HomeMy WebLinkAbout1985-12-16 (Regular) Meeting Agenda•
• -
• •
0
City Council Meeting -Re g ular
-December 16, 1985
-
•
•
• •
X:{ •<'-4,1<tv. ~ .?0:~ 5:0 <;,
CiA " a"« . &;, . 'N. !? r, r1. c? a
•
0
0
I . •
•
REGULAR MEETING:
•
• •
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
City of Englewood, Colorado
December 16, 1985
The City Council of the City of Englewood, Arapa hoe County,
Colorado, met in regular session on December 16, 1985, at 7:30 p.m.
Mayor Otis , presiding, called the meeting to order.
The invocation was given by Council Member Higday. The pledge of
allegia nce was led by Cub Scout Troop 1333.
Mayor Otis asked for roll call. Upon a call of the roll, the
following were present:
Council Members Higday, Van Dyke, Vobejda, Weist, Bilo,
Bradshaw, Otis.
Absent: None.
The Mayor declared a quorum present.
* * * * * * *
Also present were: City Man ager McCown
Assistant City Manage>r Vargas
City Attorney Olsen
Assistant Director of Community
ment (Planning) D. Romans
Develop-
Englewood Housing Authority Executive
Directory A. Feinstein
Deputy City Clerk Owen
* * * * * * *
MAYOR PRO TEM BRADSHAW MOVED TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE
REGULAR MEETING OF NOVEMBER 25, 1985. Council Member Bilo seconded the
motion. Upon a call of the roll, the vote resulted as follows:
Ayes:
Nays:
Council Members Higday, Van Dyke, Vobejda, Weist,
Bilo, Bradshaw, Otis.
None.
The Mayor declared the motion carried.
* * * * * * *
•
I • •
•
December 16, 1985
Page 2
•
• •
Mayor Otis and Mayor Pro Tern Bradshaw presented awards to
athletes from Englewood High School for recognition in the sport of cross
county track and in the sport of soccer.
* * * * * * *
There were no other visitors at this time.
* * * * * * *
There were no communications nor proclamations to act upon at
this time.
* * * * * * *
Consent Agenda items were:
(a) Minutes of Urban Renewal Authority meeting of
October 30 and November 6' 1985.
(b) Minutes of the Housing Authority meeting of
October 30 , 1985 .
(c) Minutes of the Planning and Zoning Commission
meeting of November 19, 1985 .
COUNCIL MEMBER VAN DYKE MOVED TO ACCEPT CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS
9(A)-9(C). Council Member Bilo seconded the motion. Upon a call of the
roll, the vote resulted as follows :
Ayes :
Nays:
Council Members Higday, Van Dyke , Vobejda, Weist,
Bile, Bradshaw, Otis.
None.
The Mayor declared the motion carried.
* * * * * * *
MAYOR PRO TEM BRADSHAW MOVED TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING TO
CONSIDER A RESOLUTION APPROVING A HOUSING POLICY REPORT FOR SINGLE FAMILY
MORTGAGE REVENUE BONDS. Council Member Weist seconded the motion. Upon
a call of the roll, the vote resulted as follows:
Ayes: Council Members Higday, Van Dyke, Vobejda, Weist,
Bile, Bradshaw, Otis •
•
I • •
-
•
December 16, 1985
Page 3
Nays: None.
•
• •
The Mayor declared the motion carried.
Englewood Housing Authority Executive Director Alan Feinstein,
7030 Pecos, Denver, Colorado presented the resolution. The purpose of
the hearing was to consider comments on the policy report for single
family mortgage revenue bonds. No particular area of the city was
targeted to be eligible to receive the benefits of the bonds.
Mayor Otis asked if there was anyone present wishing to speak to
Council concerning this matter. No one responded.
MAYOR PRO TEM BRADSHAW MOVED TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
Council Member Van Dyke seconded the motion. Upon a call of the roll,
the vote resulted as follows:
Ayes:
Nays:
Council Members Higday, Van Dyke, Vobejda, Weist,
Bilo, Bradshaw, Otis.
None.
The May declared the motion carried.
RESOLUTION NO. 62
SERIES OF 1985
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ENGLEWOOD APPROVING THE
POLICY REPORT FOR SINGLE FAMILY MORTGAGE REVENUE BONDS UNDER SECTION 103A
OF THE INTERNAL REVENUE CODE.
MAYOR PRO TEM BRADSHAW MOVED TO PASS RESOLUTION NO. 62, SERIES
OF 1985. Council Member Vobejda seconded the motion. Upon a call of the
roll, the vote resulted as follows:
Ayes:
Nays:
Council Members Higday, Van Dyke, Vobejda, Weist,
Bi l o, Bradshaw, Otis.
None.
The Mayor declared the motion carried.
* * * * * * *
•
I • •
-
•
•
December 16, 1985
Page 4
•
• •
Assistant Director of Community Development Dorothy Romans
presented a recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission to
approve the 300 West Belleview Avenue Planned Development which is
located on the south side of West Belleview Avenue , west of K-Mart.
Ms. Romans stated Sanford Metzel, President of Sanford Companies
was the proprty owner and the applicant proposing to develop the 10-acre
site with 312 dwelling units in nine buildings.
Mr. Metzel came forward and displayed a rendering of the
proposed design . He also discussed in detail his plans for seeding
particular areas of ground, why some buildings were 2-story and other
were 3-story, the financing was not through industrial development bonds,
the units were adult rentals , and the whole project would be completed
from start to finish -there was no approach to build this piecemeal.
Council agreed to allow citizens in the audience to speak
regarding this project.
Pat Smitten, 5155 South Elati, came forward. Ms. Smitten stated
her neighborhood would be impacted by the project density and would
prefer that none of the buildings be more than 2-story. Ms. Smitten
stated that she never saw the complete set of drawings. t
Ruth Kelly , 5145 South Elati Drive, came forward. Mrs. Kelly
expressed concern about the high density and had hoped that more than
just 3 residents of the neighborhood would be present to express
opposition.
COUNCIL MEMBER HIGDAY MOVED TO SET A PUBLIC HEARING ON THIS
MATTER TO HEAR FROM THE RESIDENTS OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD FOR MONDAY, JANUARY
13, 1986, at 7:30 P.M . Mayor Pro Tern Bradshaw seconded the motion. Upon
a call of the roll, the vote resulted as follows:
Ayes:
Nays:
Council Members Higday, Van Dyke, Vobejda, Weist,
Silo, Bradshaw, Otis.
None.
The Mayor declared the motion carried.
* * * * * * *
Mayor Pro Tern Bradshaw asked Mr. Metzel to contact the residents
of the neighborhood and find out their concerns.
•
I •
......
•
December 16, 1985
Page 5
,.
•
• ..
Mr. Metzel stated he did not hold a formal meeting with the
neighborhood but did send out letters notifying them of his plans. Mr.
Metzel stated that he was in compliance with the code and even made some
concessions by moving the buildings back 100 feet and decreasing the
density.
* * * * * * *
As sistant Director Do rothy Romans presented a recommendation
from the Community Development Department regarding approval of an
Addendum to an easement agreement by and between the City of Englewood
and Donald D. Rippen.
MAYOR PRO TEM BRADSHAW MOVED TO APPROVE THE ADDENDUM AS WRITTEN
IN COUNCIL COMMUNICATION ll(B). Council Member Higday seconded the
motion. Upon a call of the roll, the vote resulted as follows:
Ayes:
Nays:
Council Members Higday, Van Dyke, Vobejda, Weist,
Bilo, Bradshaw, Otis.
None.
The Mayor declared the motion carried.
RESOLUTION NO. 63
SERIES OF 1985
* * * * * * *
A RESOLUTION APPROVING AN ADDENDUM TO THE 1984-1986 COLLECTIVE BARGAINING
AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN THE CITY OF ENGLEWOOD, COLORADO, AND THE
ENGLEWOOD EMPLOYEES ASSOCIATION EFFECTIVE JANUARY 1, 1986 THROUGH
DECEMBER 31, 1986.
MAYOR PRO TEM BRADSHAW MOVED TO PASS RESOLUTION NO. 63, SERIES
OF 1985. Council Member Vobejda seconded the motion. Upon a call of the
roll, the vote resulted as follows:
Ayes:
Nays:
Council Members Higday, Van Dyke, Vobejda, Weist,
Bilo, Bradshaw, Otis.
None.
The Mayor declared the motion carried.
* * * * * * *
•
•
I • •
-
•
December 16, 1985
Page 6
•
• •
City Attorney Olsen asked Council to approve a 4.8 % s ala ry
increase for the legal assistants in the City Attorney's office, 4 % for
the clerical positions, and to approve the upgrading of the clerical
positions in the Assistant City Attorney's (prosecutor) office.
MAYOR OTIS MOVED TO APPROVE THE RECOMMENDATIONS MADE
BY THE CITY ATTORNEY FOR THE YEAR 1986. Mayor Pro Tern Bradshaw seconded
the motion . Upon a call of the roll, the vote resulted as follows:
Ayes:
Nays:
Council Members Higday, Van Dyke, Vobejda, Weist,
Silo, Bradshaw, Otis.
None.
The Mayor declared the motion carried.
RESOLUTION NO. 64
SERIES OF 1985
* * * * * * *
A RESOLUTION SUPPORTING A STATE MANDATORY SAFETY BELT USE LAW TO REDUCE
INJURY AND IMPAIRMENTS BECAUSE OF MOTOR VEHICLE CRASHES.
COUNCIL MEMBER HIGDAY MOVED TO PASS RESOLUTION NO. 64, SERIES OF
1985. May Pro Tern Bradshaw seconded the motion. Upon a call of the
roll, the vote resulted as follows:
Ayes:
Nays:
Council Members Higday, Van Dyke, Vobejda, We ist ,
Bilo, Bradshaw, Otis.
None.
The Mayor declared the motion carried.
* * * * * * *
There being no further business to discuss, COUNCIL MEMBER
HIGDAY MOVED TO ADJOURN. Mayor Otis adjourned the meeting without a vote
at 8:40p.m., and wished everyone a Merry Christmas.
n~puty City Clerk L?C/
/./ /-·
•
I • •
-
(
•
•
• •
['{\
AGENDA FOR THE
REGULAR MEETING OF
THE ENGLEWOOD CITY COUNCIL
DECEMBER 16, 1985
7:30 P.M.
l. Call to order. ()~GL;
2. Invocation. '1 r.U-r tJ J
3. Pledge of allegiance by Cub Scout Troop 1333. ttn-'-&i'~
4. Roll call.
5. Minutes.
(a) Minutes of the special meeting of November 25, 1985.
6. Pre-Scheduled Visitors. (Please limit your presentation to
10 minutes.)
8.
(a) Athletes from Englewood High School will be present to
~ receive recognition awards.
Non-Scheduled Visitors. (Please limit your presentation to 5
minutes.)
Communications and Proclamations.
0
I •
City Council Meeting
December 16, 1985
Page 2
9. Consent Agenda.
•
• -
(a) Minutes of Urban Renewal Authority meeting of October 30 and November 6, 1985.
(b) Minutes of the Housing Authority meeting of October 30, 1985.
(c) Minutes of the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting of November 19, 1985.
10. Public Hearing.
~ ~ (o ,J-(a) To consider a Resolution approving a Housing Policy Re-
port for Single Family Mortgage Revenue Bonds.
ll. Ordinances, Resolutions and Motions.
(a) Recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission f.? to approve the 300 West Belleview Avenue Planned ~~~ -~0 Development which is located on the south aide of West
";... 1-\~ "'Belleview Avenue, west of 1<-Mart. f 1·· ws
(b) Recommendation from the Community Development Department
A ; regarding approval of an Addendum to an easement agree-(t~~t~ Lf · ment by and between the City of Englewood and Donald D. I I Rippen.
KO<Zc (v5 (c) Resolution establishing salaries for General Services Employees.
(
•
12. City Manager's Report.
;I. y -h CJa.-1' a a.U-a-a n 6
13. City Attorney's Report.i i/o -'""Ju"-?? ...Ci'
0
a1_
14. General Discussion.
(a) Mayor's Choice.
(b) Council Member's Choice. IJ1ilo A :&;~
•
I • •
(
•
City Council Meeting
December 16, 1985
Page 3
J\~~
15. Adjournment. <6~0 J f'fV"-
~~!~
City Manager
AM/sb
•
• •
I . .
•
•
-. .. .
........
.....
::;~
Ill
Ill
I
0
( v Q J
c ~
C~!INC JL CHA"!'ERS
v o t rn~le w coo , C c l ~r ~d
~~c~-o l ~ 16 • 1a~~
RF Gt:L ~~ I'FETT'<C.:
r ~ ~i ty Ccunci l of the City o f r nol e w,c d . tr aoa h oe
Cc lc r .c•, ~rt ~n r ec ul ~r s~ssinn o n Qe ce~oe r 1 6 9 1 9e5 . at 7 !
untv,
p . :".
•.y c r 0 t1s , o r esia inJ o c a ll ea th e mc e ti no t o o r oe r .
TtJ ~ in v o c a t ion was 'l iv "n b y Counc H !-~e m b e r Hi qda y . He ol eci-J c of
c ll ecionce was l eo b y Cub Sc o ut Tr oo o ~3 3 3 .
"r y &r Oti s JS~ea fo r r o ll t 3 Ll .
f ~ll c w1 n a we r e 1 r esent : Uo o 'l a c a ll o t he roll • t h,.
C c u n r i L :-1 e ,.. be r s Hi g d il y , Va n D y lc e , Vo be J d a ,
~'r iJJsna w, Ct is .
e i st . P i l e•
At s.; r t : ·-~ ~ ~t.'.
T ~e qc yc r dec l a r eo d o u o run pr e sent .
* ..
Al sa e r o se we r e :
.. ..
..
C 1 t y Ma n agP r ~cC o w n
A~sis t ~n t Ci t y Ma n age r Vd r aas
C<ty Atto r n e y Ol se n
~5s 1 s t a nt Direct o r of CO t!'tl1 unit y O"v e l o o -
me nt C P l ~nnin q l o. Qo ma ns
A s s i s t a n t 0 i r e c t o r o f Co ,. ,., u n 1t y-o "·v " l o o -
me nt CH o u s i nq l A. Fe i n st e in
~1 o uty City Cl n rk Owen
.. ..
Fl T UQ P~O i [l' nRAOSh AW ~vV f O TO ~PP RO V E TH E MI NU Tf S n FI H'
RFGU L tR ~EfTING OF ~OVfM~fq ~~. 1°85 . Co u n cil Membe r ?il c s oco ndnd "he
l"cti on . Leer d c a ll o f t"e r ol l• th e v o t e r esulted as f 0 ll o wo :
0
•
)t:s :
~' i: y s :
Counc il Me'l b e r s Hi qday , Va'1 D yk e , Vobejd a , \lei ~[,
;;il o o Br a dshaw , Otis .
Non~.
T~e '~yor dec l ~r e d o ~ot i on C J rri ~j .
..
'-;-Jill\
IJ'
•
•
,__ . ::: ..
!
j
..._
(_ __
"'C£-r r..r r ~;_, :9F 5
;:--;t: '
~~y~r Gtis dnc Mt y o r 0 r o Te ~ 3 ra dsh~w ore senteo ~war~ t c
athletes fro~ Eng l e wooc Hioh S ch~ol f o r reco an ition in the soo r t cf c r oss
c cu nty tr u ck anc in th e soo rt o f so ccer .
t 'is
* • * •
•tpre were no ~thPr vis~to rs a t t~is t i re •
• * * * * *
'~e r ~ wer e no co~muric atic ns no r o r o cl amations to ac t uo o~ 1~
im e .
* * * • * *
rc ns ~nt A ~enda tte~s wer •:
( c ) .,.1nu .. os o f Ur ba n Pene .. a l ll.uthority l!'e eti'lg of
Octcb e r 3 a'ld i\o v enbe r .,, 1 985 .
(t) "'i'lut•s ~f th • Ho u s in g Aut hority meet i ng of
1ctobe r 30 . 1 985 .
( c ) "'tnut c s of th e P l an nin g a l"d 7on1nr ComP'11 sst on
eting c f •·:J vembe r 1 s . 1985 .
CCUNCIL I'I[MBER VAN CYKE I"O V'"D TO A.CCEP T CON SEN T AGf'JD l l Tf"'S
5 <A> -c; <C>. Counc 1l M!'l"ber fl tlo se conded t h e moti on. Uoon a call of the
r cl [, th e •et c re su l ted as fcllo~s :
A )P S ; C c u n c i l ~·em b,.. r s H 1 o day , Van D y k • , vo be 1 d a • II • i ~ t ,
~i l o , B r adsha~. Otis . -
~<;y s : Non'-".
T~e ~rl yor dec l 6 r ed ntct i on ca rri ed .
* * * * * *
F~YO R PRO TEl' BR AOSHA\J MO V~D TO OP E"J THf PU B LI C HEAR!IfG TO
CC~S I DEP A RESOLUTION APP~OVI"JG A HOUST"JG POLir Y REPORT FOR SIWLl FA~(LY
f'IC~TGAGE FcEVENUf 80 1\:0S . Council l'emocr weist seconaed the motion . Uoon
a c a ll o~ th e rellt the v~t e r esulted as f o l lows:
A)es:
y s :
•
C'lunc il "'errbers Hi gda y, Van [l y~e , Vobejda o Weist ,
-;l,, A r •dsh~w , Otis .
'll':lnt" •
•
. . .
n ..
"" ..
l
,....
......,
(
C{t e Tc e r ;f , ~~~5
r-.:'
l~e v J yor decl •r ed t~e ~c tion ca rri ~d .
t~s~s t ~nt Dir ec tcr o t c ~~~un ity D c v ~l ooTent CHousin g > ~l o
F •1nstri n , 7 ~7 Pe c c ~, r nrv p r, Co l o r a d o pr€s ~nte d the r e,o lu ti o n . Tn•
CLq:cs r c f t ht h ea r i n 1 wa!: t"' ror s i O"r CO"'rr.ent s o n the p o lie y reo o r~ tor
sir g le f ~~ily ~ort~aoe r e venue bonds . No parti c u l a r a r e a o f the Cfty wa s
t :r g cted tc b e e li ciolP t c r ece iv e the bene fi ts of the bonds .
Vo y e r Gtis •ske d if ·~er• wz s an v on e p r esent wi ~hin ~ to soc ~
Cc ~n c 4 l c~rc e rninc t"i s TJ tt c r . ~o an a r esp o n o ed .
YOR PR O TEM c RADSHAW
CcLnci l ~e ~be r Van Dyke seconde
tr ~ vcte rPsulted as f ol l o ws:
OVE D TO CLO ~E TR E PUPLIC HEARING •
Ay es :
t <ys:
c~uncil
;> il 0 '
"J on~.
the mo ti on . Uo on a call of t he roll•
'""'b ·•r!' Hi q day , Va
r cJd ~n d .. , J tis .
y~ c . Vobelo a , ll e 4
Tte ~3y decl a r P d th~ ,.,otion c a rri ed .
RfS~O~LLTI Qt; mJ . E2
SER IES OF l 985
A Rl:"SC l UTJC1-1 Or T HE CTTY COUNCIL rJ F THE CITY OF fNGLfiJOOI'J 4PPDOVTII.tl1THE
FCLICY REPLRl FOR S I NGLE FAMILY 1 0 RTGAGE RfVFNUE eONDS UNDER S fC TT ~ 1"3
F T~E l~lf~N•L REVE NUF COD E •
~·Y OR PRO TEM R RAOSHA~ MO VE D TO PASS RESO LUTIO N NO . 62 , SER I ES
CF 19 t'!:. Ccunc 1l l"ember Vcoejoa se c o n oed th e not i o n. Uoon a ca ll cf th e
r ~ll, th e vote r esult~a a s tollo~•=
Ay e;.:
~. c YS :
Co u~ci l ~e ~bars Hi q da y, V~n Dyke. Vobelo~, Wei s t •
1to , Qraashaw , Ot1s .
Non ~.
Tht ~~yor decl a re d t hP ~o t1on c a rr1 e a •
• • •
•
. .. ..
~
(_
Ce c~rr r..~"~
F J :1 C "
p r ~scrt
~r::r::r cvc
l :ce:tec
: ~ • :; ;... 5
Ac~i~·a n: Oi r o ct o r cf C o ~~u~ity Qo v o l o o~ent Oo r o t~y RO ~rtn3
c c r ~co~~cnddtion fr o~ tre P l a nning and Zonin p ro~n•ssior t
tr r ! ~ Jest Be ll e vi c ~ Av •nue P lannc o Developmen t which i s
r th ~ south s i ce o f ~~st Ae ll e vi e w Av enue , west o f K -~art .
~s . ~~~a~s sta t rc San tor a ~Ct7C lo Presi de nt o 1 sa ~t o r d Cc~~-n i o~
w s trc cr co r ty o wn 4 r a rc the ~ooll c ~nt orop o sin a to d ev e l oP the i'-Jc r e
sit " with ~12 a we lll nq uni ts In rine ou 1ld1n o s. ·
~r . ~~tz el ca~e forw a r d rt nd d isol ~y cd a r ende ri no of th e
r::r coc se r cc si~r . ~r 1 l sc o i scussoo in d etJil h i s clans for se e d 1r ~
o .rticul c r a r e~s o f q r ounc , wry 3C~c ou il d ln 1s we r e 2 -story a nd ot~or
• re ~-st~ry, the f in ~n cin o was no t th r ouah 1nc u st ri a l dcvclop~ent bon~s .
tr _ ur 1t s wer E 3au lt r enta ls, d n a th e whol e n r ole ct woulo be co moLnt e
fr~~ s t a r t t~ f i nish -the r e wa s no a po r oa ch t o . oui l J this o1ecem ra l .
c unci l ~Q r Ded t c a ll o w c itiz ens in
r eca r c1n _ r~•s ~r ot~ct . P au dien c e t ? so ear
Q r.t ~.n ittr n o S15 c South [t at i, came f o rw a r o . ~"~s . Sm Hter st1
ne i g rtorh ood wou l d oe 1m oa c ted oy thA oroject ae rsity and wa ul
t r t l"i't '1 0n!' of the bu iloin gs he "!a r e th 1n 2 -story . ~s . Sl!'i tten
st ~teo t ~~t sre re v er sa w th~ co ~o lete set of c r a win ~s.
Mr S • Kn[l y
,.,o r e tf)<~n
opPOS't 1 on •
eo
"nTfR T
1 ~. 191'~ •
a c a ll o
.t 7 :3J ~.~. ~a y o r P r o J e~ ~r ads h a w s e con ded
th e r o ll, t he v o t e r e sulte d a s f o llow s :
'i!A o y
C'O'l
~)(;S : Co uncil ~~e nbcrs '1 1 od ay , Van Dyk e , Vo b ejd a o lie;,(,
f 1 t 0 . r adS h J ol • "tis •
• ~y s : 'lion•.
