Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Give it another minute before we get started. All right, we're going to go ahead and get started. It is April 21st at 6:32 p.m. Calling the meeting of the Englewood Planning and Zoning Commission to order.

You get a roll call, please. Mr. Hagerty here. Miss Austin here. Mr. Montiel here. Mr. Ruddle. Uh Mr. Adams here. Um Miss Hubka is absent. Mr. Renson here. Mr. Kaplan here. Miss Cesario and Chair Martinez

present. Thank you very much. Um first item on the agenda um this evening is approval of minutes from our April 7th meeting. Um we had a couple of actions in that. Um I'm assuming everybody got a chance to look at the minutes. you didn't have to be here to the vote on approval. Um, but I I would hope that you had had a chance to take a look at the the meeting minutes. Do we have any um corrections, amendments, discussion about the meeting minutes, I was just going to move to approve them. Thank you. Move to approve. Okay. Second. Thank you, David. Take a vote.

Ms. Austin. Yes. Mr. Montiel. Hi. Mr. Adams. Yes. Mr. Renson. Yes. Mr. Kaplan. Hi. Mr. Hagerty. Yes. And Chair Martinez. I. Motion passes. Thank you, Nancy. Do we have anybody signed up online for the public forum? We do not.

Anybody in the room? Nope. All right. Um we are going to skip over the public forum and go straight to um the study session case 2025-18 conservation overlay districts. Good evening. Um so yeah uh we're here for another study session on conservation overlay districts senior planner with community development. Um, and basically I'll kind of walk you through the presentation and then get your feedback. Uh, so just as kind of a refresher, conservation overlay is a district that is defined by particular architectural features of a set of set amount of uh this is different than a historical district in that um architectural features necessarily required to be retained. Um but it's more about development controls red a neighborhood that is predominantly one-story houses conservation max introduce max height regulations along the basically each one is tailored to conservation setup uh timeline to date um on Jan January 5th, the initial city council study session took place. Uh, and they asked the staff to dig into this a little bit more. So, we had the first study session with planning on zoning in February 3rd and also preservation February 19th. Uh, and then we had a second study session with city on March 9th. Uh, and they asked us to do the local work. So, we're back for a second study session. Um and

we also met again withition last week. So um what council asked us to do is take a look at have in terms of regulations overlays. And so here's just a list of some of the the municipalities that we looked at uh from North Carolina, other communities around Denver. Uh we even took a look at Nebraska, Texas, Wisconsin just kind of get to get a broad overview of uh what these other districts require. And so uh while we were looking at this, we we came up with kind of five main areas that were uh featured predominantly in each set of regulations that um and that is initiation. Who can submit an application for a conservation overlay district? The participation being not only the size of the district but also if there are any development benchmarks that need to be met. For example, um x amount of properties needed to be developed or x amount of properties needed to be of a certain age. Um and then overall support within a proposed district. Uh we also noted that uh regulation was also a feature and that would basically be defining uh height limitations, setbacks, bulk plane. Um these were the features of the conservation districts. And then finally we had administration um which there was a direct approval route which is like the the route a conservation district would take from application to final approval. Uh and then once that conservation district overlay is in place, who would have the design review authority to re to take a look at development applications and basically determine appropriateness of uh a development in a conservation open? So most jurisdictions, this is for the initiation, uh most jurisdictions that

we looked at only allow property owners to initiate. Um, a few allowed city council members or members of PNZ to start the initiation process. Um, in our study sessions with PNZ and HPC in the past, uh, the preference was to have the process initiated by property. Um, and it was noted that individuals outside of a district potentially nominating a district could lead to uh potential but of heads and so on. Currently, the the historic district designation process allows for property owners member of HPC or city council to initiate size. Uh the size of a district is critical. Uh too small could lead to fragmented neighborhoods. Uh and too large could lead to a process that just doesn't get used. Um this really varies between jurisdictions. Uh we've gone from a minimum of um one block face North Carolina and Texas to four contiguous properties to a block in Plano. Uh and then in the more rural area of Cardi, Nebraska, there was five contiguous. Uh so yeah, very much different between uh jurisdictions. Uh right now historic districts do not have a minimum size requirement and uh for this staff would recommend one block as the kind of starting point for any uh next was development benchmarks. Um and then again this is um the amount of property developed. Since Eaglewood is pretty much completely built out, this probably wouldn't be a great uh criteria to have um as a benchmark, um most jurisdictions require between 65

