of sales from the City of Englewood. That is, bring the businesses to Broadway that residents currently leave town to patronize. 1.2 Attract "anchor type retailers. Other retailers wil seek to co«ate with strong anchors. 1.3 Seek funding for ~tal improvement project budgets. 1.4 Support policies for 1)¥1icipating in public improvements which generate or assist new commercial and mixed use development 2. Improve retail synergy 2.1 Seek a fair, reasonable and balanced mix of businesses that complement each other. 2.2 Encourage concentrating retailing in activity centers. 2.3 Seek business support for creating Business Improvement Districts to promote, maintain and strengthen the Broadway Districts. 2.4 Monitor and enforce existing zoning regulations. C. Support multiple modes of tranapo,tatlon Issue lds:nJificatjon Support multiple modes of transportation on Broadway to enhance the quality of life for people living and working along or near Broadway. Improving pedestrian, bicyde, shuttle and convnuter bus connecdons along Broadway and between other activity centers may be rewarded with increased shopping. entertainment,. and service use along the corridor and decre~ traffic congestion. Strategies supoomna roulliole modes of ITaoWorJilljon; 1 . Support pedestrian-friendly developments with mixed land use of sufficient sea IO support neiahborhoods and businesses. Reduce vehide miles traveled (VMn thus reducing congestion, and inclrecdy improving a and water quality. Create areas on Broadway where people could choose IO live without owning a personal vehicle bued on excellent access to public transit. employment. shopping and recreation. Recognize and enhance the relationships between land use and the transportation system. 1.1 Encourage and support mixed use projects widl residential, office and retailing components. 1.2 Enhance pedestrian and bicyde mtenities and links IO light rail stations. bus slaps, shoppina and employment centers. 1.3 Enhance the accessibility of the transportation system 1 A Support illld develop a balanced. multi-modal transportation system that !ocludet rapid Wansit. regional bus service, bike .md pedestrian facilities. and improvements IO the exhlinl roadway system. 1.S Provide safe and direct crosswalk movements .ion, Broadway. ' .• • • 0 • • South Broadway Plan 2004 S/18/2004 1.6 Preserve existing mid-block paseos (pass-thrus) to access parking. 0 ~~-l ~~. 2. Evaluate alternative forms of public transportation such as Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) and circulator buses as potential solutions for "taming the traffic• on Broadway. Retail facing retail is synergistic when Broadway is perceived as safe to cross. 2.1 Analyze the BRT and cira,lator bus opportunities serving Broadway. 2.2 Seek federal and regional grants to construct facilities such as •queue jumping• and "signal priority" features on Broadway. 4 2.3 Support the purchase of specialized vehicles that support •at grade" access. The vehides generally support rapid entry and exiting while also enhancing access for elderly and disabled riders. 2.4 Support transit stop locations and development consistent with principles of optimum transit support. 2.5 Support design standards and development that help to balance the role of vehicles, pedestrians and other modes of transportation D. 1ncrNM diversification of City tax bue Issue ldenlificatjon Increasing the variety of goods, businesses and services available on Broadway makes Broadway more interesting and sustainable. Encouraging development of residential units with street level commercial uses provides activity, increased safety and customers for more hours in a day. Wh~e the mix of goods and services provided on Broadway is determined by the market, it is also constrained by Oty codes which list permitted land uses. Retaining and strengthening Broadway businesses while presenting the market with opportunities for an expanded variety of goods, businesses and services would help balance the corridor, by creating interest. encouraging activity, enhancing quality of life and diversifying the tax base. Historically, the Oty has curtailed some uses, induding: pawn, tattoo and day labor to limit potential adverse impacts as~ated with those uses. Broadway is Englewood's main commercial street. It is important to recognize the importance of the relationship between retail spending and sales tax revenues supporting public services and