Tre ''a yor ec l 3 r ec th e ~c tion c a rrio d .
Pi y'r Pro Ter 0 r ,dsha w 1s ked ~r . Metze l t
c+ th e n~i~hb~r hood .. nd f ind out thei r concern s .
c on t a c he r e~l do nt~
"r . ~.t zrl s t a t ed he J 4 J not ho l d a t e r ra l ~Petin~ o~1th •,P
r ~i~h tc r r.cc out o i a sere out l et •e r s no tifyin ~ th e~ o f h is o l an s . ~ ••
•~t zel •t,t~1 that he .. ~~ ;., co~el l an ce wit h th e co d P and e v en m1uo s J~
•
~
-~
•
• I
~ . . ::: ..... .. ..
1
«
8
:cce'T'Lf r ~f • l(",q
;;:;;. 11" c:
c:rcL~Si crs ~Y ~ovin c t~c ru 'ln 4 ~ ~ba ck 1 ' J f ee t and oec r eas i r 1 ,,~
cersi t~.
" .. * • *
~~si s t a n• e 1rector Co r or~y R o~ans or cs en ted a r cco~mcn dat;nn
f r :m tr e Cc mmunity Oe v P l crrncnt D•ca rt rnent re q a r d in n app r o v a l of ar
~ccercu~ tc an easement aq r cc~ent b y and b e tw e Pn the City o f r na t c ~'od
3rj Cc r a l r o. Ri ppen .
•tYCP PRO T E~ ~P A~SHA~
I~ CCL~CIL C u~~U NICATI O~ l l l t lo
~cticn . Locn ~ call of thP r o LL ,
VE D TO APPROVE THE ADDENDUM AS wRTT TE'
Counci l ~e m b e r Hi qda y s e c onoed t r P
:hP v o t e re s ulte d as f ol l o ws:
Ayes :
• ;y s :
Counci l ~ernb~rs Hi aca y, Van O y~e, Vo bejda , Weist .
il ~, B r adsha ~. Otis •
"J on e •
Tre Ma yor de cl a r ed th e n n ti o n c~rri Pd .
R fSO LL T I O ~ NO . 63
S£RI£S OF !58E
* * " •
A R(SL LUTIC N AP PR OVI NG A~ AOOfNOUM TO THE 19~4-l q86 CO LL ECT IVE 8 ARG AI NI NS
~GRf£~f ~T EY A~O PflWff~ TH E CIT Y OF ENG LE WOOD , COL OR ADO , AND THE -
E ~G L E•CO O fMPL OYEfS A S 3 0 CIA TI O~ rFFEC T IVE JA NUARY 1 , 1 986 THRO UG H
JE C(~P EP 3.t ;9H 6 •
~~Y OR PRO TEM BR A OSHA~ MO VED TO PAS S RESOLUTION NO . &3 , Sf~!£S
OF 19P~. Cc uncil Me~be r Vocejda seconded the motion . Up on a c a ll o f th e
r c tt, t ~~ ~ott r es~l~ec a~ f o ll o~
•
~ye s :
~ <'Y S :
Co u n cil Memb~r s Hi ada y . Van Dy(e , Vo bej d a , Wei s t •
ff iloo Br adsha w, Otis .
None .
e v~yor decl a r c c th e ~o t i on c a rri Pd .
" * *
......
.......
.......
e I 'i
..__-
I•
"' . .. . ... ... .. ..
l
~
I)
L
:Je c~r--c ~r
iJ a,~~ !:
1"'25
r;ty Att o rnoy O l ~e n 3s k ec Counc il t o app r o ve a a ,R ~ sa l a rv
ircr •a s ~ fe r the teo a l oss ist ~n t s in th e City Atto r nPy 's office • 4~ f o r
rc cleric e:L oos ltions , 'lnd t~aoo r ov3tf)e u po r ad i nq of the """'"!14 ··~~-
cl e rical lC Sitio~ir the Assis tant CifY Att orn"y 's (p r osecu t o r) Office ,
~A Y OR OTI S ~O VlD TO APPR OVf THF PfCO~MfNnATIO ~S ~AD(
~' T~f rrry LTT rRNE Y ~0" THE YEA P 1qA6 . ~ayo r Pro Te~ ?r ~dsha w s e con d~c
he ~ctic r . Lccn a c 3 Ll o f the r o ll , th? vo te r esu l tea as f ol l ows:
A )F !>:
t;. Y$:
Courri l r ·~hers Hi cda y, Van Dy ke , Vo be id a t Wei~+,
~i l c , 8 r ~as~J~• ~t is •
.'J O:il! •
The ~•yor de cl a r ed the mo tion c a rr ind ,
RESOLLTTO~ NO . 6 4
SERifS OF .9~~
A RESC LUT !CII. SUP POIHI ~G A S TAT( "1 AI\DA TOR Y S AFETY B ~LT usr LAW TO REDIJCE
~~~URY '~0 I MPA IR~E N T~ fE CAUS E OF "1010 R VEH I CLE CRASHES .
~sP5 .
r c ll •
r cuNClL Mt~PER HIGDAY MOVED TO PASS RESO LUTI ON NO . 64 t SE~I ES OF
May Pro Tem P r adsha w seconded the motion . Upon a c a ll of 'he
t n~ vote r esulted as f ol lo•s :
A) E:.>;
~ <:Y
Co urcil ~e ~b e rs hi~day , Va n Oyke t Vo be jdn t Wei s t ,
P i l o o P r 3d ShJW t 0 tis ,
None •
Tre v a ycr detlo r eo the ~ot 1 on c a rri ~u .
• • • * •
Tt c re be1no ~o furthe r bus in ~~s to d i s c uss , COUNC IL M E~PE R
/tt lC OAY I'OVEO TO ACJO URN . ~a ycr O tis ad jc.urn ec! the neetin c. witllou~ J vo t e
a t p ;q : P •••• ~nd wi shed e v e ryone a ~~rr y Christ~a s .
-:;~tr-ritr -rf:;~--------------
•
p~
•
7t;_J 4/J ./Yl .cf
7 . 3oynl .
•
• •
AGENDA ITEM ---PRESENTED BY -----
~ 'b (}'~G Uo
--------' t.doU&~J y (jJ{I1,
ROLL CALL
Moved Seconded Ayes /'Nay
Hlgday / tfr'l\
"'· aJ / I
Vobeida -J I
Weist --HH-ro I -f.--Bradshaw " ~ Otis [\ .
MOTION: \
Absent
-
Abstain
-t:---r---
I .
•
• •
AGENDA ITEM -----PRESENTED BY --------
ROLL CALL
Hoved Seconded Ayes Nay Absent Abstain
Hlgaay ' y
~l(l'>< /1 ""· v
Vobe1da ;}__ v
Weist v
Bi lo v
Bradshaw v
Otis J/
MOTION:
I • •
•
/
AGENDA ITEM ~ cJ.---
Moved Seconded
H l_gday
Neal
Vobeida
/ Weist
Y' lfllo v Bradshaw
Otis
MOTION:
ROLL CALL
~.
•
• •
PRESENTED BY --------
Ayes Nay Absent
'I Abstain
I
I
I
I
I
\
........
I • •
•
• •
AGENDA ITEM 6 {1__ PRESENTED BY ------
ROLL CAL L
Moved Seconded Ayes Nay Absent Ab t I s a n
Hlgaay
Neal
Vobeid a
Weist
Bllo
Bradshaw
Otis
MOTION :
I . .
•
•
• -
AGE NDA ITEM 1. PRESENTED BY ----------------
ROLL CALL
Moved Seconded Ayes Nay Absent Abstain
~ay
Nea....!_
VObftlda
Weist
Bllo
Bradshaw
Otis
MOTION:
I I •
•
•
• -
PRESENTED BY --------
ROLL CALL
Hoved Seconded Ayes Nay Absent Abstain
_t1_Lgda_y I ~---Neal I
Vobei da
Weist I
JL _Silo l
Bradshaw
Otis \
\ MOTION: {!1 cc. . J~
I •
•
•
• •
AGENDA ITEM PRESENTED BY ----------------
ROLL CALL
Moved Seconded
~~
Ayes Nay Absent
_l
Abstain
Ne~ j_
VobEU_da 1 v-We.!_s t .L __8_1 lo I y Bradshaw .l Otis ~
~
MCYI'ION:
I • •
•
•
• •
AGENDA ITEM ----PRESENTED BY ------
10 3 0
Moved Seconded Ayes Nay Absent Abstain
lfTQaav
Neal
Vobeida
Weist
Bllo
Bradshaw
Otis
MOTION:
I . .
•
•
• •
AGENDA ITEM -----PRESENTED BY --------
L
ROLL CALL
Moved Seconded Ayes Nay Absent Abstain
~
Hlg<lav ...-Neal I
Vobeida
Wei s t 7
Bl lo I
._.......-Bradshaw I
Ot i s \
\.
MariON:
I • •
• •
•
• •
AGENDA ITEM-----PRESENTED BY --------
ROLL CALL
Moved Seconded Ayes Nay Absent Abstain
Hlgday I
Neal I
J/ Vobe,da I
Weist
Bllo
v Bradshaw
Otis
MOTION:
I • •
•
•
• •
AGENDA ITEM 1/bL-·
c )J 7)sY oy jail~~
lr ur -'-fu ,_, ~v (A)ll.t /i_J
~02?JL
f2t)'\1-t"--a -JJ.A ~ L~ /JC-?'1.
c.:::j 0.. } )_ J uL ~~ ..-/ ~ c{U L L~
.~~
tt'Y-t},}j__ cr) d{,~ £L~rJ
ROLL CALL
Moved Seconded Ayes Nay Absent
Hlgday
Neil
Vobe da
Weist
Bllo
Bradshaw
Otis
MOTION:
•
~ a/. G L<11-~
L -;tJ"L-'Ul. .
Abstain
I . .
•
• •
AG ENDA ITEM ----PRESENTED BY ------
/ru_dal.~ ci.J..4J.L~"J"
-Fo_XctY\ ..ffJ\... o..-CC
1..A
-dl/}~ -v -,Ailt{/p <J-tl(Y.)/ ~~IJu_,~~
_/<) /JcO ~~~ -" r~<:l( r••~ wu~-
Zc~'>'-fo/._.__ .. /l~r-"~ c.fo ~d &..
-I ') t 7 I %9 aD '"e li::~ {~£"--' ,A.-R/~_x~.-i<J
c
-'!t 2 D -5 s-O I>~ LC ~
_ ~v...Z daL -If' f'»u~ /JLL r lill..&.
-~o '-L _,.t~ ~
ROLL CALL
Hoved Seconded Ayes Nay Absent Abstain
Hlgday
Neal
Vobei da
Weist
Bllo
Bradshaw
Otis
MOTION:
I . .
•
-
AGENDA ITEM ----
't 1-h -DLU A + :20j J--<J_J
~~. J i 'tj .M-{"
y;jc r1 dU-LtL c<. ~ ~ ~-u.Y ai!_ t Lu ..;__'---'
~r '-·'-~ w~· ;t
•
• •
PRESENTED BY ------
f -su u ').i..J fl.L
l.-t CA~O l
/f_ ;( ~~ k t-v __, -._ ~ ~ L.._) tVJc~L_ C---t~ ,U '_.___
9;_ J-~1u_'rh
-6 I _~:;-S ~ 't_i a L
.--.~<.). u 4-L {_
.-:1--~-?:;. :J.)
ROLL CALL
Moved Seconded Ayes Nay Absent Abstain
Hlg<lay
Neal
Vobeida
Weist
Bi io
Bradshaw
Otis
MOTION:
• •
I . .
•
• -
___ _,_,.._ ___ ----
AG ENDA ITEM ----PRESENTED BY ------
RO LL CALL
Moved Seconded Ayes Nay Absent Abstain
Hlgday
NeaT
Vobeid a
Weist
Bllo
Bradshaw
Otis
MOTION:
I . .
• •
•
• •
AG ENDA I TEM ----PRESENTED BY -------
ROLL CALL
Moved Seconded Ayes Nay Absent Ab t I
/
s a n
1/ HIQdav
Neal
Vobeida
Wei s t
etto
1/ Bradshaw
Ot is
/-13·/fG I •
• • n
•
• •
AGENDA ITEM ----
P~EmEDBY ______ _
0
ROLL CALL
Abstain
Moved Seconded
HTqday
NeaT
Vobeida
Weist
Bi lo
Bradshaw
Otis
MOTION:
I .
•
• -
---~-~~~~~--~-----~ ----
AGENDA ITEM ----PRESENTED BY -------
Moved Seconded
MOTION:
Hlgday
Neal
Vobe1da
Weist
Bllo
t/u_ /(_ 4---t!L c ( ')U.__r
ffi~~j-.
ROLL CALL
Ayes Nay Absent
"\
I
I
I
I
Bradshaw I
Otis \
\
Abstain
0
I . •
• -
• •
AG ENDA ITEM
PRESENTED BY :fj ' i./J-rrc {Lj .
0
ROLL CALL
Moved Seconded Ayes Nay Absent Abstain
v lff90av
Neal I
Vobe1da /
Weist I
-Bilo 7
v Bradshaw \
Otis \.
I • •
MOTION: {)!_ J
Q ./-cc II b
• •
•
• •
... -
AGENDA ITEM I It
ROLL CALL
Moved Seconded Ayes Nay Absent Abstain
HlgOay
Neal I
v Vobe1da I
Weist !
Bllo (
{/ Bradshaw \
Otis \
MOTION:
I • •
• •
•
• •
...
AGEN DA ITEM (3 PRESENTED BY -------
=</ '/c ,, <jJ
1 ?, tl /J'-fi.>U ~~
,_j ik !),,} J (I r~ ::1-
,
ROLL CALL
Moved Seconded Ayes Nay Absent Abstain
Higday
NeaT
Vobeida /
Weist I
Biio I
<::7 Bradshaw I
........-Oti s \
'\..
MOTION: I . .
• •
•
• .. •
....
AGEND A ITEM -----PRESENTED BY --------
ROLL CALL
Moved Seconded Ayes Nay Absent Abstain
H1ge1ay \
Neal 1
Vobe1da I
Wei s t I
Bllo I
t.-/ Bradshaw 1
Otis l
MOTION: "" I • •
• •
•
• •
AGENDA ITEM PRESENTED BY
ROLL CALL
Moved Seconded Ayes Nay Absent Abstain
-H.qday
Neal
Vobe;da
~ Weist
Bi lo
Bradshaw
Otis """1 -
MOTION: I . •
• •
•
•
• -
SIs-s £:, £Jl"')!_,_ Jfl-,
~!I..J.S'" s,_ {: (_. A .
•
.... . --
0
I .
• PUBLIC HEARING /C
•
I WISH TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL
NAME ADDRESS TELEPHONE OBSERVER IN FAVOR IN OPPOSITION NO POSITION
• •
-
-
~ -
• •
•
-
•
Eng lewood School5
; -.. ~ ', -. (' ..
October 29 , 1985
Ms . Dorothy Dalquist
City of Englewood
3400 South Elati
Englewood , CO 80110
Dear Dorothy :
•
• •
/
·• I
I
I J .. .,.
Here is the list of athletes who qualified for state level competition :
CROSS COUNTRY
Heath Sutphin
2978 S. Clarkson
Englewood , CO 80110
Guy Torres
3045 S . Galapago
Englewood , CO 80110
Andrew Hendry
4849 S. Kalamath
Englewood , CO 80110
Sean Matthews
3285 S . Penn
Englewood, CO 80110
James Alcock
3801 S. Lincoln
Englewood, CO 80110
Troy Ferguson
4717 S. Acoma
Englewood, CO 80110
Greg Cross
5055 S. Delawar
Englewood, CO 80110
Donni Ashlock
3877 S. Del a war
Englewood , CO 80110
loa c-he : Randy Penn
J ff Kicia
<1 ( •t-!. r • ''ti'
SOCCER t+ / ~{-~ /':;:t;;;Zi_
Norm Ar c hambault
3902 S. Lincoln
Englewood , CO 80110
Howard Carlile ,1~ . '.
301 W. Chenango ~
Englewood , CO 80110
Sung Sun Chang
3965 S. Penn
Englewood , CO 80110
Dian Cu stis
3517 S. Marion
Englewood , CO 80110
Mike Kerswill
3250 S. Marion
Englewood , CO 80110
Sean Matthews
3285 S. Penn
Englewood, CO 80110
Troy Schwartzkopf
4616 S. Pearl
Englewood , CO 80110
N lson Chow
4600 S . Lipan
Englewood, CO 80110
Dar1n Hargadin
374 0 C'. El all
Engl<>wood , CO 80110
t
-;b:....U,.--r..v_,.,v~.f-
I •
-
•
•
.:
SOCCER
MJk e Moore
4 03 5 S . Jn ra
Englewood , CO 80110
Sha r,c Vigil
71 0 E. Jeffe r son #3 0 4
Englewood , CO 80110
Rirk Onodera
419 5 S . Cheroke
Englewood, CO 8 0 110
Ho ng Yi
3407 S . Logan
Englewood, CO 80110
Steve AJ len
1 029 W. Stanford Pl.
Englewood , CO 80110
Mark Christensen
4630 S. Delaware
Englewood, CO 80110
Shane Hiett
3985 S . Logan
Englewood, CO 80110
Dale Igou
3041 S . Pearl
Englewood , CO 80110
Pat McGehee
4500 S. Huron
Englewood, CO 80110
Tr oy Pillow
3700 S. Fox
Englewood, CO 80110
Mi ke Reyno] ds
1021 w. Stanford Pl.
Englewood , CO 80110
Del Stark
202 E. Dartmouth
Englewood, CO 8 0 110
LN: Jw
•
• -
SOCCER
Coa c hes: N iJ Mc Laughlin
J erry Gilchrist
J e ff Whit e
/~~
Larry Nisbet
Athletic Director
•
I •
•
SPECIAL MEETING:
•
• •
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
City of Englewood, Colorado
November 25, 1985
The City Council of the City of Englewood, Arapahoe County,
Colorado , met in special session on November 25, 1985, at 7:30 p .m.
Mayor Otis, presiding, called the meeting to order.
The invocation was given by Council Member Higday. The pledge of allegiance was led by Mayor Otis.
Mayor Otis asked for roll call. Upon a call of the roll, the following were present:
Council Members Higday, Van Dyke, Vobejda, Weist, Bilo,
Bradshaw, Otis.
The Mayor declared a quorum present.
* * • * * * *
Also present were: City Manager McCown
* * *
Assistant City Manager Vargas
Assistant City Manager of Economic
Development Powers
Assistant City Attorney Grimm
Deputy City Clerk Owen
* * * *
Mayor Otis stated the purpose of the meeting was a public
hearing to consider The Marks Planned Development.
MAYOR PRO TEM BRADSHAW MOVED TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING.
Council Member Bilo seconded the motion. Upon a call of the roll, the vote resulted as follows:
Ayes:
Nays:
Council Members Higday, Van Dyke, Vobejda, Weist,
Bilo, Bradshaw, Otis.
None.
The Mayor declared the motion carried.
Mayor Otis stated the purpose the public hearing was to
considered the Marks Planned Development. During the last public
•
I • •
November 25, 1985
Page 2
•
• ..
hearing there were a number of questions on parking, traffic, South
Franklin Street closure, and drainage problems.
Assistant City Manager of Economic Development Powers presented
information on this matter. Ms. Powers entered into the record
certification of posting, the newspaper's publishers affidavit, and
letters received since the last hearing (one from the Cherry Creek School
District which in summary stated it was their practice that when
developments come into their dis trict that generate students, they either
require dedication of la nd or payment of a fee in lieu of the
dedication.) Ms. Powers stated she has talked to the City Attorney's
office about th i s, and it was staff's op ini on that since the City does
not have a written agreement with the Cherry Creek School District to
impose these kinds of requirements on developers through the PO process
or any other process, staf f strong ly encourages the developer to work with the school district.
Ms. Powers entered i nto the record three letters from Cherry
Hills Village, two from the Deputy City Clerk and one from the City
Administrator. Ms. Powers summarized the letters to state the Cherry
Hills Village City Council was concerned about the traffic and no1se
impact. Ms. Powers stated berms, fences, building materials used, and landscaping would mit i gate the noise.
Ms. Powers sta t ed the thi rd set of letters was from the State of
Colorado Department of Highways. She entered them into the record and stated these would be discussed later.
Ms. Powers read the follow ing letter into the record:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
November 25, 1985
The Residents of the Waterford Project
c j o Pearle Rae Kortz
1900 East Girard Avenue -Jl003
Englewood, Colorado 80110
RE: The Marks Project
Englewood , Colorado
Dear Residents :
It is our desire that this letter confirm ou r discussions of
November 21 regarding certain additional modificati ons and compromises to our development plan.
• •
I • •
Jovem b er 25, 1985
Page 3
•
• -
1 . We will commence d e velopmen t of the pro j ect at the west end
of the site and continue develop i ng from the west end to the east end of t h e s i t e ;
2. The building directly north of the Waterford Recreation
Center will be moved as far west as possible on the site, as shown on the
site plan attached hereto and made a part hereof (the "Site Plan");
3 . The building directly west of the Waterford site will be cut
to one-ha l f of i ts size, as shown on t he Si t e Plan;
4. At any time within six mon t hs from the date of this letter,
we will e li minate t he "one-half" bui l d i ng referred to immediately above
u pon p a ymen t of $1 50,000. The parties understand that the property is
sub j ect to i ndustrial development bond financing and tha t the consent of
the lender and other parties involved would have to be obt a ined i n the
eve n t that th i s opt i on i s exerc i sed;
5. A covenant will be place on the site limit i ng developmen t on
what is commonly referred to as the east par c el to the 3 1 /2 bu i ldings
wh i ch we have agreed to, which buildings will be located only wi t h i n the
bu i lding envelope shown on the Site Plan;
6. We will part i c i pa te with the Waterford, o n a n equal cos t
b a sis, i n cons t ruct i ng a fence no higher t h an seven fee t l ocated along
the so uthe r n bound a r y of our prope rty, as ind i c ated i n green on the S ite
P la n, which fence will consist o f ced a r f e n ci ng wi th br i ck pillars a t
ap prox i matel y 3 0 t o 40 foot i nter v als;
7 . We wi ll construct, a t o u r sole cost and expense, a f ence n o
higher than s ev e n f e e t located alo ng th e ea s te rn bound ar y of our s ite , as
indicated in red on the S ite P lan , which fenc e wil l c on si s t of c ed ar
fencing with b rick pillars at a p proximtely 30 to 40 f o ot inter vals ; and
8 . The p lans and specifications for the above described fences
and landscaping will be reasonably acceptable to the residents of the Waterford;
q• The Marks Project will be constructed accord i ng to the plans
and specifications submitted to the City of Englewood, amended only by
the provisions contained in this letter; and
10. Between this dat e and nine months from the date hereof , we
agree t o negotiate in good faith with the Waterford Homeowner's Group or
their designated r epresentatives for the purchase of the entire east
parcel, acknowledging that if a contract is entered into , such nine-mon t h
p e riod does not include the cont i ngency period of the contract . In the
event that negotiations are entered into , we will s h ow you all costs and
expenses of acquiri n g, holding , and developing the e n tire Mark s Project ,
• •
I • •
•
November 25, 1985
Page 4
•
• •
and will make available to you the east parcel at a price equal to the
pro rata share of such costs and expenses. The parties understand that
the property is presently sub ject to industrial development fund
financing and that the property will have to be released from such
financing in the event that w~ enter into a contract as described above.