and 75% of the area to be developed. Um they had age ranges of structures between 25 and 50 years or 50 50 plus years I should say. Um and then the required commonalities included architectural characteristics, lot development standards, um natural standard standards such as landscaping, land use patterns, um or adjacency to historic districts or landmarks. And then currently the historic uh designation code requires structures to be a minimum of 50 years older. Um for participation um this was the most varied criteria. Uh we saw a lot of districts that had like 50 to 51%. Um so just basically a slight majority um of participation required. Um, one committee was as low as 25, one was high as 60. For uh, historic districts in Englewood, you would need at least a minimum of 65% of participation uh, or owners in support of moving forward. Um and then um let's see uh in terms of what we saw being regulated most common it was architectural features. Um again height, massing, materials, roof line. Uh development standards. This would be setbacks, lot width or area and overall lot coverage, the sighting of structures, site design, uh density and uh one jurisdiction did include land uses. Uh but it will state that both HPZ HPC and PNZ uh and council has stated

they don't want any conservation district to override any base district zone district to prevent say uh what density is allowed as per zone district code. Uh jurisdictions also uh some some of them defined areas that could not be regulated. Those included are interior alterations, demolitions, emergency repairs, exterior paint colors. Um, and again in the last study session with PNZ, uh, it was stated that you want this process to restrict densities, land uses or again undermine base zone districts. The historic designation process uh requires review of any construction, alteration, relocation or demolition involving um the exterior of the of the structure within a historic district or a landmark property. Um and it would be the historic preservation commission that you have a landmark property or a historic district. they would be the ones that would review uh a development submitt or an application submitt for uh a remodel for a demolition to um basically grant a certificate of appropri. So for authorization uh based on the current title 16 processes um staff would recommend doing both a map and text amendment uh to be put into title 16 not uh unsimilar to what is there currently for a reasonzoning uh which would be you know a map amendment and a text amendment. Um, and we'd also recommend that this would follow the the public process similar to resoning. So that would include uh public hearings by planning and zoning commission. You would make a recommendation on the district to sit council uh who would hold another public

hearing and then have the final decision. Um, historic preservation commission did express interest in being included in basically the development of conservation district guidelines uh during this process. And currently um as I mentioned the H the HPC does will review uh any applications for historic landmarks um and grant that certificate of appropriation overlay district is approved by council and put into place. Uh who has the design review authority? Uh most jurisdictions that we looked at it was given to staff. It was basically done at the staff level. A few of them had um review boards, say the planning and zoning commission or historic preservation commission. Um and some of them had established basically conservation district neighborhood review boards that would also weigh in on any sort of development application there. um staff would recommend in this situation that any design review be done at the staff level. Um it wouldn't we don't think this would necessarily fit in with historic preservation commission's roles and duties if it's a conservation overlay. Um but then yeah, it would be left to staff to determine appropriateness and issue that certificate of appropriateness before any permits are applied. Uh next steps, we're going back to city council for another study session on June 1st. And so, uh, what staff would like from Planning and Zoning Commission, um, on any of these five items, do you kind of agree agree with staff's assessment, uh, or

recommendations on this or do you have any other ideas that you would like to see put into any sort of conservation overlay regulations? Um, and we'll take your comments and then we'll bring those back to city council in June. So we can go ahead and uh begin discussions if you have any questions, comments. Anybody? Who's first? Carl,

the uh the presentation on on this was uh it's very lengthy and very involved and uh what what is the point of the city staff on this uh whole whole overall process here. It it seems like it's reducing the um uh the overlay from what it used to be or what it was to getting smaller and smaller. I what what is the per what is what is the main goal here?

So uh we don't really have anything in the regulations right now about any o overlay district requirements. Um there is an overlay district that is in place, a neighborhood overlay district that's near Swedish and Craig Hospital. Uh but that's kind of a different beast all together. Uh this is basically whether or not to put into the code um a process for a neighborhood or a group of neighbors to submit an application to preserve a group of houses, preserve a neighborhood um to uh maintain the character. Um again the most the the most obvious uh example here is Arapaho acres right and how in terms of how that was developed one-story houses um unique lot sizes and things like that. So that would be something for uh someone like that who would like to preserve the character of those houses to attempt to create a district involving a group houses. Yeah, I I was on planning and zoning years ago and at 3146 South Pennsylvania there there's a 25 ft lot that they uh got approved to build a twostory with a deck on the top. Um and that and it didn't fit within the neighborhood. whatsoever. I mean, there was there was no commonality between the neighbors and this house this this new structure. So, um that was approved by planning and zoning and council and I think it it may have got killed somewhere along the line, but it council approved it.