facilities. The Issue is how to best balance an economically viable business dimate by anracting and nwntaining a diverse base of businesses and land uses. Many SBP recommendations are intended to increase activity along Broadway. Expanding entertainment. retail, service and residential use of Broadway provides both a diverse and sustainable combiNllon of uses. People are drawn to areas with other people. The proposed enhanced pedestrian amenities encourage people to linger in the public spaces as well as shop. The South Broadway Plan supports new mixed commercial and residential uses as a key stralesY for revitalizing Broadway. Investments in buildings subsequently generate property tax revenues that strenglhen the school district and the county's ability to serve Engll!WOod. The Plan envisions a Broadway where housing is dose to transportation, jobs, shopping, services and recreation. Strategies and Actions supporting tax base diversjfiqtjon; 1. Conduct a wide range of business attraction and retention activities. 1.1 Attract business in categories where there ls substantial "leakage• of sales from the Oty of Englewood . 1.2 Attract •anchor-type• retailers for activity centers. 1.3 Attract and retain retailers that co-locate with anchors and ,1dd to the variety and interest of the commercial area. 1.4 Encourage development of new bu~dings that suit current market demands. 1. S Foster relationships with businesses. developers and inveslon to slwe information about Broadway opportunities. 1.6 Promote economic growth in Engll!WOod by building on Broadway character, community Im.age. idenhty, ,111d quality of life . 1.7 Support cultural arts exhibits and performances in Englewood for economic development and qual ity of life . 1.8 Attract and retain a balanced mix of businesse1. residences and services that complement each o th er. I . 9 Create regulatory tools on Broadway to support businesses that complement other butineues. 1n1eg,ate with the adjacent neighborhood, add to the diltenity of aro.dway bu,inesses, o, g-ale tu re11enues. t .. .. • • -·• • • • r, ·tJ CJ .. ,l. South Broadway Plan 2004 5/18/2004 5 1.10 Enhance Broadway identity by adopting and implementing urban development standards. 1.11 Investigate the use of a Business Improvement District ( BIO) to maintain and promote the districts and the corridor. E. Improve the variety of housing types and opportunities for workforce housing Issue !denliflcaJioo The 2003 Broadway survey found eight single family residences, several work/live residences, motel units that are rented weekly or monthly, and apartments/condominiums over commercial on Broadway. Broadway zoning permits th is traditional and re-emerging trend for residences mixed with retail. More housing along Broadway would strengthen the street by extending the business day, providing evening customers to retail, service and enter tai nment businesses and improving street safety. Broadway is one important opportunity for increasing the variety of housing types available In Englewood. Roadmap Englewood identified several Englewood housing issues that may be addressed on Broadway, indudlng: promoting a balanced mix of housing opportunities serving the needs of all current and future Englewood citizens; providing for affordable housing for low-and moderate-income g,oups including workforce housing. accessory living units, and efficiency units; encourage housing investments that improve the housing mix, indudlng both smaller and larger unit sizes, and a wider range of housing types such as duplexes, town homes, and condominium units. Creating and maintaining workforce housing meeting lhe needs of local employers and employees supports a regional jobs/housing balance and results in reduced vehicle miles traveled, traffic congestion, commuting times and improved air quality. The Comprehensive Plan encourages providing workforce housing (currently defined as those with fulltime employment paying between S10 and S20 per hour) to help attract, and retain a quality workforce. The Oty's employment base is projected to grow at an average annual rate of 1.7"" over the next 5 years, resulting in approximately 2,900 new jobs. The services sector is again expected to lead growth. Since many of the service sector jobs will pay low to moderate wages, and since low to moderate wage earners seek housing dose to employment, Englewood may attract many of these workers as residents. Workforce housing is particularly important to a vital economy since most organizations employ some low and moderate salaried workers who choose to work dose IO home. Broadway Is also particularly weft suited for residents that depend on RTO 's 24 hour public transportation services on Broadway. sratnies and AcJioos for ccW01 residences on Broadway: 1. Promote Broadway as a location for residential and mixed use development 1.1 Educate development community about the existing land use entitlements. 