In consideration of the foregoing, the Waterford Homeowner's
Group agrees to send a representative to the City Council meeting to be
held on November 25, 1985 , and to state that the Waterford has negotiated
a settlement of its differences with the Chasewood Company and will not oppose the project.
Sincerely,
/s/ Richard 0. Campbell
President
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ms. Powers introduced Rick Kahm of the Engineering Services
Department to discuss drainage.
Rick Kahm stated the entire site was proposed for development in
1972 by the Larwin Corporation. The original site was bounded by Floyd,
Lafayette, Hampden , and Kent Village on the east with the back of houses
hat face Race Street. The overall development consisted of 57 .5 acres.
As part of the original proposal the Larwin Corporation retained SMN
consul ing engineers to do a drainage analysis and drainage plan for the
projec • As part of that project Larwin dedicated to the City an area
known today as Romans Park. Mr. Kahm stated he did the original design
on Romans Park and in order to do that he had to work closely with the
Larwin drainage plan. A the time the plan was done Larwin intended to
develop the entir~ site. Larwin was restricted in terms of what the
amount could be released into the storm sewer on Floyd Avenue. At that
time it was determined to be 60 cfs . Larwin showed in their original
design to discharge 49 cfs at Floyd and Lafayette the area discharging
directly into the storm sewer (Kimberly Woods). The remaining area was
to be taken to Romans Parks and was to be designed as a detention
facility. Floyd Avenue was restricted to a release rate of 11 cfs. All
he proposed development since 1972 has been required to conform with the
original drainage report. As the Waterford developed along the east side
they were also required to provide onsite detention and to conform with
the study. The Marks is to start out with the westerly portion of the
property. Originally Kimberly Woods consisted of 6.93 acres in the
Larwin plan. In this particular study, 3.68 acres will continue to
discharge directly into the storm sewer at Lafayette and Floyd. The
remaining acreage approximately 3 .2 acres will be diverted into the
center of the Marks property. Originally, the easterly portion in the
Larwin plan 7.6 acres was intended to be discharged overland through
Kimberly Village. In the Marks study all will be diverted but 1.9 acres
•
I • •
•
November 25, 1985
Page 5
•
• ..
to the west and into the central portion of the Marks plan. With the
Marks study 95.3 cfs is discharging into Romans Park as opposed to 149
cfs under the Larwin plan which holds back approximately 35% of the
flow. There will be three detention ponds in the Marks area.
Ms. Powers stated there were specific questions about the KKBNA
report and the methodology and criteria used in preparation of the
report. The second question concerned extension of South Franklin Street
through the project. Ms. Powers stated there was a 60-inch line
belonging to the Denver Water Board underneath the street and an
easement that was recorded in 1928 controlling any development on top of
it. There were also restrictions in the original Larwin subdivision
waiver that stated any access onto Floyd was specifically prohibited
except for emergency exits. Ms. Powers stated they have discussed this
with the developer and asked if they would consider some additional type
of contract or written documents between Chasewood and the City
specifying that no access would be granted onto Floyd unless it was
permitted by the City Council.
Ms. Powers stated the third item of concern was the traffic
problem at Girard and Lafayette. Ms. Powers stated staff has looked at
the possibility of traffic lights, four-way stop, and parking restrictions.
Ms. Powers entered into the record a letter dated November 4,
1985 from the State Highway Department offering suggestions decongesting
traffic along Hampden, mitigating noise, providing for a double left lane
from Gilpin coming south out of Gilpin onto Hampden Avenue.
Ms. Powers discussed the impact on Kimberly Wood and Kimberly
Village parking. Ms. Powers stated staff recommended both sides be
restricted from parking and both s i des be fire lanes because the sides
are not s ide enough to access both sides to accomodate competing traffic.
Ms. Powers discussed the impace of the development on Romans
Park and stated it was dedicated by the original developers of the KLZ
site and was designed to serve the entire development not just Kimberly Woods and Kimberly Village.
Joe Plizga, Traffic Engineer for the C ity of Englewood, came
forward. Under testimony, Mr. Pl izga commented on the State Highway's
letter re: accel and decel lanes. Mr. Pl izga stated based on the
projected volume s he did not feel any change to the acceleration lane
needed to be provided at this time. He suggested that the developer make
a statement that if at some time in the future it was deemed necessary
then they would provide costs to make the necessary changes. Concerning
the double-left lane coming out onto the south leg of the intersection of
Gilpin which wou ld be the Cherry Hills was unnecessary. Mr. Pl izga
•
)
I • •
•
November 25, 1985
Page 6
•
• ..
stated he could change the cycle length to provide variable cycles during
various times of the day to solve the traffic problem even further.
Council Member Van Dyke asked if a third party opinion was necessary.
Mr. Plizga stated KKBNA agreed with his recommendation.
Dick Campbell, 1120 Lincoln, Denver, president of the Chasewood
Company, came forward. Mr. Campbell introduced Bob Hamilton, KKBNA, who
conducted the traffic studies within the area.
Mr. Campbell stated he would be glad to participate in whatever
the City and State worked out regarding acces onto Gilpin and
acceleration onto Hampden Avenue.
Bob Hamilton, KKBNA Consulting Engineers, 4251 Kipling,
WheatRidge, came forward and explained the methods and techniques that
they used in conducting traffic study for the Chasewood people. Mr.
Hamilton stated the study was a collection of data from traffic counts
(automatic and manual) at all of the location of entrances to the site.
The counts were taken at certain times of the day. Mr. Hamilton stated ~
he supported Mr. Plizga on his position of the double-left turn lanes and
speed change lanes. Mr. Hamilton stated the extension of the
acceleration lane was not the thing to do, and the double-left turns were
not warranted from a volume consideration. Mr. Hamilton stated a
clarification of percent of traffic using the Girard and Lafayette
intersection should be adjusted downward to 48%. Mr. Hamilton stated
using the projected total traffic for that intersection at build out, the
service level should be "C" which by standards of the ITE manual were good.
In response to Council Member Van Dyke's question, Mr. Hamilton
stated they did not perform an in-depth study of the traffic around Charles Hay School.
Mr. Campbell agreed to talk with the Cherry Creek School
District. He stated there were no plans to extend the USP. of South
Franklin Street . Mr. Campbell s ated the site plan has changed due to
negotiations with the Waterford people and final landscaping and fencing
will be worked out when the time arrived.
Mayor Otis asked for comments from the audience.
Edward D. Payne, 5090 South Washington, came forward. Mr. Payne
stated he would be moving into the Waterford. Mr. Payne stated the
apartments were pleasing to the eye and he thought Kimberly Village, the
Marks, and the Waterford could live in harmony •
•
I •
November 25, 1985
Page 7
•
• ..
Sidney Parr, 3~29 South Franklin, came forward. Mr. Parr
expressed disappointment that the Chasewood Company did not contact him
about this project and that it appeared they contacted the Waterford
residents only. Mr. Parr contended there would be an increase in
traffic, he asked how renters could add s tability to the community, and
how rental units could be compatible with the concept of single-family
residents. Mr. Parr submitted pictures of the parking problems in the area .
Chris Weir, 3170 South Race, came forward. Mr. Weir stated he
lived near Romans Park. Mr. Weir stated he had noticed an increase of
traffic between Dartmouth and Floyd, specifically at the east end of
Romans Park. This area was being used more and more to avoid waiting at
traffic lights at University and Hampden. Mr. Weir stated there were 17
children in the neighborhood under 15 years of age. Mr. Weir stated with
new apartments comes the increase of traffic. Mr. Weir stated he managed
apartments and noted he always saw moving vans in the neighborhood, he
never knew any fellow apartment dwellers, and never felt an obligation to
improve the apartment. Mr. Weir asked Council to disapprove the development.
Kirk McCombs, 1401 East Girard, manager of Kimberly Woods
apartments , came forward. Mr. McCombs introduced Mr. McDermott as a
representative of the management firm for the apartments.
Arthur McDermott st ated they operated the Kimberly Woods even
though they did not own it . Mr. McDermott stated they were in the
process of residing Kimber l y Woods which would start in the next 30 days
and would take 9 months. Mr. McDermott stated the no parking along
Girard created a handic ap for his proejct because that eliminate parking
in fron of the club house and prospect ive renters would have no place to
park. Mr. McDermott fa vo red widening the street. Mr. McDermott asked
for provisions to keep the existing area s from b eing ser iously hurt by this new project.
Luis T. Romero, 3220 So . Humboldt , came forward. Mr. Romero
stated the area was already satura ed wi h people and apartments , and he
wan ed to see the project disapproved.
Gary Rob in son, 3290 South Gilpin, came forward. Mr. Rob inson
stated he had problems with the people in the park. He stated he
eventually installed a pri vac y fence . Mr. Robinson statde the apartments would worsen the pro blem .
Kevin Sug ino , 3271 So. Humboldt , came forward . Mr. Sugino
opposed the project on the basis that it would lower property value, and
increase crime , traffic and pol ice enforcement cos s. I •
November 25, 1985
Page 8
•
• ..
William M. Hebb, 3251 South LaFayette, came forward. Mr. Hebb
opposed the project on the basis that it would increase traffic in the
area of the school and would discourage prospective home buyers.
Jerry Kennedy, 3225 South Race, came forward . Mr . Kennedy
opposed the project because property ownership was important and this was
not so for renters. There was a place for rental property but not at
this location . Mr. Kennedy opposed the the method of financing for this
project and requested that Council ask the developer if financing was
eliminated would they still go forward with it. Mr. Kennedy asked
Council to disapprove the project and wait to see what Congress does with
industrial development bond financing.
Jon Binder, 2009 East Floyd Place, came forward. Mr. Binder
opposed the project based on the traffic problems that would exist while
children are catching buses. Mr. Binder expressed concern about the
possibility of South Franklin Street being extended.
Norm Kerswell, 3250 So Marion, came forward. Mr. Kerswell
reported the road condition through the apartments and park along Girard was in poor shape.
Ms. Powers asked Harold Stitt of the Planning Division to
explain the improvements proposed for the Hampden and University intersection.
Harold Stitt, 7000 West 24th, Lakewood, reported two weeks ago
he attended a meeting held by the State Highway Department that was
called to review a set of plans for proposed improvements to the
intersection of US 285 and South University. One improvement was to
extend the left turn pocket off of South University onto Hampden Avenue going east.
Mr. Campbell came forward and rebutted earlier remarks. Mr.
Campbell stated they did talk to some of the homeowners north of the site
and many were concerned over the extension of South Franklin. Concerning
the traffic problems, some can not be attributed to the proposed site
(South University and Hampden Avenue intersection). Mr. Campbell stated
maybe C-470 would provide some relief. Mr. Campbell claimed the
development met or exceeded the requirements of the City . It was
compatible with the zoning requirements and requested favorable enactment .
There were no further comments.
MAYOR PRO TEM BRADSHAW MOVED TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
Council Member Vobejda seconded the motion. Upon a call of the ro ll , the vote resulted as follows:
I • •
-
•
•
• -
November 25, 1985
Page 9
Ayes:
Nays:
Council Members Higday, Van Dyke, Vobejda, Weist,
Bilo, Bradshaw, Otis.
None.
The Mayor declared the motion carried •
• • • • • • •
MAYOR PRO TEM BRADSHAW MOVED TO RECONSIDER THE MARKS PLANNED
DEVELOPMENT BASED ON THE NEW EVIDENCE AND ANSWERS TO THE QUESTIONS FROM
THE LAST PUBLIC HEARING. Council Member Van Dyke seconded the motion.
Council Member Higday stated he originally was opposed to the
development but had changed his mind, and he now was in favor of it. Mr.
Higday stated he appreciated the audience's comments, but they were not
sufficient in his mind. Mr. Higday stated the development would cause
traffic problems but this was not unusal to the metro area. Since it was
zoned R-3, the Chasewood Company was the best company to develop the project.
Upon a call of the roll, the vote resulted as follows:
Ayes: Council Members Higday, Van Dyke, Vobejda, Weist,
Bilo, Bradshaw, Otis.
Nays: None .
The Mayor declared the motion carried .
• • • • • • •
MAYOR PRO TEM BRADSHAW MOVED TO APPROVE THE MARKS PLANNED DEVELOPMENT BASED ON THE FOLLOWING:
1.
?..
3.
4.
5 .
A fireflow delivery rate of 4,000 gpm at 20 psi residual
main pressure be made available at the site.
The dedication statement on the plat be reworded to
eliminate reference to streets, alleys, and rights-of-way.
A drainage plan be approved by the Department of
Engineering Services.
An OPTICOM emergency vehicle traffic control device be
installed at South Gilpin Street and u.s. 285.
Fire lanes be designated and meet the requirements of the Fire Department •
I • •
•
•
•
November 25, 1985
Page 10
6. Parking is to be prohibited on Girard unless the street is
widened as required by the Engineering and Fire
Departments.
7 . Fire hydrants be located as required by the Fire
Department .
8 . An amenities/recreation package must be specified and
included in the Plan.
9. The tot lot is to be relocated to the west of South
Franklin Street extended.
10 . Legal descriptions for all water and sewer easements must be
approved. Water and sewer easements are to be labeled as
such and not as utility easements.
11. The Mountain Bell easement language is to be included on
the Plat.
12. All ancillary service uses and subsequent changes in use
are to be approved by the Director of Community
Development. Uses such as, but not limited to, barber
shops, beauty shopes, gift shops, coffee shops and dining
facilities may be permitted as ancillary servicesnfor the
convenience of persons living in the development. ~Sales
tax license will be issued for construction of the
ancillary services building until a list of the specific
uses or businesses has been submitted, and those uses are
approved by the Directoer of Community Development. Any
subsequent changes in the approved businesses shall be
submitted to the Director of Community Develpment for
approval.
13 . A traffic study shall be prepared and submitted by the
applicant for review and approval by the City and State
Department of Higways.
14. Public service will require easements , and the easement
records in Book 3663, Page 142 must be shown on the plan.
15 . Facilities are to be provided for the safe and orderly flow
of pedestrians and handicapped persons either within the
development or adjacent of the roadway. The roadway is
not to be used for pedestrian travel.
•
I • •
-
•
November 25, 1985
Page 11
•
• •
16. The roadway system within the development will remain a
private roadway. All maintenance, including but not
limited to street repairs, curb, gutter and sidewalks,
signing, crosswalk painting, drainage, snow removal,
sanding and street sweeping, must be born by the property owner.
17. Within a five-year period from the date the Planned
Development is approved, the developer will pay their
prorated share of the cost of installing a traffic signal
at the intersection of East Girard Avenue and South
Lafayette Street if the City Traffic Engineer establishes
that the intersection warrants a single.
18. Any changes to u.s. 285 adjacent to the development must
conform to the Highway access code.
19. The site distance analysis recommendation of the KKBNA
traffic study (Octiber, 1985) must be incorporated into the site plan.
20. The developer is encouraged to negotiate with t he Cherry
Creek School District regarding their letter of November 19, 1985.
Upon a call of the roll, the vote resulted as follows:
Ayes:
Nays:
Council Members Higday, Van Dyke, Vobejda, Weist,
Bilo, Bradshaw, Otis.
tlone.
The Mayor declared the motion carried.
* * * * * * *
There being no further business, COU NCIL MEMBER HIGDAY MOVED TO
ADJOURN. Mayor Otis adjourned the meeting at 9:35 p.m.
•
I • •
(
•
•
• •
ENGLEWOOD URB~N R!NEW~L ~UTHORITY
October 30 1 1985
Special Heeting
I. C~LL TO QRDEftL
9
The Special Heeting of the Englewood Urban Renewa l ~uthority vas
called to order at 5:3t P. H. by Chairman Robert Voth.
Hembers present:
Hembers absent:
~lso present:
II . BOND tRUSTEE .
Totton, Voth, Keena, Hcintyre , Hinnick, VanDyke
Susan Powers, Executive Director
Cole
~ssistant Director Hinson
Steve Bell, E. F. Hutton
Judy HcBride , Hanifen Imhoff
Hr . Bell presented an analysis of the proposals submitted by
Central Bank of Denver and Denver National Bank r egarding trustee
services for the upcoming ~uthority bond issue. Such services
include escrow agent, registration/transfer agent and basic
trustee functions . Hr. Bell summarized his comparison of the two
proposals by stating that Central Bank had higher front-end costs
to the ~uthority, but over the life of the bonds , the cost vas
less than that proposed by Denver National. Hr . Bell added that
if the bonds were held a short time and refunded , Denver
National's proposal would be cheaper because the front-end costs
would be reincurred at the time of refunding . Hr . Bell noted
that, because of the potential changes in federa l tax laws, once
the bonds are issued, they would probably be outstanding until
they matured. The ~uthority agreed to consider th e proposals and
take action at the next ~uthority meet i ng .
III. BUYER 'S CLUB CONTRACT.
Director Powers indicated that she voud like to update the ~ut hority on the latest developments in the conf identi al
negotiation s with Ken Bagus of Buyer 's Club .
•
I • •
-
(
•
•
• •
-3 -
e) The ~uthority will delaya soae
acquisition of the property required for the
project, some of the public improve•ents, and
the schedule for completion until 38's
performance is evaluated.
~YESa Totton, Voth, "innick, Keena, VanDyke
M~YS : alone
ABSEIWTa Cole
~BSTAIMa "clntyre
"r . "cintyre abstained fro• the above vote due to potential
business conflicts.
The •eeting adjourned at 6:42 P. "·
Wm. Richard Hinson
Assistant Director
•
I • •
•
• -
-2 -
Minnick moved:
VanDyke seconded: The Urban Renewal ~uthority go into Executive
Session .
~YES: Totton, Voth, Minnick, VanDyke, Mcintyre , Keena
N~YS: None
~BSENT: Cole
~BST~UI: None
The motion carried.
**********
Totton moved:
Minnick seconded: The ~uthority come out of Exe cutive Session.
~YES: Totton, Voth 1 Minnick, VanDyke, Mcintyre, Keena
N~YS: None
~BSENT: Cole
~BST~IN: None
The motion carried .
Totton moved:
Minnick seconded: The following actions are authorized for
Director Powers in her negot1ations with Ken
Dagus on the Buyer 's Club co ntr act:
a) The contract will not limit 38's l1ability
for construction and operati on of the Buyer's
Club.
bl Liquidated damages on the balance of the
retail to be built on the site will be limited
to $300 1 000 until the prope rty is deeded to 38
for the balance of the retail . ~ lease with a
tenant must be signed by that date. If 38
defaults on this provision , the ~ut hority may
sell the property upon whic h the balance of
the retail was to be located to some ot her
developer .
c) ~ full letter of credit 1s required for
both phases (Buyer's Club and oth er retail !,
and a reduct1on in the outstand1ng letter of
credit is not allowed until the property is
sold to 38 .
d) Monthly progress reports are to be
required from Mr . Bagus .
•
I •
•
•
•
• •
-3 -
e) The Authority will delay1 some
acquisition of the property required for the
project, so•e of the public improvements, and
the schedule for completion until 38's
performance is evaluated.
AYES• Totton, Voth, "innict, Keena, VanDyke
MAYS: alone
ABSEIII'l'a Cole
ABSTAIMt "clntyre
"r . "clntyre abstained fro• the above vote due to potential
business conflicts.
The •eeting adjourned at 6st2 P. "·
w.. Richard Hinson
Assistant Director
•
I •
•
•
•
.. -
ENGLEWOOD URB~N RENEW~L ~UTHORITY
November 6 1 1985
I . caLL TO OBDER.
9 4
The regular meeting of the Englewood Urban Renewa l ~uthority was
called to order at 5:'5 P. H.
Members present: Voth, Cole, Mcintyre, Minnick, Totton, VanDyke,
Keena
Powers, Executive Director
Members absent: None
~lao present: ~ssistant Director wm. R. Hins o n
II. aPPBQVaL OF MINUTES.
~uguat 29 1 1985
October 2 1 1985
Ma. Betty Keena asked why Bob Mcintyre had abstained because it
was not noted in the recorda, though the By-Laws did state that
this should be done. Hr. Mcintyre informed the members that
Legal Counsel Paul Benedetti stated that he should state why he
was abstaining at the time the vote was taken. Bob Mcintyre
indicated that he abstained due to business conflicts.
Minnick moved:
The motion was seconded .
~YES:
N~YS I
~BSENT :
~BST~IN:
T he motion carried .
The Minutes of ~ugust 29 1 1985 be
approved and October 2 1 1985 be amended
to reflect Bob Mcintyre 's reason for
abstaining on the vote on October 2, 1985
regarding Buyer's Club .
Voth, Cole, Mcintyre , Mi nnick, Totton,
VanDyke
None
None
Keena
Hs . Keena abstained because she was not pres ent at the mee ting s
f or which the minutes were considered.
•
I • •
•
•
• -
-2-
III. RELOCATION PhYHINT.
Donovans Cafe-Deli
Totton moved•
Van Dyke seconded•
AYES:
NAYS:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
The motion carried.
The Urban Renewal Authority approve
relocation payment for Donovan 's De li in
the amount of $11 1 509 .55; payment of
$1,250 shall be tabled pending provision
of additional information .
Cole, Mcint y re, Minnick , Totton, VanDyke,
Keena
None
None
Voth
Mr.Voth stated that he absta ined from voting on this matter
because of a business relationship with Donovan 's Deli.
IV. RELOCATION PaYMENT.
Western Trading Co.
VanDyke moved•
Mcintyr e seconded •
AYES:
NAYS:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN•
The motion carried.
V . RELOChTION PAYMENT .
The Urban Renewal Aut hority approve
payment of $5 1 259.70 to Western Trading
Comp any as their f inal payment for
relocati on clai•s.
Mcintyre, Minn ick , Tott on, VanDyke, Voth 1
Cole, Keena
None
None
None
Western Office Ma chine Co.
Cole moved:
Keena seconded •
AYE S:
NJI.YS t
ABSENT •
ABSTAIN :
The mo tio n carried .