So, I'm not sure. It never did get built. So, I'm not sure what happened there. But that is one example of uh not fitting the neighborhood whatsoever and it shouldn't have been done. I guess along those lines, Carl, if I may jump in. Are you saying um are you wondering whether you could like if somebody was proposing to do something, you could create this conservation easement to block that from happening? Is that what you're asking or?

Yeah. any anybody can look at something and I mean there's been I've done tests throughout my life where they have five pictures there and they say which which doesn't fit and you pick out the one that doesn't fit. I mean that's what this is. It's you you show a design, somebody's got a a design of a building they want to build and you look at it, you look at the neighbor, you look at the other neighbor, does it fit? Probably not.

And I'm not sure. That's what this is though. I I don't I think this is creating an overly like district so that you couldn't do that. But as of right now, there's nothing to say like you couldn't build a super modern house as long as it fits within the zoning codes next to a old bungalow. But I that's kind of the question I have is and I apologize I missed the February meeting like what was the impetus to bring this forward? Was there a request of staff? Was there a request is staff seeing this request coming in? Was it council that wanted us to look at it? Um I like I said I apologize I missed the early so maybe a little background there would be helpful for me.

Uh sure. Uh the city council it came from city council directed staff to take a look into this and do anybody have the reason like what was the reasoning from city council?

I could answer this. It started with citizens citizens went to a council member council member took it to the full council full council directed staff to work on it. I mean, and I think it's is it known that this these were folks from a rabbit hole acres that are looking for something that to me this is historic preservation light. It's maybe easier for them. Um not as strict as a preservation district or historic preservation district. Um, I mean to me this is this is a whole process being proposed to put into um code at the request of one neighborhood. Um,

iso and I was reading that in part of your report. I I actually thought was already a historic district. Are you saying that it is it is not? But I thought it was on the national register of historic places. So, it it is a nationally registered historic district, but not a local district. Um, which means that there's no real teeth protecting demolitions from a property unless they take tax credits from the federal or state government. Um, so local designation and our our ordinances that were created in 2023 with code next put teeth in there. So, if you have a building that's on a local historic designation, there's prohibitions against demolitions or any kind of changes to the structure. Um what happened during the code next process is we had a group of citizens that were in Arapjo acres that said that they wanted an alternative. Uh they started reaching out to us. We informed them they would have to work through city council to get something like that going. Uh it took a couple of years to get going to get some progress. Um, but their the thought is that and I don't know what their thought is, but the staff's perspective on it is this is just another tool, another tool in the toolbox for us or for the citizens to use. Is it us to tell? Is it our place to tell you whether it's appropriate for the city to have or not? Nope. That's for y'all to decide, you and council. Um, it's just our job to put the information in front of you so that you all can make the decision on whether this goes forward or not.

Can I ask one one more quick thing? Go ahead. Would you like the tool? We love tools, but again, it's it's it's not protecting we're looking at it from it's protecting homeowners investments, not staff's investments in the community. It's homeowner and property owners investments. That's who uses this, not not necessarily us. What What happened to district one? One one I mean, it's you got duplexes next to old houses everywhere in there. If the zoning allows for construction of a of a unit, it can get built.

Yeah. So, in a lot of places, if you're looking at the areas um west of Hampton and north of us right here, that whole area has been zoned or the majority of that area has been zoned R2 since the 40s. Just nobody built a duplex. But the moment one person figures out, hey, this zoning is appropriate, you start to see it come up all over. That's just that's something I've seen in every community I've ever worked in

is that people just make assumptions based on what's on the ground that that's what can be built there. Like in Lukak the same thing happened where there were just single family homes built in an area then one person looked at a zoning map and said hey I can build a duplex here. They built one and then 10 more came up within the next year. That's what happened. Um so as long as the zoning is in place people can build to that level of density and that's what we're seeing happen north of us. If we put this tool into place, um are there limits or restrictions that we can put in the in the code or in the language that would um you know limit things like like you still need to be able to allow the density that's allowed in the zoning district or ADUs or um you know bulk plane those kinds of things.