1.2 Provide information to developers about the forecasted demand for housing in Englewood. 1.3 Encourage commercial projects to include a residential component to create the supply of residential products. 1.4 Foster support in the business community for residential uses on Broadway. 1.5 Enhance Broadway's physical quality and sense of place with design and development standards, publ ic ar t, innovative signage program, bu ildin g f~ade programs, and public streetsape improvements. F. Prepare a long-term public and private 1""9Stment atratagy for the corridor bsuc: 1deobficatioo Investors, developers and lenders seek ou t commercial areas with market opportunity and prospects for success and sustai nabil ity . The City must create and support this environment on Broadway. The Ci ty of En glewood must increase and diversify its tax base to continue to provide exceplional municipal services tha t contribute to the ci ty's overall quality of life. S1ra1ewn for a !oo 1:1uro oo bjjc and prjyatc invesmcoa wa•m foe !be comdgr 1. Publicize the market opportun ities and bu siness successes on Broadw11Y. 1.1 Promo te the availability o f mixed use zoning. 1.2 Celebrate business succnses on Broadway. 1.3 Invest in high quali ty infrastruc1Ure ltw supports commerc:W activity. 1.4 Insure th~t the City development review procftl is pr edict.tile and timely. 1.5 Encourage development investment ltw contributes ID the QUMlty of life in Enai-c,od. 1.6 Protect the in teg,ity of ~ent rftlden!W uses. 1.7 Provide for appropNte tran11tlon$ betwffl'I BroadwllY commerc:W and residentW aren. ,, ' ... .. • • 1. 2 . 3. Call to order -?Ji ~--..1p.m. Invocation ~ Pledge of Allegiance~ 4. Roll call ·• • • Members: __ , / ---f .. l I ~ r·--l !._ _ __) ..... ,,,,,, -~-~-v ' I' •· • •• -- • • ·, . . • ,, . . . D . - . ' • • I AGENDA FOR THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE ENGLEWOOD CITY COUNCIL MONDAY, JUNE 21, 2004 7:30 P.M. Englewood Civic Center -Council Chambers 1 000 Englewood Parkway Englewood, CO 80110 1. Call to order. '7: Ill~ 2. Invocation.~ ' 3. Pledge of Allegiance . ~ 4. Roll Call. /_p ~ / tt,kt,,,d-{ Y 11/W/ f/:..) Mayor Garren submitted Mike Yurchick's letter of rcsignatio~. His resignation is effective July. 3, 2004. 5 . Minutes. ~/;-O a. Minutes from the Regular City Council meeting of June 7, 2004.~ 6 . Schedule Visitors. (Please limit your presentation to ten minutes.) a. Don Seymour will be recognized by City Council for his years of service of the Englewood Board of Adjustment and Appeals . b. Susan Pacek will be present to address· City Council regarding off-leash dog parks. c. Greg Kainer will be present to address City Council regarding dog parks . d. Tavis Hanna will be present to address City Council regardi ng off-leash dog parks. e. Jane Coleman will be present to address City Council regarding dogs. 7. Unscheduled Visitors . /Please limit vour presentation to five minutes.) (al Jail Wilson (e) K:uhlccn Buckley (b ) Chri Earle (0 Noreen Bcgo,dis (c) Jay Schneiders (g) Chuck our (d ) Glenn Penncb3ler (h) Patricia Pattison 11 unscheduled v, IIOOi pole 1bou1 lhc off-lush dos parks. All v.'Cff m favor of off-le h e,ccp1 fOf Oluck Nour . He sooke aoinll 11 Please nole: If you have a dtsabilny and need auxili;,ry aids OI services, please notify the City of Enslewood (3 03- 762-2 405) a l least 48 hours m adv.lOCe of when services are needed. Thank you . t .. .. .. .. . .... • • 0 •• • • 0 Englewood City Co uncil Agenda June 2 1, 2004 Page 2 8 . Communications, Proclamations, and Appointments. tl.ffd /t-D a. A proclamation declaring June as National Hom ow ners hip Month. ~ 9 . Public Hearing. (No Public Hearing Scheduled) g- 10. Co 0-p/d~Oa . ~~~it° liJ.MHv-~A6a.J/JJ. ltn/S,/l ..... . rdinances on First Readirl(I .... v-· ,. /()g-j u.J /t)d.