The Urban Renewal Auth or 1ty approve
payment of the relocat ion cl aim of
Wester n Office Machi ne Company in the sum
of $9 1 485 .19 1 pending further
documentation of Item #1 3 .
Minnick, Totton VanDyk e, Col e, Mcinty r e,
Keena
None
None
Voth
•
I • •
,.,
•
•
• •
-3-
Hr . Voth stated that he abstained because of a business
relationship with Western Office Hachine Comany.
VI. BELOC!TION P!YHENT.
Bank Western
Totton moved:
Minnick seconded:
~YES:
N~YS:
~BSENT:
~BST~IN:
The motion carried.
The Urban Renewal ~uthority approve
payment of $10 1 068.36 to Bank Western for
their relocation expenses.
Totton, VanDyke, Voth, Cole, Hclntyre,
Minnick, Keena
None
None
None
VII. BESOLUTION 123, SIRlES OF 1985.
Totton moved:
Cole seconded:
~YES:
N~YS:
~BSENT:
~BST~UI•
The motion carried.
The Urban Renewal ~uthority approve
Resolution 123 1 Series of 1985 1 ~
RESOLUTION ~DOPTING THE ENGLEWOOD URB~N
RENEW~L ~UTHORITY'S 1986 BUDGET.
VanDyke, Voth, Cole, Mcintyre, Minnick,
Totton, Keena
None
None
None
VIII. TRUSTEE OF BONp ISSUE.
Minnick moved:
Keena seconded:
~YES:
Nlt.YS I
~BSENT:
~BST~IN:
The motion carried.
The Urban Renewal ~uthor ity designates
Central Bank as the trustee of the IDB 's
being issued for Buyer's Club.
Keena, Voth, Cole, Hin nick, Totton,
VanDyke
None
None
Hclntyre
Hr . Mcintyre stated that he was abstaining due to business
conflicts .
•
I • •
•
•
• ..
-4-
IX. CHRISTMAS TREE LOT.
3601 South Logan Street
Totton moveds
Cole aecondeds
~YES:
N~YS :
~BSENT:
~BST~IN:
The motion carried.
X . RTD BUS SHELTER .
Mcintyre movedr
VanDyke secondeds
~YES:
N~YS:
~BSENTs
~BST~IN :
T he motion carried.
The Urban Renewal ~uthor1ty accept the
proposal from ~tkin Sprinkler Company for
$2 1 100 rental and a $100 deposit for use
of the lot at 3601 South Logan Street as
a Christma s Tree sales lot from November
15 to December 31 1 1985 .
Voth, Cole Mci n t y re, Minnick, Totton,
VanDyke, Keena
None
None
None
The Urban Renewal ~uthor ity accept the
RTD bus passenger shelter agreement as
presented .
Cole, Mcintyre, Minnick, Totton, VanDyke,
Keena, Voth
None
None
None
XI . RELOCATIOW MISCELLANEOUS.
Hr. Hinson in formed the ~uthor ity that he had infor med all
bu sinesses locat ed on the east aide of the old King Sooper 's
building of the eligibility for relocation benef its and the
proc ess required to apply fo r them. He als o mention ed that a
Notice fo Vacate had been served on Cinde re lla City Shoe Clin1c
for failure to pay rent to the ~uthority for September, October,
and November. Hr . Hinson added th at even though the o wne r of the
Shoe Clinic, Hr . Tony Garcia , was de li nquent on rent, staff had
been advised by legal counsel that his rent status sh o uld not be
a factor in the ~uthority 's consider ation of any requ est for
relocation benefits.
XII . MISCELL~NE OUS.
Staff was directed t o check on t he feasibility o f renting the
Southwes t corner of ~co ma/Broadway as a second Christmas Tree
sales lot .
•
I • •
•
X II I . APJOURN.
Cole moved:
Mcintyre seconded:
AYES:
NAYS:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
•
• •
-5-
The meeting be adjourned.
Mcintyre, Minnick, Totton, VanDyke,
Keena, Voth, Cole
None
None
None
The motion carried; the meeting adjourned at 8:20 P.H.
Charlotte H. Pritchard
Recording Secretary
•
I • •
-
•
•
• •
ENGLEWOOD HOUSING AUTHORI TY
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
Regular Meeting
October 30 , 1985
9
I. Call to Order
The Regular Meeting of the Englewood Housing Authority was called to
order at 6:20p.m., Octob er 30, 1985, at Sim on Center , 3333 South Lincoln Street, Englewood, Colorado, 80110.
II. Roll Call
Members Presen t:
Members Absent:
A 1 so Present:
Thomas J. Burns, Chairman
Elizabeth R. Beier , Vice Chairman
alerie Lash , Commi ssioner
Norleen Palmer, Commissioner
Beverly J. Brad shaw, Commiss ione r
Alan M. Feinstein, Executive Dire ctor
Wilma Reinhart, Accountant , EHA
Mary Ryan, Secre tary, EHA
f4r. Thomas J. Synnott, Principal
Alternativ e Hi gh School
I I I. Reading and Approva 1 of f4i nutes from September 25, 1985
Cha irman Burns requested that the wording on Resolution F, t4inutes of
September 25, 1985, be changed to read, "Va 1 erie Lash mo ed to make FY84
CDBG funds for rehab grant and loan progra m available to other elig1ble
applicants residing within the City of Engl ewood."
MOTION
VALERIE LASH MOVED THAT THE MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE ENGLEWOOD HOUS IN G
AUTHORITY BOARD OF C0Mt1ISSIONERS HELD ON SEPTEMBE R 25, 198 5 , BE APPROVED AS AMENDED.
Ayes:
t ays:
Absent:
I .
Burns , Beier, Las h , Palmer
None
Bra dshaw
The Chairman declare d the motion carried.
Visitors
Mr. Thomas J. Synnott, Principal of the Altern ative High School briefly
ga ve background information on his previous experience working with voca-
tion al school projects. Mr. Synnott then address ed concerns of the Board
regardi ng th e use of students from the Alternativ e High School carpentry
and masonery classes possibly providing fr ee labor to accompl1 s demo-
lltion work f or the Englewood Housing Auth ority .
•
I • •
-
•
•
• -
ENGLEWO OD HOUSING AUTHORITY
HOARD Of COMMISSIONERS MEETIN G
OCT OBER 30 , 1985 PAGE TWO
V. Director's Report
Inspec tion of 104 units at Simon Center was que s t ioned by Co mmissioner Beie r.
Thi s total was verified by the Executive Directo r as th e number of uni t s
actually inspected at Simon Center during the mont h of Septemb er , 1985.
Co mmi s s ioner Palmer question ed Loan No. 92 bein g 13 mon t hs deli nquent.
Sufficient equity on the loan to enable the EHA t o f orec los e was di sc ussed .
Collection of past du e amou nts, polici es and proce dures were also di sc us sed.
It was reported that the water-proofing paint had bee n applie d , r epa irs t o
t he para pets were completed, and the air condit ioning uni ts had been 1ns ta lled a t Or cha rd Place.
VI. Discussion Items, Motions and Resolutions
A. Res olution to Approve FY'86 Publi c Hou si ng Operating Bud get
MOTION
VALERIE LASH MOVED TO APPROVE RESOLUTION NO. 11, SERI ES OF 1985, PUB LIC HOUSING PROJECT
NO. C048-2 , C048-3 OPERATING BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR END ING DECEMB ER 31, 1986.
ELI ZABE TH R. BEIER SECONDED THE MOTION .
Ayes:
Nays:
Absent:
Burn s , Beier, Lash , Palmer
No ne
Brads haw
The Chairman declared the mot ion carried.
B. Motion to Approve FY'86 Simon Center Opera ting Budge t
VALERIE LASH MOVED TO APPROVE THE FY'86 SIMON CENTER OP ERATl G BUDGE T. ORLEE PALMER SECONDED THE MO TION.
Ayes:
Nays:
Absent:
Bur ns , Beier, Lash, Pa lmer
Non e
r radshaw
He Chairman declared the motion carried.
C. Motio n to Approve FY'86 Section 8 Existing Operating Budget
MO TION
ALERIE LASH MOVED TO APPROVE THE FY '86 SECTION 8 EX I STI NG OPERATING BUDGET AS AM tOED
TO I CLUDE THE CO ST OF COMPUTER EQUIPMENT AS SET FORTH AT THE ENGLEWOOD HOUSING AUTHORITY
GOARD Of COMMISS ION ERS MEETING HE LD OCT OBE R 30 , 198 5. ELIZABETH R. BEIER SECOIDED THE MOTION.
Ayes: Burns, Beier, Lash, Palmer r.aJ s 0 ;one
Absent: Brddshaw
'Tr,c Chninnan declared the motion earned.
_,_
•
I •
•
•
• •
ENGLEWOOD HOUSING AUTHORITY
BOA RD OF COMMISSIONERS MEETIN G
OCTOBE R 30 , 1985
PAGE THREE
D. Update on Rehab Loan No . 106
The Executive Dire c tor was directed to continu e monito r ing the status
of this loan . Discu s si on ensued reg arding a le t te r f rom Rick DeW i t t,
Attorney at Law, conc erning the var ious options av ai l able to the
Englewood Housin g Aut hor ity with re spect to this loan.
E. Motion to Approve Revised FY'85 Se c t i on 8 Ex i s t in g Op era t ing Budget for 28 Additio nal Units.
Discussion ensued regarding cost of insuranc e for the vehicle t o be
purchased for offi c ial use by the Section 8 Existing manage r (s) up on
approval of the FY'85 budget for Section 8 Existing .
MOTION
VALERIE LASH MOVED TO RATIFY THE TELEPHONE POLL CO NDUCTED TO AP PROVE THE REVISED FY'8 '
SECTION 8 EXISTING OPERATING BUD GE T FOR 28 ADDITIO NAL UNITS . ELIZABETH R. BEIER SECONDED THE MOTION.
Ayes :
Nays:
Absent :
Burns, Beier, Lash, Palmer
None
Bradshaw
The Chairman declar ed th e moti on ca rr i ed.
F. Request to Wr1t e Off Rehab Loa n o . 98
Discussion en s ued reg ardin g th e amount of the fi r st mortgage on this
property, the dolla r amount of reh ab wor done t o this property by
the Englewo od Housing Aut hori ty, a d the current staff estimate of worth on thi s property.
~
VALERIE LASH MOVED TO APPROVE THE WRITE OFF OF REHAB LOAN NO. 98. NORLEEN PALMER SECONDED THE MOTIO N.
Ayes:
tays:
Absent:
Burns, Beier , Lash, Palmer
one
Bradshaw
The Chairman declared the motion carried.
G. Moti on to Approve Pet Policx
Disc ussion ensued regarding suggested changes to the Englewood Housing Autho r 1ty Pet Policy . I • •
•
•
• •
ENGLE WOOD HOUSING AUTHOR ITY
BO ARD OF COMMISS ION ERS MEE TING
OCTOBER 30, 1985 PAGE FOUR
MOTIOJ!
NORLEE PALMER MOVE D TO APPR OVE THE PET PO LI CY WITH THE UNDERSTAtiOING THAT THE
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR WIL L INITIATE TH E CHAN GES WITHI N THE PET POLICY WHICH WILL
DIFFERENTIATE BET WEEN THOSE THINGS WHICH EED TO BE DONE I At4i:DIATELY UPO OVE-IN
DR PET ACQUISITIOI AND THOSE TH I NGS WHICH NEED TO BE DONE WITHIN SIXTY DAYS. VALERIE LASH SECON DED THE MO TIO .
Ayes:
Nays:
Absent:
Bur ns , Be ier, La s h , Palm er
one
Bradsha 1
The Chairma n dec la r ed the moti on car ried.
H. Upda e on Rehab Loan Progra m --Lette r f r o, Bernick & Moc h, Attorneys a Law .
Discussion ensued regarding procedures wine mu~t be followed if the
Engle wood Hous i ng Authority is to cont i nue with its Rehab Loan Program,
i.e . proce ed th rough City Council, get a resolution designating that
portion of an y future mortgage revenue bonds o the rehab loan program.
Any futu re issue of mor t gage revenue bonds ~li ll be reduced by the a11ount
of t he rehab loan pro gram, i f appro ved by C1ty Counc1l. The need to
revise the EHA's rehab locn program to cor ply wi n current regulations
was discussed. The Executive Director was d1rected to loo· into what
procedural steps must be followed in order to ensure the EHA receiving
funds in the fut ure for its Rehab Lo an Program.
I. HUD Bienn1al Management Rev1ew of Section 8 Ex./ Public Housin9
The Exec uti ve Director reported on nu me rous find ngs in Pu~l1c Hous1ng,
many o whic had been correc ed already. The Executive Director reported
that he had already met with the Public Hous1nq Manager concerning those
findings which had not as yet been corrected and ant1c1pated thdt those
findings would be corrected within he 45-day per1od allowed. Discussion
ensued r egarding s veral of the recommendations o the B1ennial Management Review.
J FY'84 Audit Re crt ft·o ~l i ~~& D1 on
A brief discussion rcgar 1ng th FY'84 aud1t ensued. Cop1es ot t ~ FY'84
Audit Report will be ma1l d to th Co~n1ss;orer as soon as th} r
received from Oppenhe1m, Appel and Dixon.
VI I. Financ:_1a 1 Report
ThP Financial Repo r t for the month ending Septemb r 30, 1985, for the
Er g1cwood Housing Author1ty was pr£>sented with no dio;cussior.
-4-
•
I •
•
•
•
• -
ENGLEWOOD HOUSING AUTHORITY
BOARD or COMtt,JSSIONERS MEETING
OCTOBER 30, 1985
PAGE FIVE
VIII. Consent Agenda
Information regarding housing programs and needs in the City of Englewood was presented to the Commissioners.
Goals and needs of the housing rehabilitation program for 1986 were pre-sented to the commissioners.
A s ummary of the Englewood Housing Authority insurance co ve r age wa s pre-sented to th e Commission ers .
The Commissioners were presented with a copy of the ne wspape r articl e which
appeared in the Denv er Post Sunday Real Estate Section on 9/29/85 advertis-
ing the Englewood Housing Authority ARRP Units. Discuss ion en sued regarding
the current status of the sale of ARRP units. Further discussion concerned
th e discounting of points as a further incentive to prosp ectiv e buyers of the ARRP units.
~
VALERIE LA SH MOVED TO AU THORIZE TH E EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR TO OFFER A FIXED-RATE FOR
DISCOUNT POINTS AT 2% ON THE REMAINING ARRP UNITS. NORLE EN PALMER SECONDED THE MOTION.
Ayes: Burns , Beier, Lash, Palmer
None Nays:
Ab sent: Bradshaw
The Chairman declared the motion carried.
IX. General Discussion
A. Commissioners' Choice
It was established that the November/December Meeting of the Englewood
Housing Author ity Board of Commissioners would be held on Decenber 4, 1985, at Simon Center.
B. Directo r's Choice
Discussion ensued regarding a $50,000,000 bond allocation to bu1ld wo,
100-unit highrises for the elderly on the old King Soopers s1t~ .
X. Adjournment
VALERIE LASH MOVED TO ADJOURN THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE ENGLEWOOD HOUSING AUTHORITY
BOARD OF COM~ISSIONERS HELD OCTOBER 30, 1985. NORLEEN PALMER SECONDED THE MOTJO •
Ayes:
Nays: Burn~, Beier, Lash, Palmer None
. Absent: Bradshaw
lhP Chairman declared the motion carried.
-!..-
• •
I • •
•
•
ENGLEWOOD HOUSING AUTHORITY
BOAR D Of COMMISSIONERS MEETING
OCTOBE R 30, 1985
•
• •
PAGE SIX
Th e Regular Meeting of the Englewood Housing Authori ty Board of Commissioners held
on October 30, 1985, adjourned at 9 :15 p.m.
Chairman
•
I • •
(
•
I.
•
• •
CITY OF ENGLEWOOD PL~NNING ~ND ZONING COHHISSION
NOVEMBER 1 9 1 1985
O,L L TO ORDER.
9
The regula r meeting of the Ci ty Planning and Zoning Commission
was called to order by Chairman Stoel at 7:00 P. H .
Members present: Beier, Carson, Gourdin, Hesa, Stoel 1 ~llen,
Barbre
Magnuson Members absemt:
~lso present: D. ~-Romans , ~ssistant Direc t or of Community
Developmen t
Susan T. King , Sen i or Planne r
II . ~PPROV~L OF MINUTES .
November 5 1 1985
Chairman Steel stated that t he Mi n u tes of November 5 1 1985 1 were
to be conside r ed for approval.
Carson moved:
~llen/Barbre seconded: The Mi nutes of November 5 1 1985 be ap-
proved as wr i tten.
~YES:
N~YS:
~BST~IN :
~BSENT:
Carson , Gourdin , Stoel 1 ~l l en 1 Barbre , Beier
None
He sa
Magnuson
The mot ion c a rri e d.
I II . 4 7 55 SOUTH S~NT~ FE DRIV E
Pl anned Deve l opme n t
CASE ff33 -85
Chairman Stoel stated that the Commission and staff ha ve rec e i ved
a request from Hr. Cameron, applicant, that the Public He aring on
this matter be continued until December 3 1 1985 to gi ve hi m
additional time to address problems noted 1n relation to t h e
Planned Development for his property.
Carson moved:
Gourdin seconded: Case #33-85 be contin u ed to Decembe r 3 1 1 985 .
~YES:
N~YS:
~B SE N T:
~B ST ~I N :
Gourdin 1 Hesa, Stoel, ~llen, Barbre, Beier, Car s o n
None
Magnuson
None
The motion carried .
•
I • •
IV .
-2-
PL~NNED DEVELOPMENT
300 West Belleview
Carson moved:
•
• ..
C~SE N34 -85
Barbre seconded: The Public Hearing on Case N34 -85 be opened .
~YES: Mesa, Stoel, ~llen, Barbre, Beier, Carson, Gourdin
N~YS 1 None
~BSENT: Magnuson
~BST~IN: None
The motion carried.
Chairman Stoel stated that he has received a copy of the Not ic e
of Publ ic Hearing published in the ENGLEWOOP SENTINEL on November
6 1 1985 1 and has also rece ive d copies of the Certificate of
Posting . Hr . Stoel asked that the staff make their presentation
at this time.
Ms. Susan King was sworn in, and testified that she is the Senior
Planner in the Department of Co mmunity Development . Ms. King
discussed the requirements of the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance
as they apply to the property at 300 West Bellev iew ~venue, which
is zoned R-3 1 High Density Residence. This is a 10.83 acre site,
which was annexed to the City of Englewood in 1964 . The original
multi -f amily residential zoning of the site wo uld allow a maximum
dens ity of 70 dwell ing units per acre with the bonus provision.
The Zon i ng Ordinance has since been amended, and the maximum
density allowed now is 40 dwelling units per acre . The applicant
is proposing to construct a total of 312 units on the 10.83 acre
site, or 28.8 units per acre. Open Space is r eq uir ed in the
Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance, and the applica nt is proposing
40~ open space vs. the required 25~. This ope n sp a c e will be
lighted for security purposes. Max i mum height of struc tures in
the R-3 Zone District is 60 feet; the maximum he1ght proposed by
the developer is 45 feet to the highest point on the roof on the
three story buildings. Ms . King then discussed setbac k
prov i s i ons , and pointed out that the applicant i s providing a 25
foot lands c aped strip along the west side of the propert y , plus
carports, and driving lanes, s o that the buildi n g line of the
firs t structures will be approximately 100 feet east of the west
property line. ~ 30 foot setback from West Belleview ~venue is
being pr o vided . The applicant is providi ng 532 off-str eet
parking spaces for the 312 apartment units, and f1ve or six
off -street loading spaces will be provided for use by tenants
moving into or out of the development.
Ms . Ki ng stated that the proposed development plans were reviewed
by all th e C i ty Depa r tments, and that the developer has
addres s ed all concerns that were raised by City staff. The staff
has no c onditions they suggest plac1ng on the approval of the
p r oposed Planned Devel o pment .
•
I • •
-
•
•
• •
-3-
Mr. Beier inquired about access to the site from Belleview
Avenue. Ms. King stated that State Highway Department wants
access to the development aligned with South Delaware Street to
the north side of Belleview Avenue, which the plans indicate.
The City Traffic Engineer is concerned about left-turning
movements into and out of the development; however, the State
Highway Department does not want a traffic signal inst alled at
the Delaware/Belleview intersection because of the proximity to
the Belleview/Broadway intersection. The City of Englewood will
monitor the traffic flow at the Belleview/Delaware intersection
for a minimum of two years, and if specific warrants are met, a
traffic signal will be installed. The developer has committed to
providing a traffic signal if the warrants are met . Mr. Beier
asked what "assurance" the City has that the developer will,
indeed, install such a light . Ms. King stated that there is a
letter on file to this effect.
Doug Wagner , 17633 East Temple Drive, was sworn in. Hr.Wagner
testified that he is the architect and planner for the project,
and presented several slides of the subject site and renderings
of the proposed development . Hr . Wagner stated that the site is
a compilation of five separate parcels of land that have been
purchased by Hr. Sanford Hetzel, developer; the site is on the
south side of West Belleview ~venue, and west of the K-Hart
Store. A small portion of the site is within the 100 year flood
plain for Big Dry Creek, and this part of the site will be
devoted to the open space/landscaped area . The acreage of the
site is 10.83 acres total. An acceleration/deceleration lane
along West Belleview Avenue is proposed for access to the site. ~n additional street light will be installed at the developer's
expense at the intersection of Belleview and South Delaware
Street . Mr . Wagner discussed the need for grad ing of the site
because of the topography of the land, and that the development
will be "terraced" down to Big Dry Creek. The development will
provide 1t7 covered carport spaces, with the rema i nder of the
off-street parking spaces to be open. Mr . Wa gner stated that the
developer has comm itted to instal lat ion of the traffic signal if
warranted within a two -year period after t hey receive the final
Certif i cate of Occupancy .
Hr . Beier stated t hat he understood approximately one acre of the
s1te is within the boundar i es of Littleton. He asked if this is
the area along Big Dry Creek. Mr . Wagner acknowledged that a
por tion of the site is in Li t tleton, and does lie along Big Dry
Cree k . This area wi ll be used for tennis courts and volley ball
courts, and open space and landscaping purposes; thi s is within
the 100 year flood plain of the Creek.
•
I • •
•
• ..
-4-
Hr . Allen asked if this will be a condominium development. Mr.
Wagner stated the proposed development will be built as
apartments. He pointed out that condominium developments are
built in "phases" as they are sold, but an apartment development
will be built out with one construction loan. The units are
designed to be at the "high end" of apartment development, but
Mr . Wagner stated that he has not discussed the rate of rental
for the units with the developer. He stated that it would be
difficult to determine the rental rate until the construction
loan is in place.