Yeah. there uh what the jurisdictions that we looked at a lot of them gave explicit items that could not be yeah uh you know diverted from the base zone district and one of those was density so it wouldn't be able to uh prevent an ADU from being built it might just be able to uh prevent being an ADU above a garage say if you have a high limitation I mean but theoretically a conservation district could say well that ADU needs to be in a mid mid-centur modern style with a single slope roof, you know, and match the house, right? Which makes it could make it prohibitively expensive to build an ADU on on these lots.

To clarify or to respond to that, um the way it works in Denver with these situations with ADUs is the ADU does not necessarily have to match the style of the house. Even if like in Curtis Park, for example, they've got an overlay. So, there are ways that you can write it that the new structure can be distinct. It's more about sort of maintaining the style of primary structure in those cases. Obviously, the rules could change, but yeah, but if a conservation district came before this commission and and city council got it through, they could require that.

In theory, you could write that in. Yeah. But I I guess what I'm saying is there's functional overlays in Denver where they've tried to sort of walk that line where they want to make sure people can build ADUs and increase density. And they don't even limit what that ADU can look like. You I got one basically approved where the client wanted something pretty contemporary and their house was very much a classic Victorian. It's more about keeping it distinctly different so that you're not impacting the aesthetic of the original house. In that case, uh Noah,

um so I want to push back on the idea that this is about protecting investment. Um so this is about binding uh a group of property owners um some of which may be against their will and and I think that anybody who is coming in to a neighborhood like Arapjo Acres at this point they're making the investment in that particular property because of the characteristics of that property. And so the idea that there's a like looming demand to knock those buildings down and build other things to me just seems off. Like I I just don't I believe firmly that this is a solution in search of a problem.

Um and I'm opposed to making our zoning code more complicated, adding new categories, adding new processes. Um, and I I just really don't see the value of doing this. So, that's where I stand.

I don't think I I disagree with what you're saying, but you look at the neighborhood to the east there. They're tearing down a lot of houses and putting up some very large houses throughout that entire neighborhood. It's on the Denver side, but it's creeping in. And I can see where there could be neighbors that would be concerned that they have decent sized lots there that that characteristic might go away. I don't know that this does this or not. I I really don't. Like I don't know if this is the right tool or not. I'm asking if they want the tool. So that's that's something I need to think about. But the question is if there is something that's put in, can it be taken out too? Like can you vote to take it out or like once it's in like is it in forever? Well, I think that's something that um the I think it was the letter that was submitted yesterday proposed was if this is allowed, there should be a suns setting or a reauthorization, you know, after 10 years, there needs to be a look at it again or another vote. Um I think that's a reasonable um compromise in some of this. The last time we discussed this at the last study session, I think the consensus was if this were to be allowed, it should be a very high bar um for uh neighborhoods to do this. Um you know, it's tools like this that I'm very wary of that in um over the long history of of planning. These things have been used for um racism and segregation and um not just the color of the paint on the house, but the color of the people in the neighborhood. I mean that's just the historical facts of of these types of things. Um not saying that that's what's being proposed for Arapjo Acres by any means but um that's a very real history that we cannot ignore. Um so again I think there are some ways to compromise here. I don't disagree with Noah's point. This this seems like um a solution in search of a problem. Um, however, if it's a tool that can sit on the shelf that we have some guard rails around and make it a very high bar where we're not suddenly getting, you know, 10

15 uh special conservation districts throughout the city because, you know, folks really want their neighborhood to look the same forever. Um, that's just it's just can't happen. That's my thoughts. Uh, Carl, is a historic preservation going to get involved in this whatsoever? I mean, you see their name in there, but I haven't seen anybody from there.

Oh, yeah. So, um, we've had two study sessions with HPC. Um, so similar with with you. Um, and basically in their input in regards to conservation overlays. Um bottom line is that they would like to be if this process is in place or put into the code, they would like to be involved in the creation of the design standards for a proposed district or just have, you know, be able to have some input on that. Um otherwise, they're pretty much they've got their historic districts and landmarks and and things like that. That that's kind of their bread and butter. Um, I think I'm with Aaron that there should be a high bar, but personally I do think there are times and places where something like this is important. So, um, the Rapacres instance to me seems valid. Um, and if there's 65 70% of the neighbors that want to do it, then I can understand why they would be concerned about the pot. I mean, there are a few smaller, older, in kind of rough shape houses on the west edge that in theory, if the right developer came and decided to scoop it up for 500K, you know, if there's nothing protecting it, I can see why people want that. Um, so that's my stance.