~ / Ifill b. Approval of Ordinances on Second Reading . i. Council Bill No. 32, accepting a Transportation Utility Easement Agreement with the Regional Transportation District. c. Resolutions and Motions. i. Recommendation from the Department of Finance and Administrative Services, City Clerk's Office, to approve a resolution adopting tne Colorado Municipal Records Retention Schedule . STAFF SOURCE: Loucrishia Ellis, City Clerk . ii . Recommendation from the Department of Finance and Administrative Services to adopt a resolution casting the City of Englewood's vote as employer regarding Fire and Police Pension Association (FPPA) proposed amendments. STAFF SOURCE Frank Gryglewicz, Director of Fii,ance and Administrative Services . iii. Recommendation from the Safety Services Department to adopt a resolution authorizing the approval of direct Subgrant Awards for the Colorado Division of cs-Criminal Justice Juvenile Accountability Incentive Block Grant Program. STAFF -,J: SOURCE: Chris Olson, Director of Safety Services. 11 . Regular Agenda . a. Approval of Ordinances on First Reading. i. ff~t,-~o ~'I/of Council Bill No. 33 -Recommendation from the Community Development Department to adopt a bill for an ordinance approving the Planned Unit Development for Englewood Estates. Staff requests that Council schedule a Puhljr Hearing for IYIY 19. 2004 to gather input on the proposed Planned Unit Development. STAFF SOURCE: Anthony Fruchtl, Planner.~ b . Approval of Ordinances on Second Reading. Council Bill No. 26, authorizing an Intergovernmental Agreement with the City of Littleton for the purchase of the NHerbertson· property for the Littleton/Englewood Wastewater Treatment Plant. ~ Please note : If you have a di sabi lity and need auKiliary aids or services. please notify the City of Englewood (3 03-762 -2405) a t leas t 48 hours in advance of when services -needed. Thank ou . ' .· .. ,, • • Englewood City Council Agenda June 21, 2004 Page 3 In .J 113 . f ii. Council Bill No. 29, submitting to a vote of the registered electors of the City of V UC. -rr_ 'f Englewood a proposed amendment to Article I, Section 12, of the Englewood Home ap?J '-~ Rule Charter pertaining to Elections . a)~ 111 . Council Bill No. 30, submitting to a vote of the registered electors of the City of ._ .J _Jj,,!/;) Englewood a Ballot Question to sell or transfer property owned by the Englewood {) tllf,. Water and Sewer Utilities to the Cities of Englewoo tJp/)J ~-Olitdeton/Englewood Wastewater Treatment Plant.1 h'~~~11c,.w c . Resolutions and Motions. /) , l /':"I. i. Recommendation from the Community Development Department to adopt a ~~ resolution approving proposed changes to the Developme~~r:::J-.~ ~~lica~on Fee '#' ~-0 Schedule. STAFF SOURCE: Anthony J. Fruchtl, Planner. Vfl~-- ii. Recommendation from the Community Development Department to approve a (). . Jl. riJ . resolution adopting the South Broadway Plan as a Strategic Plan implementing ~:::, Englewood's Comprehensive~an, Roadmap Englewood. STAFF SOURCE: Mark ~'-{) Graham, Senior Planner.~ 12 . General Discussion . a. Mayor's Choice . ~~-0 b . Request to reschedule the July 6, 2004 City Council meeting to July 12, 2004.~ Council Members' Choice. ' / Aedu O . r . S . t , Due ,to the resignation of 6>uncil Member urchick, OWJCil agreed to meet, in open session, with City Attorney after the Regul ar Council Mcct.ing to discuss.the Pl'!)CCSS of appointing a.new Council member . 13 . City Manager's Report. 14. City Attorney's Re port. Adjournment. 8;5~ The following minutes were transmitted to City Council between June 4 and 17, 2004: Englewood Cultural Arts Commission meeting of May 5, 2004 Englewood Parks and Recreation Commission meeting of May 13, 2004 Englewood Transportation Advisory Committee meeting of May 13, 2004 Englewood Planning and Zoning Commission meeting of May 18, 2004 Please note: If you ha e a dtsabiltty and need auxiliary aids or • rvices, please' notify the City of Englewood (303-762 -2405) t least 48 hours in ad\ance or when services are needed. Thank ' . ... . ,• .. • • •• • • RE ULAR MEETING OF THE ENGLEWOOD CITY COU MONDAY, JUNE 21, 2004 •""'] I I \' 1 ~-~ 7:30 P.M. \\_ Engl ewood Civic Cent e r -Council Chalabers 1 000 Englewood Parkway Engl ewood, CO 8011 0 1. Ca ll to order. 2 . 3 . Pledge o f All egia nce . ~ 4 . Roll Cal~ /UJud {Jfdef/, ,r.~s. ~ }lu~ ~ 11//--r/ Minutes from th e Reg ul ar City Cou nci l mee tin g of Jun e 7, 2004. 