In response to a question posed by Mr. Beier, Hr . Wagner stated
that the development will be in the Littleton School District, District •6.
After a brief consultation with Mr . Hetzel, Mr . Wagner stated
that the rental rates will begin at $420 to $550 per month for
the larger two-bedroom units, and that it will be an adult community.
Mr. James Finn, 5166 South Elati Drive, was sworn in, and
testified that he has lived at that address for 21 years. He
stated that when he purchased his property, the land in the
Miramonte Subdivision was divided into 12 lots, and there were
nine residential lots on South Elati Drive; he thought it was all
an R-1 -A, Single-family Residential area. Then he found out that
the Miramonte Subdivision was zoned R-3; he was not aware that
multi-family zoning was ever imposed immediately next to
single-family residence. Mr . Finn stated that because the zoning
is in place, there is nothing that the opponents can do
1
but they
do ask that the Commission consider some of their concerns. Mr.
Finn stated that the plan proposes a 45 foot high structure,
which parallels three houses on South Elati Drive; the grade of
their block slopes from the northeast to the southwest, and he is
of the opinion that if this 45 foot high structure is built in
this location, the residents on South Elati Drive will be in a
"canyon". Mr. Hetzel also owns land to the west of South Elati
Drive, which is in L1ttleton; he is proposing construction of
multi -family units on this land also. If apartment construction
is allowed on both sides of South Elati Drive, the residents on
that street will be definitely placed in a "canyon ". Mr . Finn
asked that the developer be required to install a seven foot
fence on the property line between his property to the east and
South Elati Drive; that the landscaped buffer be composed of
trees and bushes, not rocks and gravel; if carports are to be
imposed on the property line that they be enclosed on three sides
so that the fumes will not blow directly onto the properties to
the west ; also, that the structures parallel to South Elati Drive
be two -story in height .
•
I • •
•
•
• ..
-5-
Linda Lutz, 5165 South Elati Drive, was sworn in, and testified
that she is aware that there is a high vacancy rate in many
multi-family developments. Considering this high vacancy rate,
she stated that she could not understand why the developer is
considering a development of the density proposed for this site.
Hs. Lutz quoted from an article in the ROCKY HOUNThiN NEWs, which
news article quoted the Lakewood City Manager as stating that
developers can make a profit at 10 units per acre, and discussed
the quality of developments. Hs. Lutz stated that many
developments are of such poor quality that they deteriorate and
"self-destruct• within 25 to 30 years.
Ruth Kelley, 5145 South Elati Drive, was sworn in. Hs. Kelley
presented a display of pictures of their block, which was noted
as Exhibit •1. Hs. Kelley stated that she ha~ lived at this
address for 24 years. Hs. Kelley stated that she realizes the
residents will have to accept some type of development on the
subject site, but asked that the Commission give consideration to
the imposition of the 45 foot high building directly to the east
of their property line. If the structure could be lowered to two
story it would certainly help the residents along South Elati Drive .
Pat Smeaton, 5155 South Elati Drive, was sworn in, and testified
that the residents have been fighting the development proposed by
Hr . Hetzel in Littleton for two and one-half years. Hs. Smeaton
stated that the Fire Marshal in Littleton had expressed concern
about adequate access and facilities to service a large apartment
development; she asked about the Englewood Fire Marshal's opinion
on service of an apartment complex in this area . Hs . Smeaton
also discussed the grade of the fire lanes; is it too steep for
the fire vehicles to maneuver, and is it of sufficient width.
Hs. Smeaton noted that the CDH development to the east of
Broadway has a final density of 14 units per acre; the density of
the proposed development is more than two times that of CDH .
Also, all of the residential development is situated to the north
end of the site, abutting the residential development along South
Elati Drive, while the open space is situated to the south end
abutting the South Slope Development, wh ich is multi-family . Hs.
Smeaton stated that it is the opinion of the residents on South
Elati Drive that the proposed development provides a better
buffer between the commercial development of K-Hart and the
proposed apartment development than between the R-3 and the
single-family development on South Elati Drive . Hs . Smeaton
stated that if the traffic signal is installed at Bell eview and
South Delaware, this will direct more traffic down Sout h Delaware
Street by the two schools. Hs. Smeaton further discussed the
action t he homeowners have had to take concerning the development
proposed by Hr. Hetzel in Littleton; the determ ination of the
City of Littl eton approved the multi -f amily zoning, but with
sufficient restrictions to protect the single-family homeowners .
Hr. Het zel is now suing the City of Littleton regardi ng this
matter. Hs . Smeaton questioned the validity of the figures
quoted on the trips -per -day originating from the proposed
development.
•
I •
•
• ..
-6-
Roy Hankie, 5050 South Delaware Street, was sworn in. Hr. Hankle
discussed the traffic congestion which is presently on South
Delaware and West Belleview ~venue, and expressed the opinion
that an acceleration/deceleration lane would not be that much
help. He suggested that another point of ingress/egress to the
site should be investigated. He also advised that traffic
accident records in the vicinity of South Delaware Street and
West Belleview ~venue should be reviewed, noting that there have
been several serious accidents.
Hr. Carson asked if Hr. Hankle was suggesting that the traffic
signal be installed at the present time. Hr . Hankle stated that
he would suggest there is currently a need for signalization of
the intersection. He pointed out that a motorist cannot make a
left-turn from South Delaware Street to east-bound West Belleview
Avenue at the present time.
Roger Newman, 5090 South Elati Street, was sworn in. Hr. Newman
stated that while it does sound as though the developer has
worked closely with the City staff in planning the proposed
development, Hr. Hetzel has not worked with the people who live
in the area abutting or adjoining the site. Hr. Newman suggested
that if the Planned Development is approved there be right-turn
only restrictions into and out of the development. Such a
restriction would alleviate left-turning movements across
Belleview ~venue traffic.
Dave Lone, 5045 South Delaware Street, was sworn in, and stated
he would have to agree with the neighbors that the proposed
development would impose a heavy traffic burden on South Delaware
Street . Hr. Lone stated that it is difficult to make a right
turn from Delaware onto Belleview, let alone a left-turn. Hr.
Lone stated that he feels the density proposed in the development
is very high and is opposed to the Planned Develo~ment.
Hr. Steel asked if there was anyone else in the audienc e who
wished to address the Commission, but had not signed in. No one
else indicated they wanted to address the Comm1ss1on.
Hr . Wagner asked if he could rebut some of the c omments opponents
had made. Hr. Wagner emphased that the structure on the west
side of the site which is parallel to South Ela ti Drive will be
set back 100 feet from the property l1ne. The ends of the
structures will be two-stories, stepping up to three story
maximum. The structures are all designed with a "stepped" back
aspect rather than the "block" design. Hr. Wagner stated that
the southern portion of the s1te, along Big Dry Cree k, is part of
the 100-year flood plain for the Creek, and will be heavily
landscaped and used for open space/recreational purposes. The
landscaping shown on the plot plans is also their landscaping
plan, and has been approved by the City staff .
•
I •
•
•
• ..
-7-
Mr. Wagner stated that the developer is also concerned about the
traffic congestion, and this is the reason for the provision of
the acceleration/deceleration lane along the frontage of the
site. The State Highway Department has stated that they will not
approve the installation of a traffic signal at the South
Delaware Street and West Belleview Avenue intersection; the
developer has agreed to a study of the traffic pattern for up to
two years after the issuance of the final Certificate of
Occupancy, and if warrants for the installation of a signal are
met, will cooperate with the City in the installation of the
signal. Hr. Wagner stated that the City of Englewood does have
the final determination on installation of a traffic signal, and
can over-rule the State Highway Department. Hr. Wagner stated
that regarding additional points of access, the more points of
access there are to the site, the more problems of traffic
congestion could result . Hr. Wagner disputed the "canyon" effect
that residents raised, noting that the height of the structure is
only approximtely 40 feet at the ridge, it is not a three story
block building that will be facing the neighbors. The
development is not low quality, and will not "self-destruct" in
25 to 30 years.
Hr. Stoel inquired about the width of the landscaping strip
abutting the property on the east side of South Elati Drive. Hr.
Wagner stated that the landscaping will be 25 feet in width; they
were also proposing a six foot high cedar fence which will be on
the property line. The carports will have sloping roofs, with
the west side of the carport only about four feet in height, and
the height at the point of access approximately seven feet in
height. The carports will be of the same construction as the
apartment units. The carports will not be "enclosed".
Discussion ensued on the location of the two story buildings.
Hr. Wagner noted that the slide which has been shown on the
screen is of a 36 unit building; they have 44 unit buildings
which are two story on the ends, stepping up to three story
toward the center. They did not do slides of the various sizes
of structures, but only of a "typical" structure .
Hr. Allen asked about the street light; Hr. Wagne r has stated
during the course of the meeting that the developer will "help"
with the installation of such a light, but the staff report
states that it will be "installed" by the developer. Hr . Wagner
stated that the developer will participate in the installation of
th e light . Hr . Wagoner also stated that the interi or roadways
will be finished with gray asphalt, not concrete .
Hr. Hesa asked if consideration had been given to providing
access from the south end of the development . Hr. Wagner pointed
out that the only point of adjacency with Lehow Avenue and the
subject site is where Big Dry Creek goes under Lehew Avenue, and
they cannot get access at that point, also there is a very steep
grade on the site on the southern part .
•
I • •
•
•
• •
-8-
Mr. Beier asked if an up-dated traffic study had been considered.
He stated that he would have to agree that the figures used on
trips generated during a given time period were "preposterous".
Mr. Wagner stated that the figures used were from the State
Highway Department, but the developer will work with the City on
resolving the traffic issue. Mr. Beier asked how old these
traffic figures from the State Highway Department were. Mr.
Wagner stated that they are 198' figures.
Mr. Beier asked what provision had been made for emergency
vehicle access if there is no traffic signal and heavy traffic
congestion on the street. Mr. Wagner stated that he had
discussed access by emergency vehicles with the Fire Marshal, who
saw no problem with the access as designed.
Mr. Mesa stated that he is concerned about impacting Belleview
Avenue with further traffic in light of the State Highway
Department's intention of closing off a number of streets
intersecting with Santa Fe Drive. He suggested that the closure
of these intersections would throw more traffic onto streets such as Belleview Avenue.
Mr. Wagner pointed out that the proposed development will contain
30' less traffic than it would handle if built to the maximum
allowed under the R-3 Zone District. The developer has tried to
design the project so it will be feasible financially, and still
be workable for the City and neighborhood.
Ms. King presented the elevations of the ,,_unit buildings to the
Commission for their consideration.
Mr. Carson stated that he is also concerned about the traffic,
and that the installation of a traffic light should be the
financial responsibility of the developer; the Ci ty taxpayers
should not have to pay for it. Mr. Carson then inquired about
trash pickup and storage. Mr. Wagner stated that there will be
screened trash dumpster sites throughout the development.
Carson moved:
Allen seconded: The Public Hearing be closed .
AYES:
NlWS:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Mesa, Stoel, Allen,
None
Magnuson
None
The motion carried .
Barbre,Beier, Ca r s o n Gourdin
Mr. Carson stated that he felt there is a need for more feed back
from the Fire Department on the matter of access for emergency
vehicles. He is also of the opinion the developer should pay for
the traffic signal at South Delaware Street and West Belleview
Avenue, if installation of such a signal is warranted.
Discussion ensued.
•
I •
•
•
• ..
-9-
Hs . King stated that in the past, a developer has provided the
cost of materials for a traffic signal, and the City has provided
the actual installation; Traffic Engineer Plizga has mentioned,
however, that he did not know how long this policy could be in
effect because of a shortage of staff time available for
installation work. Further discussion ensued.
Hr. Gourdin pointed out that one of the citizens addressing the
Commission suggested that left-turn movements be prohibited at
this intersection; this could help alleviate traffic problems in
the interim until a determination is made on signalization. Hr.
Stoel suggested that this should be part of the total traffic study.
Hr. Hesa stated that if a traffic signal is to be installed, he
would be in favor of the installation at the present time. He
pointed out that there will be increased congestion during
construction of the development. Hr. Hesa urged that an up-dated traffic study be submitted.
Hr. Stoel disagreed that traffic on Belleview ~venue would
increase because of intersection closures at Santa Fe Drive; he
stated that he felt there will have to be provision of
over-passes or under-passes to handle the traffic from some of
the streets presently intersecting with Santa Fe Drive. He
questioned that the intersection closures would have that much
impact on West Belleview ~venue. Hr. Stoel stated that he is
concerned about traffic, but does feel that the developer has
made an effort to meet every requirement in the Zoning Ordinance.
He stated that he is of the opinion that consideration has been
given to the residential neighbors to the west, as well as to the
commercial development to the east. He stated that he feels the
layout of the project indicates a quality life-style for the
residents of the project, and that as the landscaping which is
proposed matures on the site, it will be a benefit to the
residents on the west side of the project. Hr. Stoel reiterated
that he feels it is a quality project, and he will be voting in
favor of it; he does feel, however, that the developer should pay
for the installation of the traffic signal .
Hr . ~llen stated that his main concern is traffic; there should
be another point of access from the south; these are volat ile
buildings and he could see there might be a problem with fire access.
Mrs. Romans pointed out that there is provision for emergency
access through the South Slope Condominium development via the
east fire lane and a crash gate to the subject site; this crash
gate would be on the southeast corner of this site . Hr. Wagner
stated that this means of access had been discussed earlier, and
the Fire Department had stated that they no longer needed that
point of access. However, if the Commission so desires, the
developer is willing to make provision for such access from the south.
•
I •
-
•
•
• •
-10-
Hr. Allen asked about the location of fire plugs on the site.
Hr. Wagner stated that they are working with the Fire Department
on the location of the plugs on the site.
Carson moved:
Allen seconded: The Planning Commission approve and refer to
City Council the Planned Development for 300
West Belleview Avenue with the following
stipulations:
AYES:
NAYS:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
1. The traffic on West Belleview Avenue shall
be monitored for two years following the
issuance of the final Certificate of
Occupancy; if a traffic signal is warranted at
the South Delaware Street-West Belleview
Avenue intersection, it shall be installed at
the expense of the developer.
2. A fire crash gate access shall be
installed on the southeast corner of the
property to provide emergency access from the
south through the South Slope development via
the east fire lane.
Stoel, Allen, Barbre,
None Beier, Carson, Gourdin, Mesa
Magnuson
None
The motion carried.
v. SUBDIVISION WAivER
Public Service Co. CASE ff35-85
Mrs. Romans stated that Public Service Company is the applicant
for a waiver to the Subdivision Regulations. One parcel is to be
sold; but because no rights-of-way or easements are required, the
staff did not feel it was necessary to go through the process of a formal subdivision plat .
Hr . Bill Davies, Senior Real Estate Agent for Public Service
Company, was present and stated that he would answer questions;
the staff report covered the situation quite well, and he had
nothing further to add . In response to a question from Hr .
Carson, Hr. Davies stated that he agreed with the staff report as written.
I • •
(
•
Carson moved:
Gourdin seconded:
•
• ..
-11-
The Planning Commission approve the waiver to
the Subdivision Regulations for property in
the '600 block of South Santa Fe Drive on the
west side of the st reet as set forth in Case
•35-85.
~YES: ~llen, Barbre, Beier, Carson, Gourdin, Hesa, Stoel N~YS: None
~BSENT: Magnuson
ABST~IN: None
The motion carried.
VI. PUBLIC FORUH.
There was no one present to address the Commission.
VII. DIRECTQR'S CHOICE.
Hrs. Romans stated that after the packet had been sent to the
Commission, a letter was received from the Del Webb Co.
requesting approval of a private prison at 2750 South Shoshone
Street. Hrs. Romans read the letter into the record. This
property is in northwest Englewood. It appears that with the
problems the State of Colorado and other jurisdictions are is
having in building public prisons, that there are groups,
companies, or corporations who are interested in building
"private• prisons and leasing the facilities to governmental
agencies. Discussion ensued.
Hr. Barbre asked about the criteria on security that must be
installed in such a use. Hrs. Romans stated that she did not
know what the security criteria is, but she will try to get more
in formation if the Commission wants to pursue this matter . Hr .
Carson stated that he would like to know more about the private
prison issue. Further discussion ensued.
It was the consensus of the Commission that the use would not be
permitted in the 1-1, Light Industrial District.
Hrs. Romans stated that at the City Council meeting of Novembe r
18 1 the Council approved the Subdivision Plat filed by General
Iron Works; Council also approved the Subdivision Plat and
Tidwell Planned Development for property on South Decatur Street .
Hr . ~llen asked what has happened to the development on the old
KLZ site . Hrs . Romans stated that a second public hea ring has
been scheduled before City Council on November 25
1
1985 .
•
I • •
•
•
• •
-12-
Hr. Stoel asked if there was any further information about
Councilman Higday's letter which was written to the Commission.
Mrs. Romans stated that she had written to City Manager McCown
asking for clarification of Councilman Higday's comments
regarding Planning Commission decisions; in reply, City Manager
McCown indicated that Councilman Higday had made his point in the
letter and he felt it would not be necessary to expand on it
further. Discussion ensued.
VII. COMMISSION'S CHOICE.
Hr. ~llen stated that he and Hr. Gourdin attended the Planning
Commissioner's Seminar at Keystone. Hr. Gourdin stated that he
felt the session was very informative, and gave xeroxed copies of
some of the articles to the other members of the Commission . Hr. ~llen stated that he also discussed the issue of trash disposal
with other Commissioners attending the meeting.
Hr. Carson asked what progress has been made on the annexation of
some sites on southwest Englewood. Mrs. Romans stated that
meetings have not yet been scheduled. Hr. Carson stated that he
would like to invite the property owners of these areas to an
informal meerting to discuss the pros and cons of annexation.
Mrs. Romans pointed out that the people in at least one of the
areas have strenuously opposed annexation to the City of
Englewood in the past; but a meeting will be scheduled.
Hr. Mesa asked that staff look into the possibility of obtaining
a small desk lamp for the podium; he noted that it was difficult
for Hr. Wagner to see his notes during the slide show when the
lights were out.
There being nothing further to come before the Commission, the
meeting was declared adjourned at 9100 P. H.
~ertrude G. Welty
Recording Secretary
•
I • •
•
RESOLUTION NO. ~
SER IES OF 1985
•
• •
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ENGLEWOOD APPROVING
THE POLICY REPORT FOR SINGLE FAMILY MORTGAGE REVENUE BONDS UNDER
SECTION l03A OF THE INTERNAL REVENUE CODE.
WHEREAS, the City of Englewood, Colorado (the "City"), a
political subdivision of the State of Colorado, des ire s to
participate in the issuance of single family mortgage revenue bonds
for the calendar year 1986, to assist in the purchase or rehab ili-
tation of residences for low and moderate income persons and families; and
WHEREAS , to comply with Se c tion l03A(j) (5) of the Internal
Revnue Code of 1954, as amended, the highest elected governmental
representative of each governmental un it part ici p ating in the
issuance of these bonds is required to publish a statement of
policies that the governmental entity will follow: and
WHEREAS, the policy report has b ee n prepared and a public
hearing held on the pol i cy report;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF ENGLEWOOD, COLORADO:
Sec ti on 1. That the attached Policy Report governing the
issuance and sale of single family mortgage rev enue bonds for the
calendar year 1986 and the use of proc eeds therefrom is hereby approved.
Sect i on 2. That the Mayor and ex officio City Clerk-
Treasurer are hereby authorized to sign , attest, and publish the
Policy Report for and on behalf of the City Council and the City of Englewood.
ADOPTED AND APPROV ED this 16th day of December, 1985.
Attest: Eugene L~s, Mayor
ex off1cio City Clerk-Treasurer
I, Gary R. Higbee, ex officio City Clerk-Treasurer of the
City of Englewood , Colorado, hereby certify that the above and
foregoing is a true, accurate and complete copy of Resolution No.~, Series of 1985.
•
I •
•
•
• -
POLICY REPORT OF THE CITY OF ENGLEWOOD
ON SINGLE FAMILY MORTGAGE REVENUE BONDS UNDER SECTION lOJA
Taxpay er Identification Number: 98-03470
This report sets forth the statements of policy on single family mortgage
revenue bonds of the City of Englewood to be applied during the calendar
year lg85 in accordance with Section 103A(j)(5) of the Internal Revenue Cod e
of 1954, as amended by Section 611 of the Tax Reform Act of 1984 (th e "Code").
Section 103A(j)(5) of the Code requires that a report be published by the
applicable e l ected representative of the City and a copy of such report be
sub mi tted to the Secretary of the Treasury on or before the last day of th e
calendar year preceding the year in which obligations are to be issued.
Contained in t his report is a statement of policies with respect to housing,
development and 1 01~-inc ome housi ng assistance which the City of Englewood is to
follow in issuing qualified mortgage bonds. There is also an assessment of the
compliance of the City of Englewood during the one year period preceding the date
of this report with the statement of policy on qualified mortoage bond s that was
set forth in the pre vious report, if any; and the intent of Congress that state
and local governments are expected to use their authority to issue qualified
mortgage bonds to the greatest extent feasible (taking into account prevailing
interest rates and conditions in the housing market) to assist lower income families
to afford home ownership before assisting higher income fa mi lies .
The primary goal of the City in the calendar year 1986 is to assist qualified
low-and moderate-income families and persons to obtain the benefits of ho me-
ownership through l ower interest rates through the use of single family mortgage
revenue bonds. The City is also interested in enabling qualified homeown ers to
rehabilitate their home through a home improvement or rehabilitation loan. The
proceeds of the bonds are expected to be used to provide financing for the acquisi-
tion or rehabilitation for both new and existing homes (including detached housing,
condominiums and townhouses) to be used by the mortgagor as his or her sole place
of residence. It is not e xpected that any particular portion of the proceeds of
the bonds will be targeted to any particular class or type of housing except as set
forth below. The City has determined that the best method of determining the nPed
ano 1Pmand f Jr vario .. ~ t 1 pe :; of housltlg is to a_:ept applicativns fc ;· r.:J r t9c~c ',;;r :
fro1 u prospective mortgagors on a fir st-come-first-serve basis.
Proceeds of the bonds will be available to finance the purchase and rehabilitation
of residences of low-and moderate-income families and persons as permitted by
the laws of the State. No particular portion of the proceeds of the bond s will be
targeted specifically to low-income or moderate-income fa milies and persons.
1. The report must be published after a public hearing following reason-
able public notice. The notice of such hearing was published on November 27, 1985
and the hearing was held on December 16, 1985. Proof of publication of the notice is attached to this report.
2. The City of Englewood has adopted the following policie s with r espect
to the issuance .of qualified mortgage bonds for the calendar year lg86:
A. Eligible borrowers must not have owned a home during the previou s three
years, provided however, the program administrator may approve 10 of
th e mortgagP loan s for non-first-ti me homebuyE:rs .