Let me just also add real quick, you know, this is something that completely leaves um renters out. you know, this is exclusively a a homeownero occupied kind of tool and policy that benefits only one group of of Englewood citizens. Just let's remember that. Um, yeah, just to make sure I'm clear in my own mind. Um, from this email that we received, and I'm sure you received it as well, can you clarify for me the difference between a historic designation, district designation, and what we're talking about today? Just so it's crystal clear for me?

Sure. Um, so, uh, we have in the code like specifics for a historic designation or what would be considered a historic district. For example, all the properties in there would need to be a minimum of 50 years old, um, or have some other historical feature that is kind of un universal throughout that proposed district. Um, we have not had any applications for a historic district yet. Uh and we have not had any applications for historic landmark as of um so that being said uh Englewood was recently awarded uh certified local government status uh from the state and federal government which does open up some potential benefits for property owners to designate their property as historic. Um and that comes in the form of uh tax credits from the state uh potential redevelopment grant fund uh opportunities and things like that. So um right now um yeah, so we're hoping that that kind of um encourages some people to to go through that process, but right now um we we've not had any applications. So, I'm hearing you talk about historic buildings. What about a district? Is it basically the same thing? It's just a a multi-properties instead of a single property.

Yeah. And we don't have um so historic designation, you could do a historic landmark, which would be a a single property. Uh or you could do a district, which could be multiple houses, a block. Uh the code does not specify a a size uh minimum requirement for a historic district. Um, so it that would just be um it's kind of another preservation. So what's the difference between what we're talking about and but I mean I'm just going off this Arapjo Acres example. Would it be better for the or what what could they do to make their Arapo Acres a historic district versus using this tool?

So um Okay. So what what historic landmarks would not allow would be for somebody to come in and scrape the property without authority or you know certificate of appropriateness from the historic or planning or historic preservation commission. Um in a conservation overlay they do not limit demolitions in most instances. So, say somebody could come into Arapjo Acres and if this is in a conservation overlay district, they could scrape the property, but then they would have to rebuild it to the standards that were mid-modern century kind of thing again. Exactly. Okay. a historic district

a historic district to I mean you can limit you can't change the footprint of the existing structure it can be as detailed as like you know you've got these 50-year-old wood windows in the home and really you have to replace like for like you can't put in you know it's it's very specific I think of this as like historic um district light yes you said that and it's also much more ownorous for a um a neighborhood to get a historic district status um and much more detailed. So, well, I guess I'm curious because we got that email to say, "Hey, don't do this." And it seems to me that this tool might be exactly what they need in Rapo Acres. I mean, I don't live there, but I'm just

They absolutely could. They could go for historic district. Um, but then they couldn't dare do any demolition and that's I mean that's I mean I don't live there so I'm not sure what's in their minds and what they want to do but it seems to me that this tool would be a little better for them there but that's what I'm trying to with this tool they couldn't really access the tax credits without a historic designation is that that's correct. Yeah. Okay. So it's the tax things. Okay. That's what makes a difference. Thank you. I mean I would say the historic Yeah. I think the difference is that the historic preservation is a lot more strict.

Oh yeah. Um, and I think that is more limiting than the overlay that is sort of after an aesthetic that people want to maintain in their neighborhood. Um, so I I don't find that the overlay is that arduous. I mean, there's been renovations and updates that were done in Arapo Acres that frankly would most likely be approved if if sort of typical rules went into place. Um, but they've got modern windows, they've got proper insulation. And I think that's one of the things that you don't want to do with certain neighborhoods by forcing it historic is these rules on a non-historic designation would still allow modern updates to a house. It's a little bit more challenging, but it's not impossible. Um, it's focused on the aesthetic. Yeah, I worked for a company that had a uh one of the Porter's historic mansions, so I'm I'm familiar with that. But that's why I was just like I'm not understanding why this person doesn't want it when it seems to me like this would be a better tool for them. But um that's why I was a little confused. So, thanks for the

Yeah, I mean I think we're agreeing. Yeah, I read that letter and I got I mean I understand where the guy's coming from. It seems like he's concerned that this would be like running rampant around town with all sorts of overlays. But to your point, if there's strong enough rules where logic is guiding kind of what what would have to be overcome to even get the designation. It feels unfounded that there's going to be just like tons of these things popping up. I think obviously Rapoacres is the obvious case. I think there's a good reason to have it done there. I just don't know how many other realistic areas this is even viable. So I don't know that there's that much concern.