6. Scheduled Visi tors . (P lease limi t yo u r presen tati o n to ten minutes .) a. Don Sey 1 c,11r wi ll b e recog nized by City Co unci l fo r hi s yea rs of servi c e of the Eng Bo ard of stmen t and Appea l~. n Pac ek · ill be ~o~ City Council regarding off-leash dog parks. _;_~~;:::=#r:'!e~g;::K~ai;;ne;;:r~ ill be prese nt to address City Council regarding dog parks. ' • • 0 ·• • • 0 Englewood City Council Ag enda June 2 1, 2004 ~i ~ ./' 8 C munications, Proclamations, and Appointments. fiJ L/ 9 . 10. A proclamation declaring June as National Homeownership Month. ? ____ .. ------ . P,p• (NoPubli:~~:TrtfJ;.-rolY (CA I Consent Agenda . l/fJ v-~ I a. b. App~f Ordinances on First Reading . Approval of Ordinances on Second Reading. Council Bill No. 32, accepting a Transportation Utility Easement Agreement with the Regional Transportation District. c. Resolutions and Motions. 1?,;eJ-i ~§!}. Recommenc/ation from the Department of Finance and Administrative Services, City Clerk's Office, to approve a resolution adopting the Colorado Municipal Records Retention Schedule. STAFF SOURCE: Loucrishia Ellis, City Clerk. Recommendation from the Department of Finance and Administrative Services to adopt a resolution casting the City of Englewood's vote as employer regarding Fire and Police Pension Association (FPPA) proposed amendments. STAFF SOURCE Frank Gryglewia, Director of Finance and Administrative Services. ~,siii. Recommendation from the Safety Services Department to adopt a resolution authorizing the approval of direct Subgrant Awards for the Colorado Division of Criminal Justice Juvenile Accountability Incentive Block Grant Program . STAFF SOURCE: Chris Olson, Director of Safety Services. 11 . Regular Agenda . ~(6_....·a. ~-0 b. Approval of Ordinances on First Reading. i. Council Bill No. 33 -Recommendation from the Community Developmen t Department to adopt a bill for an ordinance approving the Planned Unit De elopmenl for Englewood Estates. Staff requests that Council schedule a Public Hearing for July 19, 2004 to gather input on the proposed Pia~~~~ 11 _ ' ~ D e elopmen t. STAFF SOURCE: A.!?f_hony FruchlL Planner. V1) ~ ~ Approval of Ordinances on Seco nd Re ading. ,- 1 JJ. i1II i . Council Bill o,.26 1 authorizing an Intergovernmental Agreement with the City pf U ~ JJ Li tt le ton fo r the purchase of the~Herbertson# roperty for the Littleton/Engl~ood ;_ Was tewater Treatment Plant. ,.,-o • . Please note: If you have a qi: bility and need au ,liary aids o, §ef'oicH, plea e nottfy the City al ~ (30),762-2 40 5) at l ea t 48 hours in advance of "'hen services are needed . Thank you. ,. . .. .. • • (J Engl ewood City Council Agenda Jun e 21, 2004 Page 3 # ,.,, f!i. Council Bill No. 29, submitting to a vote of the registered electors of the City of ll)d ;,cf Englewood a proposed amendment t'}_~r_tij~e I, Sectio~ 12, of the Englewood Home V' tijJpJ.__ 6 ~ Charter pertaining to Elections. ~ iii . Council Bill No. 30, submitting to a vote of the registered electors of the City of /'r\ J~nglewood a Ballot Question to sell or transfer property owned by the Englewood Cl lfJ.· ater and Sewer Utilities to the Cities of Englewood an ittleton or use by the ittleton/Englewood Wastewater Treatment Plant c. Resolutions and Motions. -o i. Recommendation from the Community Development Department to adopt a resolution approving proposed changes to the Development Review Application Fee Schedule . STAFF SOURCE: AntnPlJ'~ner.l,atJ /2 " ii. Recommendation from the Com::~i;i;-l:iopment Department to approve ~ / (11».:f .5!J resolution adopting the South Broadway Plan as a Strategic Plan implementing ~ Englewood's Comprehensive Plan, Roa,t.'ap Englewood. STAFF SOURCE: M r,14-oraham, Senior Plann?>//~ ?~ 12. General Discussion . a. Mayor's Choice . .... ~Jo,-0 i. Request to reschedule the July 6, 2004 City Council meeting to July 12, 2004.~ urr--~ -Couadl M""""'' Choice. ~ i. Requested motion regarding Off-Leash Parks Pilot Program. ~& 13 . City Manager's Report. 14. Caty Attorney's Report. AdjoummeM. "{j~ The following minutes were transmitted to City Council between June 4 and 17, 2004: Englewood Cultural Arts Commission meeting of May 5, 2004 Englewood Parks and Recreation Commission meeting of May 13, 2004 Englewood Transportation Advisory Committee meeting of May 13, 2004 • Englewood Planning and Zoning Commission meeting of May 18, 2004 P1e.ise note: If you ha\/e a d1Ybility and need ~ aids or semces. plow noJify lhe City ol Enat-ood (303-762-2 405) at le;ist 48 hours in adv;ince of when services are needed. ~ Y<l t ..• .... • •