•
I • •
•
•
• •
B. Maxim um Adj us t ed Jnco me is $37,920.
"Adjusted Jncome" means th e aggregat e adjusted gross income of a
mortgagor and all pe rson s who occupy or will occupy a single
Family Residence (including the gross income of any co-signer
or guarantor of a mortgage note made in connection with the
making of a Mortgage loan who will occupy the Single Family
Residence) as evidenced by such person's or persons' adjusted
gross income as most recently reported for federal income tax
purposes on line 22 of Form 1040 (or the comparable line of
Form 1040A), or, in the event that such person's or persons'
aggregate gross income, less an amount equal to $2,000 for each
resider. t of the Single Family Residence.
C. Targeted areas include all census tracts and area s of economic
distress. The entirety of the City of Englewood is a target area .
D. At the current time, no additional financial subsidies are con-
templated by the issuer.
E. Parameters for mortgage lending and allocation of bond proceeds
including the following:
(1) Each Mortgage loan will be secured by a Mortgage on a Single
Family Residence, will be made substantially in accordance with the Participant's
then current standard underwriting policies, which will, as to matters not
covered by the Agreement, be at least equal to the then current standards set
forth in the Federal Home loan Mortgage Corporation ("FHLM C") of the Federal
National Mortgage Association ("FNMA") Seller's Guides, subject to acceptance
by the insurer under the Private Mortgage Insurance Policy and the Special
Hazard Insurance Policy; and the Participant will have determined that the
Mortgagor's income does not exceed the Maximum Income.
(2) Each Mortgag e loan shall be issued under a Private Mortgage
Insurance Policy in an amount equal to 100 ~ of the unpaid principal amount
of the Mortgage loan whi ch will be maintained during the period th e Issuer
has an interest in the Mortgage loan.
Each Mortgage loan may, at the option of the Mortgagor, bP ~ Pledged Savings Account Mortgage loan .
(3) In the event that (i) the Special Hazard Insurance Policy does
not provide coverage against flood damage and (ii) the Single Family Residence
financed with any Mortga ge loan is located in a designated flood area, the
Participant will cause the Single Family Residence to be insured by federal
flood insurance, if available, in an amount which is not less than the maximum
insurable value of the Single Family Residence securing such Mortgage loan or
the principal balance owing on such Mortgage loan, whichever is less, l/l2th
of the annual premium for such insurance will be paid by the Mortgagor each
month as part of the Mortgagor's regular monthly payment on such Mortgag e Loan,
which shall be collected by the Participant and deposited in the Mortgage
Service Account.
(4) No Mortgage loan shall be purchase d, the original principal
amount of which exceeds 95 % of the lesser of the purchase price or the initial
appraised value of the Single Family Residen ce subject to the Mortgage Loan .
•
I • •
(
•
•
• ..
(5) Each mo rtga ge not e on a Mortgage Loan will provid e for a
prep ay me nt penalty du r ing the pe riod co mm en c ing upon th e exec ution of t he
mo rtgag e note and continu i ng fo r fiv e years thereafter equal to 25 % of one
year 's inte r es t on the principal amo unt of s uc h pre pay ment .
(6 ) Not more tha n 10% of t he aggre gat e pr in cipa l amount of
Mo r tgag e Loans to be pu r cha sed by t he I ss uer wi ll be Mo rtgag e Loan s f or t he
ac quisition of condomin i um uni t s or t ownhou ses havin g co mm on wal ls with ad-
j ac ent un i ty and no su ch condo mi ni um un i t or townhouse shall be i n a build -
ing exce eding four s tor i es in he ight ; provid ed, howev er, that of such amount ,
not more than 25 ~ of s uc h a mount wi ll be used to finance condominiu m unit s or
townhouses sold by the sam e seller; provided, further howeve r , that no Mortgag e
Loan to be purchased by the Issuer will be for th e acqui s ition of dupl exe s or
other two-family dwelling s . With respec t to any Mortgage Loan rel a ting to th e
financing of a Si ngle Family Residence con s tituting a condominium unit or town-
hous e which has been conv erted from previ ous r ental use, pr io r to any ori gi na-
tion by the Participant of such Mortgag e Loan; (i) the project of whi c h s uch
condominium unit or townhouse is a part will have been accept ed by FHL MC or
FMNA form 102 7, whi ch letter or a pp roval will evide nc e tha t su ch projec t meets
all of the requirem ents thereof e xc epting requirements of pres a l e pe r cen tag es ,
and (ii) a condo minium declaration sub mitting th e applicable pro pe rty to condo-
minium ownership pursuant to 38 -33 -1 01 et se q., Colorad o Revi sed Sta t utes , s hall
have been filed prior t o J ul y 1 , lg85 .
(7) Un ti l May 1, 19 86, at lea st 50% of th e a ll ocati on of eac h Part ici -
pant shall be available to fund Mortga ge Loan s on a fir s t-come f i rs t-se rv ed
basis; accordingly, not mor e than 50% of the alloca tion of eac h Part ic i pant
may be reserved for any sin gle builde r , developer , contractor or r ea l tor ; any
build e r, developer, contractor or r ealtor of wh om fund s will be commi tted
is required to certify that su ch build er , develop er , co ntra c to r or r ealtor is
obtaining the benefit of fu nds o f t he Pr ogr am from onl y one Participant; each
Pa r t ic ipa nt agree s t o notify Trustee of t he id ent i ty of any builder , developer,
cont r ac t or or r eal tor with which it agrees to make any such reservation and the
amount of pr ocee ds so r eserved.
(8) All mortgage notes will provide that the Mortga ge Loan evidenr.ed
thereby will be assumable, subject to the restrictions hereinafter set fort,.
In any case in which a Single Family Residence has been or is about to be con-
veyed by the Mortgagor and the purchaser desires to a ssume all the rights and
obligations of the Mortgagor under the Mortgage Loan, the person to whom such
Single Family Residence has been or is about to be conveyed shall be required
to enter into an assumption agreement; provided that (i) th e re s idence be ing
acquired is a Single Family Residence at the time of th e assumption, (ii) an y
party assuming a Mortgage Loan meets the qualifications of an Eligible Borrower
as set forth in the Agreement , and (iii) the Mortgage Loan must continue t o be
insured under the insurance policies described in the Agreement and approved
by the Trustee. The assumption restrictions will be incorporated in there-
lated mortgage and kept as a part of the Mortgage File. At the Participant's
discretion , t he inc ome l imi t ation of $37,920 set forth in the Agreement may
be increased by an amount not in excess of the cumulative increase in the
United States Co nsumer Price Ind ex from the Bond Delivery Date to the date of
the assumption .
•
I • •
(
•
•
• •
(9) In order to qualify for selection, a lender must meet the
following minimum criteria:
(a) Participant is a lending institution duly authorized to do
business in the State.
(b) Participants agree that they will remain subject to super-
vision and examination by state or federal authorities, a s
may be applicable, and that it will remain in good standing
and qualified to do business under the laws of the Unite d
States of America or the state of its then state or organiza-
tion and o f the State , will not dissolve or otherwise dispos e
of a l l or substantially all of its assets and will not voluntar-
ily cons oli date with or merge i nto any other entity or perm it
one or more other entities to consoli date with or merge into
participant; provided that Participant may, without violat ing
the agreement contained in this subsection, consolidate with
or merge into another entity, or permit one or more entities
to consolidate with or merge into them, or sell or 0therwise
transfer to another such entity all or substantially all of
its assets as an entirety and thereafter dissolve, provided
the surviving, resulting or transferee entity, as the case may
be, shall be subject to the supervision and examination of state
or federal authorities, as may be applicable, and, after giving
effect to such transaction, shall have a net worth substantially
equal to that of Participant immediately prior to such acquisi-
tion, consolidation or merger, and shall assume in writing all
of the obligati ons of Participant un der this Agreement. In the
case of a sa l e of all or substa ntially all of the Participant's
assets, Trustee, on behalf of Issuer, shall release Partici-
pant in writing concurrently with and contingent upon such as-
sumption, from all liability hereunder.
(c) In the event Participant will be servicing Mortgage Loans, it
is approved to service mortgages for FNMA or FH LMC and has a
s~rvicing office located in Arapahoe County.
(d) Participant covenants that its depository account is insured
by Federal Deposit In surance Corporation or the Federal Savings
and Loan Insurance Corporation or that fund s received pursuant
to this Agreement of the Indenture are kept in depository ac-
counts of lending institutions which are insured by one of such
federal corporations.
(e) Participant is and will continue to be an approved seller of
con ve ntional mortgage loan s to FNMA or FHLMC, and Participant is and wi 11 continue to be an approved servicer of conventional
mortgages for FNMA or FHL~1C.
(1 0) Funds are allocated on the following basis:
(a) Part ic ipants must submit a completed "Offer to Sell" loan s.
•
I • •
ment
•
•
• •
(b) Allocations will generally be based on :
i ) Participant's lending history in the County .
i i ) Participant's successful participation in previou s bond
programs.
iii ) Participant's ability to originate bond loans.
iv) Participant's ability to make target-area loan s.
v) Participant's reque s ted allocation.
vi) Participant's ability to service loans loc all y .
( 11) Policies and goals for qualified rehabilitat i on and hom e i mprove-
loans:
(a) Financing for home improvement loans as defined by Section 103A
as financing in an amount up to $15,000 of rehabilitation work
which complies with the following criteria:
i) The work must consist of alterations, repairs, and improve-
ments on or in connection with an existing residence by the
owner of the residence, but
ii) only if such items of work substantially protect or improve
the basic livability or energy efficiency of the property.
(Basic livability is defined as those improvements neces-
sary to bring property into compliance with local building
code requirements).
iii} The residence must be the principal residence of the borrower.
The home must be in the jurisdiction of the City of Englewood.
(b) A qualified rehabilitation loan is defined by Sect i on 103A
as a loan provided to finance either qualified rehabilitation,
or the acquisition of a re s idence with respect to which t he r e
has been qualified rehabilitation. In order to qualify fo r a
loan, a mo rtgag or must com ply with the following ~r iter ia:
i) The mortgagor must be the first resident of the pro per t y
after completion of the rehabilitation (with i n 60 days).
ii) The building to be re ha bilitated mu s t be a t l ea st 20 yea r s
old .
iii) Sev enty-fiv e percent or mo r e of th e existi ng external
walls of the pro pe rty must be retain ed i n pl ace.
iv) The expenditures f or th e rehabilitation mu ~t equ a l 25
or more of the mortg a gor 's ad j usted ba s i s in t he r esi dence .
(A mortgagor's ad j us ted ba s i s is equal to th eir c a pital
investment in the prop erty). Adju s ted basis i s det ermi ned
as of the completion of the rehabilitation .
•
I • •
\
•
v)
•
• -
Th e co s t of th e rehabilitation on exist i ng re s iden ce
may not exceed the "averag e area purchase price" for
existing residence s. When th e rehabilitation is for a
building not previously used for residential purpo ses,
the cost may not exceed the "average area purchase
price " for a new residence.
(c) Ne ithe r loan may r efinance existing debt.
(d) Neither loan falls under "first-time ho mebuyer rule ".
(e) Both loans may be assumed by a pe rson who me et s th e pr i nc ipal
residence requirements and income guidelines in effect at th e
time of assumption.
(12) On April 12, 1985, the City of Englewood in conjunction with
the City of Lakewood, issued $17,104,296 in Single Family Mortgage Revenue
Bonds. A portion of the loan proceeds were used in the City of Englewood,
Colorado ($940,000). As of November 20, 1985, about 21 % of the program's loans
were purchased, closed or were in process. Additio11ally, substantially all
the targeted monies have been satisfied. Program ·profiles as of November 20 , 198 5 ,
are as follows:
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
(e)
(f)
(g)
(h)
( i )
(j)
Average mortgage amount :
Mortgage term and rate:
Average loan to value:
Average property age :
Average sales price :
Average appraised value :
Average borrower 's annual income :
Average monthly mortgag e payment:
Detached housing :
Housing Size :
$50 ,75 0
10-3/8%; 30 y ea r s
91 %
15 years
$56,000
$64,500
$23 ,1 25
$546
25 "
1,000 to 1,500 sq. f t .
4. Attached hereto is a su mm ary of comme nt s on t he proposed re port
which we re received at th e publi c hea ring.
5. In order to effec t th e poli cies a nd goal s set forth in this r eport,
th e City re c ognize s that i t may pa rt i cipate with 9ne or more other go vernment a l
un i t s withi n the State of Colora do and enter into such agreements as may be
necessary to acc omp l is h s uch purposes.
This report is ordered to be published in the Englewood Sentinel, a
newspaper of general circulation, on and a
copy of this report is to be submitted 7to~t~h~e~co~mm~i-s~s~io~n~e~r~o7f~t~h~e~Internal
Revenue Service on or before December 31 , lg85.
The undersigned , as Mayor of City Council, .authorizes the issuance of
this report this day of , 1985.
By:
Title:-------------------------
•
I • •
PUBLISHER'S AFFIDAVIT
STATE OF COLORAOO.
~UNTYOF Arapahoe
Dt~nna A ... shea.r
I ,..
I
publiaher ..................... ~
.the .Englewood Sentinel .................. _.., --"'""·-
tnt.,.Cotyof ..........
~.ngle .wo.o.d
Countyol ....
Arapa~oe ..
State ot ColOrado and hH 1 ~·' t•tcvlaUon
tt'l•t•n. It'll! ll•d NWIOipet hll beet'+ Ovbf•tf'ted
cont•ftUOVII' artd untnterrupt.cfly '"' u •d
c ...........
Arapahoe
IOf 1 pet"tOCI f11 ""0'1 than S2 ._._, prtor to lf'll
'"'' putM<:at~ of '"-ennt•flf notice tf'lat 11•d
. ._,...., ,. -"tefed '" '"' pow,t ott<t at
Englewood
Cotot"eclo. at tKOf\d c•an matt "''"• and tttlt
IN N •d ,.._..,.~ It I 1\e'WSDIIMt' W4IP"ft t"-
,..._"'"1 o• tM act of the G,,., .. Attambty of
tt\e State of COlOradO IIPO'ow.cf March 30, 1123.
eftell'f'tt~ .. leo-t NohCII -"CC A.,..,Mfftef'tl ..
eftd otNt' ectt , .. , .. "t to t"-prlnltftt eN
puot•th•nt of ... ,, nottcn and actYet't•tmentt.
tt-~at '"-et"~N•f'd not<a .. , pubUtfiled m ,.._
r .. u .. r lftCf ~1"1 tiiU" of lltcf NWIPIJ)ef.
once ttc.h ...,...,_, o4ol the tame day of each weetl
,.,,.._..,.,ot
\
pubhc ehon of 11td ,....,paper dated \l:\1:)\J ... 0)1 .~~ ....
1111 oubltcattOn of N•d "~·c • ••• '" tne iatue of
•
•
• •
11059 E. Bctl1any Dr ive
Aurora, CO 80014
•
I • •
-•
• •
----------------------------------,
C 0 U N C I L
DATE December 16, 1985
C 0 M M U N I C A T I 0 N
AGENDA ITEM
10 tL
SUBJECT Public Hearing of the Pol icy
Report for Single Family Mortgag e Revenue
Bonds.
INITIATED BY Alan M. Feinstein, Exec utive Director, Englewood Housing Authority
ACTION PROPOSED To Adopt a Resolution Approvi ng Policy Report for Single Family
Mortgage Revenue Bonds.
INTRODUCTION
At the Ci ty Council Meeting of November 18, 1985, a public hearing was scheduled
for December 16, 1985. The public hearing was scheduled for the consideration of
adopting the Housing Policy Repo rt for the 1986 Single Family Mortgag e Revenue Bond
,.._ Program.
(.
BACKGRO UND
The goal of this program is to assist qualified low-and-moderate-income families and
persons to obtain the benefits of home ownersh ip , home improvement s, and/or home
rehabilitation loans through lower interest rates through the use of single family
mortgage revenue bonds. The bonds will not be targeted for any particular class or
type of housing, and there will be no targeted areas within the City. The Housing
Policy Report and Resolution adopting this report are attached. The Report meets
the requirements under Section 103A of the Internal Revenue Service Code .
FINANCIAL DETAILS
There will be no financial obligation placed on the City through the issuance of
these bonds.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff is recommending adoption of thi s Resolution after considering comments made
at the public hearing.
------------------------------------~
• •
I • •
(
•
C 0 U N C I L
DATE December 9, 1985
•
• •
C 0 M M U N I C A T I 0 N
AGENDA ITEM
IIJ a_
SUBJECT 300 West Belleview Planned
Development.
INITIATED BY City Planning and Zoning Commission
ACT I ON PROPOSED Approve the proposed Planned Development for 300 West Belleview
Avenue.
INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND:
The proposed 300 West Belleview Planned Development is located on the south side of Wes t
Belleview Avenue, west of the K-Mart store, north and west of South Slope Condominiums
and east of South Elati Drive. West Belleview Avenue is on the north.
~r. Sanford Metzel, President of Sanford Companies, is the property owner and is
reposing to develop the 10-acre site with 312 dw ellin g units in nine buildings.
The Planning Commission held a public hearing on November 19, 1985, t o co nsider the
proposed development. At the hearing , Mr. Doug Wagner, arc hitect for Mr. Met zel,
presented testimony giving specific details of the site plan. There were also seven
residents in the immediate area who presented testimony stating their concerns, pri-
marily about the effect of the traffic generated by the development upon South
Delaware Street, as well as Belleview Avenue. After reviewing the proposed Planned
Development, listening to the testimony and considering the Staff Report; the Planning
Commis sion approved the site plan with the following stipuations:
1. There shall be a two-year traffic study following the issuance of the final
Certificate of Occupancy; a nd if, in the opinion of the City Traffic Engineer, a
traffic signal is warranted at the Delaware/Belleview intersect i on; it shall be
installed at the expense of the developer.
2. A fire crash gate access shall be installed on the southeast corner of the property
to provide emergency access from the south through the South Slope development
via the east fire lane. (At the time of the South Slope Subdivision, the South
Slope own ers were required to provide eme r gency access to the north lot, Lot 1,
via a fire lane on the east side of the development. Mr. Metzel has now purchased
Lot 1, and it is included in t he proposed Planned Development whi ch is an assembla ge
of five different ownerships.)
Following the im position of these requirement s, the applicant agreed to provide the
~raffic signal if the Traffic Engineer determines it is warranted, and the Developer has
dded the wording to the site plan committin g to this. As a result of the concern about
the secondary fire access, the staff again contacted the Fire Department after the
hearing. The Fire Department reiterated its position that a secondary fire access off
•
I •
•
• •
-2-
of West Lehow Avenue via the South Slope development is not required by the Fire
Jepartme nt in order to provide the necessary fire protection. However, the developer
has a greed to provide such access if it is required. (See the attached letter from
t h e Fire Department.)
As to the traffic, the applicant has worked closely with the State Highway Department
a nd wi th Traffic Engineer Plizga. The Highway Department would approve only one point
o f access onto West Belleview and required that it be aligned with South Delaware rath er
than offset. Mr. Plizga also required that alignment. The Highway Department does no t
feel that a traffic signal will be warranted at the Delaware/Belleview intersection
bec ause of the devleopment; however, the City will make the final decision if Traf f ic
Engineer Plizga determines later that one is necessary. This position led to the
Planning Commission suggestion that the traffic flow be studied for two years; and, i f
t h e Traffic Engineer determines that a signal is required; it will be paid for by the
d eveloper.
Attached is:
1 . Staf f Rep o rt, vic inity map and the developer's a pplication. (See the Minutes of
the November 19th public hea ring.)
2. The Planning Commission's Findings o f Fac t and Con clu s ions.
3. The Planned Development Site Plan, Landscape Plan and two sheet s of build i n g
elevations .
.. The letter from the Fire Department •
RECOMMENDATION:
It is the recommendation of the City Planning and Zo n ing Commi s s ion to t h e Englewood
City Counc il that the applic ation of Mr. Sanford Metzel fo r a F l anned Dev elopment to
construct a 31 2 unit apartment complex be approved with the stipula tio ns that the
traffic l i gh t b e prov ided at the d e velo per's co st if it is warranted , a nd t h at a
secondary fire access be prov ided via the South Slop e de v elopm e nt. (Again , t he Fire
Departmen t h as s t a t e d tha t the la tter require me n t i s no t n ecessa r y i n i ts o p i n ion ;
howeve r, the d e v eloper will mo d i f y h is pla n to p rov i d e the a c cess if i t is n ecessary
to do so. Th is wou ld r equi r e s ome mino r modification i n t he P lan on the ext reme
southeast corner of t he site.)
The staff would recomme nd that, pursuant to the Fire Department recommendation, the
s e co ndary access not be required, and that t h e Planned Development be approved subj ec t
only to the two-year monitoring of the traffic.
SUGGESTED ACTIO N:
MOVED BY ________________________ __
Jr SECO ND ~~ -----------------------
YES ________ NO ________ ~AIB SE N T ____________________________________ _
• •
I • •
(
(
•
•
• •
RESOLtJI'ION 00. SERIES OF 1985 __ _
A RESOLtJI'ION AOOPI'ING THE FINDINGS, COtCLUSION AND DEX:ISION OF THE
CITY CO!lCIL OF THE CITY OF ENGLFl>lOOD, COLORADO, REGI\RDING THE
PLANNED DEVELOPMENT BY SAlFORD C<MPANIES AT 300 WEST BElLEVIFl'l
AVENUE.
WHEREAS, case No. 34-85 for approval of a planned develop-
ment for a parcel of land at 300 West Belleview Avenue was heard by
the Planning and Zoning Carrnission; and
WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Carrnission r::ecanmended to
City Council that the application of Sanford Hetzel (Sanford
Canpanies) be approved with certain stipulations;
~. THEREFORE, BE IT ORDI\INED BY THE CITY COUOCIL OF THE
CITY OF ENG..&lOOD, COLORADO, AS FOL.La-lS:
'!he City Council finds:
1. '!hat the application is concerned with an parcel of land
at 300 West Belleview Avenue legally described as:
Plot 6, INI'ERURBAN ADDITION, County of Arapahoe, State of
Colorado, containing 122,633 square feet or: 2.815 acres
more or: less, and including,
IDt 1, SOl1I'H SLOPE SUBDIVISION, County of Arapahoe,
State of Colorado, containing 51,422 square feet or
1.18 acres more or less, and including,
Part of Block 7, INI'ERURBAN ADDITION, County of
Arapahoe, State of Colorado, described as: Beginning
1,322.5 feet We st and 840.2 feet South of the North 1/4
corner of Section 15, Township 5 SOuth, Range 68 W of the
6th P.M.; thence South 215.8 feet; thence S 63o30' West 10 0
feet; thence N 28o24" W, 378.3 feet; thence S 78o56' E, 279
feet to the Point of Beginning, INI'ERURBAN ADDITION, County
of Arapahoe, State of Colorado, containing 47,480 square
feet or l. 09 acres more or: less, and including,
IDts 1-14 inclusive, and vacated Minrnonte Road right of
way, MIRAMONTE SUBDIVISION, County of Arapahoe, Sta t e o f
Colorado, containing 250,427 square feet or: 5.748 acres
more or less.