Right. You keep talking about a Rapo acres, but if you build a twotory duplex in Arapo Acres, somebody's going to probably die.

Well, it's still R1A zoning, so you can't build. It's not a very good example, but like the uh just driving down the street, you know, you you got this old house is was built in 54 and next to it was h an old house similar to it. You you just can't uh it's it's not in Ingwood's best interest to build a bunch of duplexes around existing old houses. I mean it's you you the only thing you're doing is increasing the density. You're not increasing the value of the city. You're not th those people pro the buy those houses. They they probably won't shop in Englewood anyway. More than likely if if you buy a million and a half dollar house, you're probably going to shop downtown. But, uh, it's easy to see just comparing the the just this house with this house and this house. If if if you'd have a different house, it's easy to see it. I mean, it's there's not a whole lot to to really discuss about it. You you can just see the difference. What What's the different house on this block? Well, that one right there, it's uh District One, it's it's totally lost. Uh District 3 and four are pretty much uh established as they

were as they were built somewhat. Um, Eric, you mentioned that the that there is already a preservation overlay district near the hospital and that is right. Yeah, it's a neighborhood overlay,

right? Neighborhood preservation overlay is what it's called in title 16. I looked it up unless the website unless the, you know, code online is wrong. Um the I I I just I think that if the Arapjo Acres neighborhood in particular wants something like this, then something should be written for that neighborhood in particular and should be put into Title 16 to apply to that neighborhood. Like I just I don't see I I would rather have a situation where city council has to vote one time on this one, you know, specific case that is unique for historical reasons. Um and rather than creating an entirely new process that um you know could be applied in various places. And I think, you know, I I think I would probably still when it came back through here, I would still probably say I'm opposed to it. But I as this goes, you know, through I I think that it would make more sense to do it as a specific overlay that applies to that neighborhood in Title 16 rather than creating new processes, new terms, new uh you know uh rules around all this. That's the way that I would approach it.

Yeah. Eric, can you explain the difference between the neighborhood preservation overlay that's north of the hospital with what this potential new overlay classification would would do? I do not know the history of that overlay very well. Brian, do you happen to know anything more about that? Um, I don't know all of it. I know that it was created through a bunch of neighborhood meetings. Um, the reality is we would much rather create a process that everyone has the ability to apply for than just do oneoff updates for certain sections of town. It's more appropriate for us to update the code and create a tool that is available for everyone than to just do these little spin-offs because, you know, we've already done one,

then this would be a second one, then there might be a third one. And we want to make sure that the process is the same for each one when they're requested or if they're requested. Yes. So, we don't know. I mean, there was a tool or a process to get that one done. Yeah. Title 16 amendment, but no actual process other than that. That's why we want to make sure that the process is created so that moving forward everybody follows the same process. What What are the boundaries for that overlay?

It's three blocks of Grant um just north of the hospital up to um Eastman and then one block of Sherman south of Eastman. But just to clarify what we would be doing like whatever that overlay is is similar to what we are thinking of creating the process for right kind of their overlay that overlay limits a lot of land uses which is what this group has said do not do. Yeah.

So it it doesn't follow all the same um but it would affection effectively it would do very similar things except this one would focus more on architectural characteristics, building siding, things like that where that one focuses a lot on land use which again nobody has really bought into doing something like that. Yeah. I mean that's trying to it's to keep it from becoming commercial uses. Is that what that district is about? It limits um some non-residential uses but only allows um duplexes in places where duplexes already exist. I think that was the biggest thing and it's an MUR3 zoning there. Yes.

Yeah. That's the opposite of what we want. I mean the opposite tool like they are severely restricting density um despite the existing zoning. Is that one sunset? So I get your point that we don't want that kind of thing happen or at least a process like it's still a framework.

As I listen to the conversation tonight, the concern that comes to my mind is if somebody wanted to build uh whatever, right? not your typical thousand square foot bungalow. Would this process enable surrounding neighbors to go in and have a his have an overlay put on it in order to prevent somebody from building a you know something that they want to build that may not necessarily match the neighborhood at the time of construction. Um, so we did hear that we but this process should not be something like a hostile designation. Um, as you can kind of see they have this process. I think they still have it in Denver where anybody can nominate a property for historic landmark status and they you're not the property owner doesn't matter. Um, and we've heard from everyone that this is not something that interested in having anybody have,

but if you require less than 100% vote of the district, it could still be a hostile designation because if I'm on a block with five other houses and I vote no because I want to make a change to my house and the other five houses vote yes, then over my objection, they've put that restriction on my property. Even if a 100% of people vote, this gives an individual property owner o rights over properties that they don't own. That's just what so we should be just eyes wide open like what we're talking about.

Yeah. Uh Carl, you have a question, comments on I thought I'd turn mine back up. I I in my like gut I feel the same way as you guys. But if they're saying they want a tool, why are we saying they shouldn't have that ability to? I I understand what you're saying. I'm not disagreeing with the fact that this could influence somebody's outside of their own property, and I don't love that. Right. But I want to be able to give us the tools to be able to run effectively, run the government effectively. And if this is something that seems interested and and seems like something that would be beneficial to them, I want to make sure that we're fully considering.

Eric, does Arapo Acres have an homeowners association? I don't think so. I'm not aware of any HOAs in Englewood. I don't think they have.

I'm not aware if they are or not, but that wouldn't have any any any bearing on what we do from a developing. I mean, I think a lot of what we're talking about is hypothetical worst case scenarios, which is valid, of course, but um maybe just to pose a hypothetical because I hear your point, Noah, you don't want to be bound by someone else's rules. I I totally get that. We're also saying, well, if you buy into Rapoacres, you're of course you're automatically understanding that you want to fit in. Well, I I think, you know, the hypothetical is, let's say that one of the more beat up houses does get bought and sold by someone who decides, you know what, I am going to put a twotory maximized volume kind of goofy out ofplace developer house, right? And now someone next door says, well I could sell my house for, excuse me, for 600K. and someone could again again do a 2 million house. So five years from now half the block has done the same thing with duplex is like would you rather put rules in I mean I totally get having a high bar but my sense is if you did this for Apple and said hey the bar's 75% if they want to pass that I mean I don't live there but I would vote for it because I'd rather see that neighborhood preserved even if it's the only neighborhood in the entire city that ends up with this designation. And I think there's limited opportunities to preserve neighborhoods which are probably never going to be replicated in a similar fashion. And I would rather disappoint someone who couldn't make more money because they wanted to build a bigger house than lose an asset that I think is irreplaceable.

I think that's a fair point, but there already exists a tool and that's the historic preservation do exactly what you're saying, right? But I think the point being that historic preservation handcuffs people far more severely than than this does. Um to the point where you can't change the house. This is not saying you can't change the house. It's not saying you can't build a bigger house. It's not saying you can't build an ADU. All it's saying is that we're generally trying to respect the aesthetic that's been established and clearly defined. I mean that that's what Carl's picking up on, right? Is there shouldn't be something out of place. And all this is doing is making sure that some bone head with bad taste doesn't come in and ruin it for everyone else.

No, that's fair. And I have a question for staff. Um, you know, some of this, if we're talking about neighborhood character, aesthetics, that comes down to some subjective um, assessment, what does that look like? Um, how does that get played out from a staff? Um so usually what we've seen in other jurisdictions is um some the a neighborhood will come forward with an application or set of properties will come forward with an application. They work with staff um oftentimes they work with planning and zoning commission sometimes HPC to develop the guidelines for what would be that conservation overlay district the kind of the characteristics that they're setting out to preserve. And so it's during that kind of creation of that conservation overlay uh when all that stuff kind of gets hammered out. And ultimately um like similar again to a reasonzoning this would be um uh reviewed by PNZ you make recommendation to city council the final.

Yeah. Similarly like the the neighborhood uh community like group usually gets a review like in Denver they have a review but they don't have authority and then the authority to actually provide feedback with teeth is staff's review based on the guidelines.

I think I I like the idea of a high threshold and something that expires um would be something I'd be supportive of trying to you know have a process in place. does look like Rapoacres has a neighborhood association where they have, you know, some sort of, you know, gallery and, you know, resources and things like that people can go to in a neighborhood link. So, there's obviously it's a community there, right? I don't know if they're going to do this or not. I don't know if it really matters. I think it could be one of Carl's neighborhoods. If we have a block of, you know, houses that all want to get together and say, "Hey, we want to keep this character," then then that is the thing that they can do. I I I think I would be supportive as long as there's a high bar and and it's revocable or not revocable, reversible, I guess I would say. So in 15 years or 10 years when those people move out and somebody else is like this is stupid, they don't have to do it anymore. So Eric is did we say this is one block? Is that what he said?