'!he above property is a 10.8 acre s i te of Which 9.74 a c r es
are in Englewood and 1.09 acres in the City of Littleton.
1
•
I •
(
(
•
•
• •
2. That the area with which the application is concerned is
to be developed by Sanford Companies, a sole proprietorship,
Sanford K. Hetzel, sole proprietor.
3. That the application for approval of a Developnent Plan
at the parcel located at 300 W. Belleview Avenue was filErl with the
Department of Catmunity Developnent on October 21, 1985, notice of
public hearing ~oas published in the Englewood sentinel on NovEmber
6, 1985, the property ~oas posted no less than fifteen days prior to
the public hearing, and public hearing ~oas held Novenber 19, 1985.
4. The application was for approval of a Development Plan of
28.8 dwelling units per acre with 312 proposed dwelling un its, 40 %
usable open space, maximi.IT\ building height 45 feet, a 25-foot
buffer strip with landscaping and privacy fence along the property
line adjacent to a single-family zone district, 532 off-street
parking spaces, all of which comply with the R-3 High-Density
Residence District classification place on the property by the
City of Englewood.
5. The portion of the property Which is in Littleton will be
utilized only for useable open space.
6. The applicant has ccmnitted to providing for the cost of
a traffic signal if it is required by the City Traffic Engineer
after studying the traffic patterns for a two-year period following
the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy.
7. All of the City staff concerns were incorporated into the
design of the Planned Developnent prior to review by the
Ca!mission.
8. PUblic access, energency access and fire lane ease:nents
have been taken into consideration.
9. The Planning and Zoning Ca!mission reccmnends that
Application f34-85 filErl by Stanford Hetzel for a Planned
Developnent at 300 West Belleview Avenue be approved with the
following stipulation:
a. There shall be a two-year traffic study following the
issuance of the final Certificate of Occupancy; if, in the opin1on
of the C1 ty Traffic Engineer, a traffic signal is ~oarranted at the
South Delaware Street/West Belleview Avenue intersection, it shall
be installEd at the expense of the developer.
b. A fire crash gate access shall be installed on the
southeast corner of the property to provide energency access from
the south through the South Slope developnent via the east fire
lane.
2
•
[
[
I •
-
(
(
(
•
•
• •
CXltC LUi IONS
City Council therefore corx:ludes that:
1. The application for a Planned Dev el opmen t subm i tted for
property at 300 w. Belleview Avenue should be approved with the
following recommendation:
a. There shall be a two-year traffic study following the
issuance of the final Certificate of Occupancy; if, in the opinion
of the Ci ty Traffic Engineer, a traffic signal is warranted at the
South Delaware Street/West Belleview Avenue intersection, it shall
be installed at the expense of the developer.
2. 'lhis Developnent will be an asset to the City and to thi s
area.
3. Usable open space and landscaped areas have been incor -
porated into the overall design and is sufficient to serve the
mrnber of units being constructed and will be accessible to all of
the occupants of the dw:!lling .units.
4. The anount of off-street parking to be provida:l canplies
with the requirements of Section 16.5-5a(l2) of the Comprehensive
Zoning Ordinance of the City of Englewood.
5. Consideration has been given to the location, design and
height of the buildings as \Ell as access and fire lanes.
IT IS HERffiY DEX:IDED that this Council adopt the foregoing
f i ndings and Conclusi ons for a Planna:l Developnent at 300 West
Belleview Avenue, Applicati on f34-85.
AOOPr ED AND APPROVED thi s 16th d ay o f Decanber , 1985 .
Attest:
Eugene L. ot1s, Mayor
ex offi c io C1ty Clerk-Treasurer
.,
•
I
•
I • •
(
•
•
• •
I, Gary R. Higbee, ex officio City Clerk-Treasurer of the
City of !hglewood, Cblorado, hereby certify that the above arx:l
foregoing is a true, accurate and canplete copy of Iesolution
No. __ , Series of 1985.
Gary R. Higbee
4
•
I • •
(
•
•
• •
TO: The Englewood ~~~ Council
Galen Miller~:ptain -Fire Prevention/Code Enforcement FROM:
DATE: November 20, 1985
RE: Fire Access for 300 West Belleview Avenue
Upon initial review for fire access and fire hydrant placement,
the access off of West Belleview Avenue as shown on the Plan is
acceptable, and we do not feel that a secondary access is required.
It is my understanding, however, that the City Planning and Zoning
Commission felt a second emergency access off of West Lebow Avenue
might be desirable and wanted additional information from the Fire
Department.
In reviewing the site plan once more with the Fire Chief, I would
say that a secondary fire access from the south is not necessary
in order to adequately serve the development. It is always helpful
to have a secondary means of access; but in this case, it is not
essential for fire protection because our service would not normally
be from the south. Incidentally, we did not require more than o ne
access point for the Broadway Condominiums (Greenwood Point).
sr
0
I • •
(
(
•
STAFF REPORT
Page -1-
STAFF REPORT RE:
..
•
• -
PUBLIC HEARING FOR A PLANNED DEVELOPMEN T
CASE NO. 34-85
The proposed 300 West Belleview Avenue Planned Development.
DATE TO BE CONSIDERED:
November 19, 1985
NAME OF APPLICANT AND PROPERTY OWNER:
Sanford Companies, Sanford Metzel, President
3773 Cherry Creek Drive North
Denver, CO 80209
~:
Pa m~la English, Ar c hitec t
Wagner Johnston Associates, Inc .
10730 East Bethany Drive, Suite 108
Aur o ra, Colorado 80014
ADDR ESS OF PROPOSAL:
300 West Belleview Avenue
Englewood , Colorado 80110
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
See the writ ten portion of the appl ication.
ZONE DISTRICT:
R-3 , High-Density Res idence District .
DESCRIPTION OF SUBJECT SITE AND THE ADJACE NT AREA:
The subject site is 10.83 acres in area and has been cleared for developme n t .
Access to the site is from West Belleview Avenue. The site slopes fro m th e
north to the south with the slope becoming steep along Big Dry Creek . Ve get at i on
consists of weeds, the trees having been removed when the structures on the sit were removed .
The s i t e is bounded on the north by West Belleview Avenu e , on the e as t by t he
west proper ty line of the K-Mart store and also the west property line of Sou t h
Slope Condomi niums, on the south by Lebow Av e nue and Bi g Dry Creek, an d on th '
west by an existing single-family development which has access t o South El at i
Drive . See the attac hed vicinity map for land use characteristic s.
BACKGROUND OF PREVIOUS CITY ACTION:
The subject site wa s p art of Annexation Ordinanc e Number 13 of 1964 and was
z one d R-3 after being annex ed to the City. Prior to Nr. Hetzel's purchas e of
th site , there wer e three houses alon g Miramonte Road which were owned by th
Ba sho r fa mily and three houses and an ambulance company with fr ontage on Wes t
Be ll evi ew avenue. The north portion o f th e Slope Sl o pe d vel opm ent, Lo t 1 of
•
I • •
(
•
STAFF REPORT
Page -2-
•
• ..
PUBLIC HEARING POR A PLANNED DEVELOPME NT
CASE NO. 34-85
South Slope Subdivision, is also part of this assemblage of land on the property .
Mr . Hetzel, of Sanford Company, has acquired the different parcels to make up
the 10 .83 acre site. In July of this year, the City vacated Miramonte Avenue
at Mr. Hetzel's request, finding that there was no public purpose for the right-of-way.
DESCRIPTION OF THE REQUEST:
The developer proposes to construct a multi-family development of 312 dwelling
units on the 10.83 acre site. Nine three-story apartment buildings are proposed
with a mixture of one and two-bedroom units ranging in size from 690 square
feet to 780 square feet, and two-bed~munits ranging in size from 910 square
feet to 980 square feet.
Open space accounts for approximately 40% of the site. Recreational amenties
for the residents of the development will include a clubhouse, laundry facility,
tennis court, volleyball court, pool, and picnic area with park area adjoining
Big Dry Creek. A 25-foot landscaped greenspace with a six-foot priva cy fence
will be provided along the west property line to buffer the adjoining single-
family homes. Carports which will also act as a buffer will be provided
throughout the site along with landscaping.
RELATIONSHIP TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN:
The proposed Planned Developmen t is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan.
COMMENTS FROM OTHER DEPARTMEN TS:
A technical review meeting was held on October 30, 1985, for the City Staff
to comme nt on the proposed Planned Development; and the following comments were received:
Public Works and Traffic Engineer: An updated traffic study is needed. A
traffic signal might be needed at the entrance if the study shows the traffic
generated meets the Colorado Department of Highways' requirements.
Fire Department: The access and fire hydrant placement is acceptable. Hydrants
and roadways must be installed and in service prior to starting combustible
construction. Access road to pool area must support 50,000 gross vehicle weight .
Utilities: Easements will be needed for water and sewer lines not in public
streets. Note: The applicant is working with Utilities on this and easements
which are to be granted to the City will be part of the construction document s.
Engineering and Building: Have no problem with the design of the proposed development.
Please note: As a result of the above Department comments , the applicant
has added easements for water and sewer to the Development Plan.
Other Department concerns hav reen added as an additional note on the Planned
D velopment, which include the statements that:
1. The hydrants and roadways will be in place prior to combustible
construct ion.
•
I • •
(
(
•
•
• •
STAFF REPORT
Page -3-PUBLIC HEARING FOR A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT
CASE NO. 34-85
2. Construction of the fire access lane will support 50,000 pounds gross
vehicle weight.
3. A street light will be installed by the developer at the entrance to the
development.
4. Relative to the comments of the Traffic Engineer and Public Works
Director, the applicant is in the position of having to comply with both
the Colorado State Highway Department requirements and the requirements
of the City Traffic Engineer. The State Highway Department does not want
a traffic signal installed at the Delaware intersection which lines up
with the access to the proposed development because of the close proximity
to the South Broadway/Belleview Avenue intersection. The Highway Department
also stated that the traffic generated by the proposed development will
not warrant a traffic signal. The City Traffic Engineer is concerned
about the full turning movement from the new development, especially left
turns onto West Belleview Avenue. He is of the opinion that a traffic
light might be needed if traffic accidents result because of the apartment
development. To resolve the issues the City Traffic Engineer has asked t o
review the traffic generated by the development for a two-year period after
the Certificate of Occupancy is issued. If, during that time, a traffic
signal is warranted; the developer has agreed that he will install a
signal at his expense. A letter from Mr. Metzel committing to the
installation of a signal within that time period is attached.
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATION:
After reviewing the plans for the Planned Development, it has been determine d
that it conforms with the requirements of the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance .
Landscaping, parking layout, loading, access, drainage, lighting, recreation a l
amenities and open space have all been incorporated into the design which
conforms to City standards. Special attention has been given to buffer the
development from the single-family area to the west with a six-foot privacy
fence, a 25-foot landscaped setback and a carport structure.
The building elevations have also been designed t o be sensitive to the s i n gle-
fam i ly area to the west. The buildings whi c h have 44 units are designed to
have only two-story construc tion on each end, rather than three storie s in
elevation. This design will provide f o r fewe r windows on the end units which
look onto the single-family area . I n working wi t h the architects, it i s t he
staf f 's o pinion tha t a very thorough p roposal has been present e d.
The staff r ecommen ds approva l of the proposed Plann ed Develo pment fo r 300
West Belleview Aven ue as presented.
•
I • •
• -
• -
---
KMART
0
,I ,Mil I 0
-r-:;;~ .... -0.
IL.!....,J ! -.-·
I t
\ \
I !
\ .}
-, I . \ ~
' '• ..
(
( .\ ..
.\
/1
\'
•
• •
CITY OF ENGLEWOOD, OOLORADO
3400 SOUTH ELATJ STREET
ENGLEWOOD, COLORADO 80110
Application for approval of a Develop.ent Plan
I22.CA Planned Developaent Diatrict ---------------------
Data: October 21, 1985 Do Not Write in Thia Space:
Fee Paia : __ Caae Number: ________ __ Applicant:
Na •a: Sanford Companies
')77) Cherry Creek Dr.N Date Received: ________ __
Address: 0 ,011 ,r
1
co enzos
Telephone: )88-0907 Pre-application Conference:
Owner of Property:
N .. e: Sanford Companies Date of Hearine before Planning Commission : ________________ _
Addreaa: a~~,e~~eEfiY86269k Dr .~ Action Tlken : ----------Telephone : 388-0907 Date Received by City Council :
Date of Hearing before Council :
Action Taken :
Conditiana l•posed : ________ _
Date Filed with Arapahoe County
Clerk • Recorder : ____________ _
Subsequent Action : ________ _
!!£!.!.:
If the applicant i& not tbe owner of the property, tbe applica-
tion •uat be accompanied by the written authori£atton for auch
action atcned by the owner or ownera ot &aid land, tocether
with a atate•ent atcned by tbe owner or owners that they agree
to be bouod by the regulations and conditiona which will be
affective with the approval and recordin& of the Development Plan,
INFORMATION TO ACCOMPANY APPLI CATI ON :
(a) Prel1•1nary Pl an s . A Preliminary Plan showing the •ajor
detaila of the proposed Planned Development at a acale of not
lese than 1" • SO'and i n auff i cient d e tail to evaluate the
land planning, building design, and other feature& of th e
propoaad davelopaent. The Preliminary Plana aust contain,
in&Qf'r ~f ~· a~plic~b}e~ the following •ini•ua tnforaatton : ~ .. !!..~/.~~,'·\' \ "\.C:.'\~.J'"~
•
I • •
(
(
•
•
•
.. •
1. A Boundary survey;
2. The existing topographic character of the land;
3. The proposed land uses ;
4. The location of all existing and proposed buildinga,
structures and improvement&;
5. The density and type of dwellings, includiDg typical
elevations a nd showing aaxiaua height;
6, The major po1nta of access to public rights-ot-way,
the internal traffic and circulation ayatems, it
applicabl e, off-street parking areas , service areaa ,
and loading areas ;
7, The location, height and aize of proposed eign.,
fences, lighting and advertising devices including
typical elevations;
8, Areas which are to be conveyed, dedicated or reeerved
tor public purposes, including, but nnt liaited to,
parks and recreational areas, scboola, public buildings,
or other public purposes;
9 . Areas subject to a 100-year flooding cycle;
10. A ~:eneral landscape pl11n •·i tb aajor types of
materials designated as to purpose;
11 . Designation of various stages for construction, if
applicable.
(b) Written Statement, The written statement with the Planned
Development appl1cation shall contain the following ainimua
information :
1. A statement of the present ownership and a legal
description of all of the land included in the
Planned Development;
2. An explanation of the objectives to be achieved by
the development, including building descriptions,
sketches, or elevations as may be necessary to des-
cribe the objectives;
3. A devel opm ent schedule indicating the approximate
date when construction of the development or atagea
of the development can be expected to begin and to
be completed;
4, Copies of any special agreements, conveyances,
restrictions, or covenants which will govern the
use, maintenance and protection of the development
and public area s.
(c) The applicant may submit any other information or ezbibita
deemed pertinent to the evaluation of the proposed Pla~ned
Deve lopoen t.
Submitted herewith is the required tee of $ wbicb
baa been established by the City Council according to a
schedule for Planned Development application& to cover tbe
coat of processing and review, In add ition, I understand
that I •ill be required to post the property according to
specifications set forth by the Department of Community Develop-
aent and to pa y for the cost of the publication of tbe legal
notice of the public hearing before the City Planninc and
Zoning Commission and before the City Council, should the
Council determine that it 1s to the public interest to bold
a hearin~ on this appli c ation .
Appcant
(Corporat ion or individual owner)
By :
of b<:inll
(OJiice or nos1t1on held)
•
I • •
(
(
•
•
• •
10730 east bethany drive suite 108 aurora, colorado 80014 (303) 33 -4144
300 West Belleview Planned Development
Present Ownership
The parcel
owned by: in this planned development proposal is presently Sanford Companies
3773 Cherry Creek Dr ive North
Suite 535
Denver, Colorado B0209
The land included in this planned development is described as follows:
Plot 6, INTERURBAN ADDITION, Co unty of Arapahoe, State of
Colorado. Containing 122,633 square feet or 2.815 Acres
more or less. And including,
Lot 1, SOUT H SLOPE SUBDIVI SION, County of Arapahoe, State of
Colorado . Contain i ng 51,422 square feet or 1.18 Acres
more or less. And including,
Part of Block 7, I NTERURBA N ADDITION, County of Arapahoe,
State of Colorado, describ ed as: Beg inning 1,322.5 feet West
and 840.2 feet South of the North one-quarter corner of section
15, Township 5 South, Range 68 West of the 6th P.M., thence
South 215.8 feet; thence S63 °30'W 100 feet; thence N 28°24'W,
378.3 feet; thence S 7 4°56'E, 279 feet to the Point of
Beginning, INTERURBAN ADDITION, County of Arapahoe, State of
Colorado. Containing 47,480 square feet or 1.09 Acres
more or less. And including,
Lots 1-14 inclusive, and vacated Miramonte Road R.O.W.,
MIRAMONTE SUBDIVISION, County of Arapahoe, State of
Colorado. Containing 250,427 square feet or 5.748 Acres more or less.
Development Schedule
Following the City of Englewood approval process, the developer
plans to proceed with construction in March 1986. Construction
will be done in one phase with occupancy planned in September 1987.
1
•
I • •
(
(
•
•
• ..
)00 West Belleview Planned Development
Objectives
This planned development submittal proposes s multi-family
development of 312 units on a 10.83 acre site west of South
Broadway on West Belleview Avenue. The site is presently zoned
R-3, High Density Residential District. This zoning allows for 40
units per acre. Site density proposed for this parcel is 28.8
units per acre.
One main boulevard s ty le entry is proposed from West Belleview
Avenue into the planned community. West Belleview Avenue will be
improved to State Highway Department standards by the
construction of an accelleration/decelleration lane along the
property frontage. Also proposed is the reduction of the speed
limit for east bound traffic from 40 mph to 35 mph. While
lessening the impact of new project traffic, these improvements
will also allow for the City of Englewood street tree planting
standards to be met. Colorado State Highway Department standards
do not allow trees to be planted within 30 feet of the existing
roadway if the speed limit exceeds 40 mph.
Nine 3-st ory apartment buildings are proposed for this site.
Three different building types are proposed to add d ive r si t y
in size/sc ale and character. A mixture of one and two bedroom
units will be provided with one bedroom units ranging in size
from 690 square feet to 780 sq uare feet and two bedroom un1t s
ranging in size from 910 square feet to 980 square feet.
Due to the reduced density of the proposed development, open
space land accounts for approximatly 40% of the site, which far
exceeds the required 25% of land area. Recreational ammenities
for the residents of this community will inclu de a clubhouse
facility with party rooms , lounges, and a large laund ry facility.
Al so provided is s tennis co urt, volleyball court, pool, and
picnic area with extensive park area adjoining Big Dry Creek. A
25 foot landscaped greensp ace with a six foot privacy fence will
be provide d at the west property line to buffer the adjoining
single family homes . Carports will be provided throughout th e
site with similar architectural style and colors as the
buildings . These structures will also act a s a buffer to the
surroundi ng property owners on the east, west, and south prop erty
lin es . Extensive landscapi ng wi ll be provided throughout the
site.
2
•
I • •
(
(
•
•
• -
96/6
10730 east bethany drive suite 108 aurora, colorado 80014
November 14, 1985
City of Englewood Planning Department
3400 S. Elati Street
Englewood, CO 80110
Attn: Sue King
Re: 300 West Belleview Ave. Planned Development
Traffic Impact
Ms . Sue King,
(303) 337-4144
The 300 West Belleview Ave. planned development submittal
p r oposes a multi-family developme n t of 312 units on a 10.83 acre
site on West Belleview Ave. approximately 1340 feet west of the
i nt ersec t ion of South Broadway a nd West Belleview Ave. Because
West Be l leview Ave. is a state highway, the pr o posed development
p l an has been reviewed by both the Co l or ado Department of
Highways and by the City of Englewood traffic engineer ing
department.
The City of Englewood traffic engineering department suggests the
possibility of a traffic signal being located at the
intersection of West Belleview Ave. and South Delewar e Street
which is also the location of the proposed entry to this
development. The Colorado Department of Highways has indi cated
that the location of this intersection is too close to the
intersection of South Broadway and West Belleview Ave. for a
signal to be installed. General state highway guidelines
dictate signal s pacing for smooth traffic progression to be
between 1/2 to 1 mile apart. The Delaware intersection lies
approximately 1/4 mile from South Broadway and thus would not be
the optimum location for signalization and in fact may impeed the
flow of traffic through the area.
Pres e nt traffic volumes in the area would be impacted by an
increa s e in volume of approximately six percent. Peak hour
vo lume s on the major intersection at West Bellevi ew Ave. and
South Broadway would be increased by approximately three percen t .
Twenty year traffic volume projections indicate that with the
increased traffic in the area from other new development, the
impact at that time from this development would be only three
percent total impact.
•
I • •
(
•
P age 2
S u e King
11/14/BS
•
• •
The Colorado State Highway Department has certian traffic volume
and site condition requirements in order for a traffic signal to
be warranted. At the present time these conditions are not met
although there is impact on the area.
In order to minimize these traffic impacts on the area several
improvements will be made. The site density as allowed by
present zoning allows for 40 dwelling units per acre. The
proposed development calls for only 2B.B dwelling units per acre
thereby decreasing the allowable projected traffic at the onset.
Also, a 12 foot accelleration/ decelleration lane will be
constructed to Colorado State Highway standards along the entire
property frontage. This construction will minimize the mid-block
traffic flow interruptions caused by project traffic. The
reduction of the speed limit from 40 mph to 35 mph is also
proposed with the development plan to ease traffic progression
interruptions in the areas adjacent to the site. One boulevard
style private entry drive is proposed for the development and i~
directly aligned with South Delaware street in the advent that
signalization i s warranted at a later date.
At the prese nt time these improvements will be an adequate
solution to the traffic i mpac t from this development on the
surroundi ng area. In the event that these conditions change, or
the projec tions /ass umptions prove to be in error, the property
owner/ de eloper agree s to participate in the cost of installing
a lraff1c signal at the intersection of West Belleview Ave. and
South Dela ware Street. This agreement will extend for a period
of t o ears after the issuance of a final ce rtifi c ate of
occu ancy.
In co nclusion, the ste p s that will be taken during construction
of l lS proJect will alleviate th e major traffic impacts du e to
de~elopment . If conditions along West Belleview do c hang e, the
o ner/deve loper will participate i n any further improvements a s
warranted to satis f y the problem.
Sincere:~ , ~ ~lis~
Wagner Johnston Associates Inc.
I have reviewed the above and agree to the conditions as stated.
~~+(.J~
Sanfo rd K. Metzel
Sanford Companies Owner/Develop er
cc: SKM, WJA
I • •
(
•
10730 east bethany drive
November 14, 1985
aulte108
•
• •
aurora, colorado 80014
City of Englewood Traffic Engineering Department
3660 S. E1ati Street
Englewood, Colorado 80110
Attn: Mr. Joe Plizga
Re: 300 West Belleview Ave. Planned Development
Traffic impact
Mr . Joe Plizga,
(303) 337-4144
I have gathered some figures from the Colorado State Highway
Department records r e garding traffic volumes in the vicinity of
the proposed 300 West Belleview Planned Development. I hope
these will be useful to you in your analysis of the area. I am
also enclosing a copy of the letter of agreement for the funding
of a signal at West Belleview Ave. and South Delaware Street for
your review. If you have any questions or comments please feel free to give me a call.
Colorado State Highway Traffi c Survey 1984:
W. Belleview Ave. traffi c count from Windemere to S. Broadwa y
for a 24 hour period (total both dire c tions ): 28,700
Twent y year projected volume increase: 1.8
(28,700 x 1.8: 51,660 for year 2005)
Proposed development of 312 apartment units at 300 W. Belleview: Peak hour trips
7AM to 9AM Enter: .1 x 312 : 31.2 trips
Exit: .4 x 312 = 124.8 trips
4PH to 6PM Enter:
Exit:
(these figures would be
west bound traffic)
.4 x 312 : 124.8 trips
.2 x 312 = 62.4 trips
divided equally between east and
Since~ ,///
~'ishPW'.
Wagner Johnston Associates Inc.
cc:S u e King, WJA
•
I • •
-
(
•
DEPARTMENT OF HIGHWAYS
D istrict 6
2000 Soulh Holly Slreel
Oen•or. Colorado 80222
(303) 757-8011
November 14, 1985
Sus an Ki ng , Se nior Planner
Englewood Planning
3400 So uth Elati
Enplewood , Colorado 80110
Re: 34 -85 , 300 West Belleview Avenue
Dear Susan :
•
• •
We have r eviewed this proposal and o ffer the following :
Aaaess to this site will have to be designed an d aonstr uated in aonformanae with
the State Highway Acaess Code . Roadway widening will be r equir ed for speed ahanpe
lanes , left turn lanes and may inalude curb, gutter , sidewa lk , s torm sewer system
and Highway signing and striping. The proposed aacess must be properly aligned
with South Delaware Str eet. We request that no evergr een trees be planted on the
s outh side of Belleview, that will shadow the r oadway during winter season.
We will not allow ANY on-site drainage to enter the surfaae of the Highway . In -
stall or extend any-drainage structures or storm sewers that may be assoaiated
with the development . We r equest the aity to require on site dra inage detention
to minimize effects on down stream s t ructures.
Attached is a copy of r eduaed Right-of-Wa y Plan of the area.
that you show ties to e x isting right-of-way and eation line .
matah our right-of-way plans.
It is recommended
Your plans sh~uld
Approximately i of the 80 units in the two building along West Belleview Avenue
(S .H. 88), may be exposed to noise levels in excess of the federal design noise
level of 6? deaibles. The Highway Department does not have any noise abate"1ent
program for homes tha t are built after the high~y. Any noise barrier built by
the developer would have limited effectiveness because the access to Belleview
would require a break in the barrier.
Any work within the Highway right -of-way will r equire a Permit fr om this o."'f'ice
at 5640 East Atlantic Plaae , Denver , Colorado 80224.
If you should have any questions, please call on Burkholder at 757 -9514.
•
I •
-
(
•
(
•
~4 -85 , 300 We st Belleview Avenue
PagC' 2 -
Very truly yours ,
RICHARD J . BRASHER
Distr ic t Engineer
~~~
/OR VILLE A. RHOADES ~~aintenance Superintendent
OAR/DB /ssa
Enclosure
cc: Brasher/Bovee
G. Prentiss
File (S.H . BBJR
•
• •
I • •
•
(
•
•
• -
CITY PLANNING AND ZONING COMHIS SI ON
ENGLEWOOD , COLO RAD O
IN TH E MA TT ER OF CA SE #34-85,
FI ND ING S OF FACT, CON CLU SIONS
AND RECO ~ll-fEN DATI ON S RELATING
TO THE APPL I CATI ON TO APPR OVE A
PLANNED DEVELOPME NT FOR A PARCEL
OF LAND AT 300 WEST BELLEVIEW
AVENUE, PURSUANT TO SECTI ON
16.4-15 OF THE COMPREHEN SIV E ZONING
ORDINANCE OF TH E CITY OF EN GLEWOOD,
COLORADO.
THE DECISION OF TH E CITY OF
ENGLEWOOD PLANNING AND ZO NIN G
COMMISSION
FILED BY: Sanfo r d Companies , Sanford Metzel , President
3773 Ch e r ry Cr eek Drive North
De nve r, Colo r ado 8 02 0 9
FOR PROP ERTY LOC ATED AT :
300 West Belleview Ave nue
This ma tt e r c an.e b efore th e Ci t y Pl a nni n g a nd Zonin g Commissio n on November 19,
1985 u po n the application of Sanford Metzel, President of t he Sanford Compa ny
and own er of the p r operty at 30 0 We s t Belleview.
Those members of the Planning and Zo n ing Commission who were present were:
Messrs. Mesa , Steel, Allen, Barbre, Beier, Carson and Gourdin. Mr. Ma gnuson
was absent.
The applicant, Mr. Sanford Metzel, and his architect, Mr. Doug Wagner, were
present and ~lr. Wagner gave testimony and evidence to the Planning Commission.
The Staff Report and testimony were received by the Commi ssion and incorporat d
into the Record of the Public Hearing. After co nsidering the statements of
the witnesses and reviewing the documents entered as evidence into the record
of the Hearing, the Members of the City Planning and Zoning Commission made
the following Findings and Conclusions:
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. That the Public Hearing was initiated by the filing of an application for
a Planned Development for the property located at 300 West Belleview
Avenue.
2.
3.
4.
That the notice of Public Hearing was given in the Englewood Sentinel,
the official City newspaper, on November 6, 1985; and the property was
posted no less than fifteen days prior to the date of the Public Hearing.
That the property being considered is a 10.8 acre site of which 9. 74
acres are in Englewood and 1.09 acres are in the City of Littleton.
That the property was annexed to the City in 1964 and an R-3 Hi~h-nensit y
Residence District classification wa s placed on the pro p rty .
•
I • •
(
(
•
5 .
•
• •
-2-
That until 1981, it was poss ibl e to have a density of 70 units per acre
in the R-3 zan ~ classification with a density bonus for parcels over on e
acre in size.
6. That in 1983, the City amended the permitted density in the R-3 District
to permit a maximum density of 40 dwelling units to the acre with no bonus
for assembling property.
7. That in evaluating the proposed Planned Development, Commission members
f ound the following design features:
a. The density is 28.8 dwelling units per acre.
b. The usable open space required by the Ordinance is 25 percent, and
the proposed development has 40 % of the site in usable open space.
c. The maximum building height in the R-3 District is 60 feet; the
maximum building height in the development will not exceed 45 feet
to the highest point of the r oof.
d. The Zoning Ordinance requires a 25 foot buffer strip with landscaping
and privacy fence alon g the property line of the multi-family site
when it is adjacent to a single-family zone district; and the
applicant h as provided for this along the west property line.
e. The Zoning Ordinance requires 1.7 of f-street parking spaces for
each dwelling unit; the applicant is proposing 312 dwelling units
with 532 off-street parking spa ces , whi c h complies with the requirement.
f. The applicant has committed t o providing for the cost of a traffic
signal if it is required by the City Traffic Engineer after studying
the traffic patterns for a two-year period following the issuance
of a Certificate of Occ upancy .
g. All of the City staff con cerns were incorporated into the design
o f th e Planned Development prior o review by the Commission.
8. That Mr. Doug Wagner, the architect retained by Mr. tzel, testified
that an accelera tion/d eceleration traffic lane along W st Belleview
Avenue is provided for access t o the site pursuant to th e r quirem nt
of the Colorado Department of Hi ghw ays.
9. That Mr. Wagner further testi fied that:
a. The area alon g Big Dry Creek in th 100 year flood plain ~o.•ill be
used for a tennis c ourt , volley ball court, open space and landscaping.
b .
c .
The apartment dev elo pm en t will b built out with one co nst ruction
loan ; r ental rates will be from $420 t o $550 per month; an d it will
be an adult community.
The structures on the west sid of the site and parallel to th e
Signal Hill Addition Subdivision will be set back 100 feet fr om
property line.
d . The ends of thP structurPs containing 44 dwelling units will be tw o-
stories stepping up t o three-st o ry cons truc tion construc ti on in th
mld dl£> po rti on of th r struc ture .
•
I • •
(
(
•
10.
11.
12.
•
• •
-3-
e. Additional a ccess from West Lehow Avenue is no t po ssibl e bec au s e
Big Dry Creek crosses the Avenu e at the property line ; however,
additional emergency access could be provided al o n g the fire lane
easement through the South Slope Condominium deve lopment which is
directly south of the subject site.
f. The emergency access as shown on the Development Pl an meets with
the requirements of the City's Fire Ma rshal and Fire Department.
That the following persons testified befo r e the Commission in this matter:
a . Mr. James Finn, 5166 South Elati Drive.
b. Ms. Linda Luty, 5165 South Elati Drive .
c. Ms. Ruth Kelley, 5145 South Elati Drive.
d. Ms. Pat Smeaton, 5155 South Elati Drive.
e. Mr. Roy Hankle, 5050 South Delaware Street.
f. Mr. Roger Newman, 5090 So uth Elati Stree t .
g . Mr. Dave Lone, 5045 South Delaware .
That their testimony addressed their c on cern rega r d in g
the apartment vacancy rate, fire access, buf f erin g and by the proposal.
bu ild ing height ,
traff ic gen era ted
That no other persons addressed the Commiss ion f or o r a gainst the
proposed Planned Develo pme nt.
CONCLUSIO NS
1 . That p r oper notice was given of the Public Hearing held on Nov e mber 19 ,
1 9 85.
2. That the applic ation filed by Mr . Sa n ford He t zel, President , Sanford
Companies, for property loca t e d at 300 lvest Belleview Ave nue , complies
with the Planned Development and R-3 , High-Density Residen c e Distric t
re gu l a tions.
3 . Th a t the proposed Planned Develo pment is consistent with the intent a nd
purpose of t he Ci t y Comprehensive Plan.
4 .
5 .
6.
That the acc e ss to the site o n West Bellevi ew Avenue will be studied by
t h e Traff i c En gine er f or two years after a n occu pancy p ermit is i ssued
to deter min e if a traffic sign al s hould b e in s t a l led.
That i f , in the o pinio n of t h e City Traffic Eng ineer, a traffic si gnal
is wa rranted, the d eveloper agrees to pay for the si gnal .
Tha t f ire a cces s in th e sou theast section of th e d evelopment will be
req uired to alig n wi th th flre lane easemen t o n t h e east side of th e
Sou th Slope deve l o pm ent.
•
I • •
(
(
•
•
• •
-4-
RECOMMENDATION
Therefore, it is the recommendation of the City Planning and Zoning Commission
to the Englewood City Council that the application of Mr. Sanford Metze! for
a Planned Development to construct a 312 unit apartment complex be approved with the following stipulation:
0
1. There shall be a two-year traffic study following the issuance of the final
Certificate of Occupancy; if, in the opinion of the City Traffic Engineer,
a traffic signal is warranted at the South Delaware Street/West Belleview
Avenue intersection, it shall be installed at the expense of the developer.
2. A fire crash gate access shall be installed on the southeast corner of
the property to provide emergency access from the south through the South
Slope development via the east fire lane.
Upon a vote on a motion made by Mr. Carson and seconded by Mr. Allen, the
following members voted in favor of the 300 West Belleview Planned Development:
Messrs. Stoel, Allen, Barbre, Beier, Carson, Gourdin, and Mesa. Mr. Magnuson was absent.
This dec ision and these Findings of Fact and Conclusions are effective as o f
the meeting of the City Planning and Zoning Commission held De c ember 3, 1985.
BY ORDER OF THE CITY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION. ~4-,.&e
•
I • •
•
•
• ..
RESOLUTION NO.
SERIES OF 1985
63
A RESOLUTION APPROVING AN ADDENDUM TO THE 1984-1986 COLLECTIVE
BARGAINING AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN THE CITY OF ENGLEWOOD,
COLORADO, AND THE ENGLEWOOD EMPLOYEES ASSOCIATION EFFECTIVE
JANUARY 1, 1986 THROUGH DECEMBER 31, 1986.
WHEREAS, an Addendum dated December 16, 1985 by and
between the City of Englewood and the Englewood Employees As-
sociation has been executed by representatives of each of said
parties; and
WHEREAS, said Addendum was duly ratified by a majority
of the members of the Englewood Employees Association.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF ENGLEWOOD, COLORADO:
ATTEST:
Section 1.
That the Addendum of December 16, 1985 to the
1984-1986 Memorandum of Understanding between the City
of Englewood and the Englewood Employees Association be
approved to reflect that effective January 1, 1986,
each employee covered by the terms of the 1984-1986
Memorandum of Understanding will receive a 4% wage in-
crease on his/her annual salary.
ADOPTED AND APPROVED this 16th day of December, 1985.
Eugene L. Otis
Mayor
ex officio city Clerk-Treasurer
I, Gary R. Higbee, ex officio City Clerk-Treasurer of
the City of Englewood, Colorado, hereby certify the above and
foregoing to be a true and complete copy of Resolution No. ~,
Series of 1985.
Gary R. Higbee
I • •
•
•
• •
ADDENDUM TO THE 1984-1986 CONTRACT
BETWEEN THE CITY OF ENGLEWOOD
AND THE ENGLEWOOD EMPLOYEES ASSOCIATION
This Agreement entered into by the authorized City represen-
tatives and the Englewood Employees Association shall be a mutual
request of the above-named parties that the City Council modify
the current wage provisions as contained in the 1984-1986 Memo-
randum of Understanding, to reflect that effective January l,
1986, that each employee covered by the terms of the 1984-1986
Me morandum of Understanding receive a 4' wage increase on his/her
annual salary.
The parties respectfully request this modification and by
their respective representatives have placed their signatures
thereon, on this 16th day of December, 1985, at Englewood,
Colorado.
CITY OF ENGLEWOOD ENGLEWOOD EMPLOYEES ASSOCIATION
; <:. ~.
I • •
•
•
• -
RESOLl1I'ION 00. ({; + SERIES OF 1985 __ _
A RESOLl1I'ION SUPPORTING A STATE MAN!Y\TORY SAFETY BELT USE LAW TO
REDOCE INJURY AND IMPAIRMENI'S BEx:::AUSE OF MCYrOR VEHICLE CRASHES.
WHEREAS, the effectiveness of safety belts in reduc ing
deaths and injury severity in motor vehicle crashes has been
doci.Jllented in ni.Jllerous studies; and
WHER~, there has been a significant reduction in injuries,
deaths and economic losses in jurisdictions Where mandatory safety
belt laws have been in effect; and
WHEREAS, public health and safety legislation has been
enacted at the state and federal levels;
N<M, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUOCIL OF THE
CITY OF ENGLEWOOD, COLORADO:
'!hat the City Council of the City of Englewood strongly
supports state mandatory safety belt use laws to reduce human
suffering and impairments because of motor vehicle crashes.
ADOPTED AND APPROVED this 16th day of December, 1985.
Attest: Eugene L. Otls, Mayor
ex officio City Clerk-Treasurer
I, Gary R. Higbee, ex officio City Clerk-Treasurer of the
City of Englewood, Colorado, hereby certify that the above and
foregoing is a true, accurate and complete copy of Resolution No._k£, Series of 1985.
Gary R. Higbee
•
I • •
-
" .·
•
•
• •
To: Mayor Otis and Members of City Council
FROM: Andy McCown, City Manager
DATE: December 12, 1985
SUBJECT: Seat Belt Legislation
Recently I received a request from Dr. Roy Lininger for the City
to consider approving a Resolution supporting legislation for
mandatory usage of seat belts. Attached is a copy of the Resolution and a fact sheet.
I did not know whether you wished to support this or not so I
have included it in the study packet ma terials only. If you do
wish to support it, you can bring it up under Council Member's Choice.
/b~t~{ :;3?~-t~~~ ~
LAndy , ccown
Cit Manager
AM/sb
cc: Peter Vargas, Assistant City Manager
Susan Powers, Assistant City Manager
Jack Olsen, City Attorney
Dorothy Dalquist, Public Relations Specialist
Jim Espinoza, Administrative Assistant
•
I .
•
• -
___ ,,_Are You r\Jttin3 Me On?·.---
/r
FACJ'S
FOR A SEAT BELT USE L/>V,.; IN illLORAOO
IT'S NEIDI:D
The single , most effective traffic safety measure that can be tak ~n to
reduce death and injury on Colora<b roadways is to require the uEe of seat belts.
-In 1984, 452 feople were killed in auto crashes in Coloram.
Another 37,047 were injured.
-Statistics show that CNer 90 {:ercent of the fatal a c cident
victil!S in 1984 were not wea ring seat belts.
-Cur renUy, only 13% of p:-opl in Co l ot ad:> consistenU y us:; se a t
belts. The only way to sws tanti ally increase this usag i s to
re::~uire, through legislation, a sea t belt usage law.
1\Uto accidents inpos;, a staggering cost on soci ety.
IT WORKS
-'lll e direct eoonanic costs to the nation of autanobile accidents
in 1983, cons=tvatively estineted, were $43.3 billion.
-Auto accidents are the leading caus= of epilepsy (fran head
injury) and p:~rcplegia (fran damage to the spinal cord ) in the u.s.
At an average cost of $58,000, spinal cord injuries fran autanobile
accidents cost society nearly $220 million p:>r year.
-It is estirrated that autanobile f a talities in Coloracb in 1984
cost $94,900,000.
-'llle cost to Colorad? enployers as a result of traffic fatalities
was nearly $78 million.
-If 50% of the plblic had been wearing seat belts in 19 84, there
would have been 95 few e r de a ths and 4,650 few e r injuries . That
r~resents a &:wing s of $48.8 million oollars in wag e loss, medi cal
expenses , insurance claims and other irxlirect losse s .
Since 1970, 39 countries and jurisdictions have enacted seat belt lawz.
'lhese safety r equi renents have increased belt usage by ap{roxirro tely sm,
worldwide.
-A stuclj l:7j the SWedish car manufacturer, Volvo, indica ted that in
28,000 accidents in SWeden in 1979 ro fatalities occurred involving
scat belt UOC!rs until crash SIEeds of 60 ll'{11 or greater wer e
attained; non-belted fatalities occurred at crash SIEeds az low a s
12 q:h. &./eden has had a OC!at belt law since 197 5 and usag i at 85%
•
)
I •
•
• -
-Great Britian's mandutcry OC>at belt law, which took effect in
1983 , result£-d in an increase in ac ·at belt usc rates iran 40'1,
bcfot e the law to 9 5~ after the law. Front scat occuranl
fatalities we re reportedly reduo=d by 23~, injw-ies by 26%
- A safety belt ua: law in Australia has been in effect since 1972.
D..lring the First tw o years of the law, there wa s a 30t reduction in
eye injuries, 501. reduction in spiml injuries, and a 5l% drop in
drivers acinitted to hospitals. Despite Australia's oontinued
increase in registered vehicles during the lJ y ears since the law
became effective, fataliti es ha'J e oontinued to de c line.
INDIVIDUAL RJGH'ffi
-'lhe p::>wer to re<plate and oontrol the Oferation of rrotcr vehicles
on public roads is the resp:msibility of the st.at .
-'lhe privilege, oot the right, of holding a driver lio=ns= already
r9:1uires oonformity with many rules which are a loss of freerlom to
the individual. A belt us= law, therefore, is nothing new in principle .
-No ore has the "right," after an a cci den t , to irrpne on thE
taxpaying plblic the oostb of clearing the seen , nedical care, and
OOmfenS:~tion for the disabled.
-No ore has the "right" to force insurance rates higher for
e<.•e ryore due to unnecessary claims for non-belt wearers invol Vl?d in accidents.
-'lhe debate over the right to choos= beoomes moot when the oosts
to society in terms of nedical rehabilitation, unenployment and
welfare services Sup:!rsede the "right" of feOple to seriously or
fatally injure thens=lves by not using seat belts .
IT'S ENFORCEABLE
-Belt use laws d:> not r9:1uirE roadblocks or stringent enforcement caTl£:Bigns.
-Seat belt laws are typically enforo=d during routine p::>lice
procedures, much like the driver lio=ns= law.
-A police officer can readily determine if shoulder belts are
being used when he app:oaches the car.
-M:>st citizens obey laws a rnaja:ity of the tine without p::>lioe surveillance.
YOO G.N HELP
There is supp:>rt for seat belt legislation.
-CNer 50 organizations have joined the Colorad:> Coalition for Seat
Bcl t Use to urge JBSS:!ge of a seat belt law.
Your active supp:>rt ·of seat belt us= legislation in Cola:ado will help save
lives and reclua= injuries.
Cola: ad:> Coalition for Seat Bcl t Use
6061 s. Willow, Suit 228
Engl ewcxx'l, Color acb 80111
(303)779-5455
•
I • •
•
•
• •
]/tJ /86
Andy,
The following i s for your information concerning th e
"a pproval" of Council concerning Olsen's request at the
l as t Council meeting. When Janice prepared the minutes,
she did not have access to th e tape (it was being duplicated
by the police department fo r 1et:el ). She asked me to shoh'
Jack the draft of the minutes and see if she had interpreted
hi s s tatem e nt co rr ec tl y . My memory of th e s tat eme nt was
that h e asked Council to consider the up grading , but when
showed him the draft he co n fi rm ed that Council approved the
mat t e r. The tapes came back today and th e tape tr a n scribed
is as fo llows:
Olsen: Would you formalize approving raises of 4.8 1 for my
three legal employees, 4 ~ for two non-legal employees
with the view toward s upgrading the positions of Debra
Brizce, the part-timer, and 'ancy Fritz in the next six
months.
This was approved -so I guess it's all in how you interpret
"vie"' toward upgrading."
I know you didn't n s L for this, hut thought you might want to
•
I • •