Uh, that's what staff we don't have anything, you know, completely set up yet, but that was just what staff's recommendation. It should probably be a minimum of a block. Um, just to avoid kind of, you know, like a broken up block of of two properties here, three properties over there, and so on. The space is more kind of a consistent.

Okay. So, when we're talking about a block, let's just take 4,100 to 4200 South Sherman, is that going to be both the odd and even side of that block or would it just be one side of the street? Um, that was something that would be determined when we get these regulations crafted. Um ultimately would be uh a recommendation from you and again council would make final decision on that on how big the minimum size should be for a conservation uh district application to move. Can you think of any other uh block or neighborhood in the city of Englewood, Eric, that would outside of Arapjo Acres that people would have an interest in having the conservation overlay district imposed?

Uh we did identify a few areas uh with HPC. I do not have that list in front of me. I don't know. Brian, do you remember any of those? Yeah, there's some houses on Dartmouth uh almost to the east eastern edge of town that have these rear loaded garages. There's like 10 of them um on one block face. There's some properties on I think it's Lincoln and Grant kind of close to the hospital that have these cool like uh front stairways with big retaining walls that that would be something that they might want to preserve. There's some areas of town. I think one of our examples you guys caught on the first time we presented it to you is a R1A neighborhood that might have 12,000 square foot lots along this block and you said no don't let somebody limit the size of the block if underlying zoning allows it. So there's other places we think it could be used. Um but I mean Arapo Acres is the impetus but I don't want to focus on that because we're trying to look citywide for this for this process. could see some stuff in district 4, you know, either kind of back behind Pirates Cove or something or even very kind of southwest corner of uh of the city that might have some opportunities also in just some of those unique areas or even kind of the part that goes down by um yeah, so I think there I'm sure there's opportunities around. I think the question becomes, you know, are what's the bigger impact of somebody that comes into a neighborhood and says, "I'm tearing down this house because I'm going to be the first duplex that can go in and we're not limiting size, but like should that should that neighborhood should that neighbor be able to do whatever they want if the other neighbors are like, "Hey, I'd like to keep this at least looking the same versus, you know, are we limiting, you know, somebody else from from doing what they want?" I think you're you're kind of limiting somebody either way. Um I just do a check-in with commissioners. Um it sounds to me like we have kind of two positions. Um

considering this uh you know implementing a tool like this with um a stringent bar um that that neighbors that a neighborhood would need to clear. Um not being able to do anything about the zoning or um land use um to the underlying zone district. you know, all of this kind of little tools we've been talking about. So, high bar, lots of restrictions, lots of review of planning and zoning and city council, all that stuff. Um, or like no, I mean, I feel like maybe Noah, you might be the only No, like can I just take a temperature or is there somebody who's like, "No, we should make this really easy and not um so like maybe where do you fall in that spectrum between those three?" Um, you do like kind of strong. I I think you I I'm in the needs to be strict, needs to be reversible at some point in time. Um but needs to be a process. So

I am opposed to adding complication to the code for these niche use cases. I would like to keep it the way it is. I'm kind of halfway between Colin and Noah. uh if we're going to go to vote to tonight then I would probably you know say I don't think it's something that we need to impose on the on the residents of Englewood. Uh let's go to David. Um I lean more towards high bar because I think there are a few relevant neighborhoods where I would see value in preserving it but I understand the concern. So a higher bar seems to mitigate that risk. Michelle.

Yeah, I'm I'm also kind of in the middle of this. I normally fall on the spectrum of property rights over to that side, but um and I can see the point of maybe having an expiration and I also see the point about, you know, you can totally get outnumbered by the rest of your neighbors. Um so I'm a I don't know, maybe you end up staying. I have no idea. This might might be where I am.

Thanks, Carl. Uh I I think that uh it should be well you you got some part like I said district one it it's already totally beyond this rule here but it should be either a large neighborhood or um I I I don't see it doing any good whatsoever if It's like three or four houses out of the block. That's not going to do much of anything. Needs to be a a few block square neighborhoods or something like that. A larger area. I' I'd just seen it have it as ingoid period border to border.

One large overlay conservation.

Yeah, I Yeah, that's a that's okay. Um, yeah, I'm I'm feeling similar to to Eric. Um, you know, there's um should be a very high bar if at all. And I also feel like I'm not fully confident in like how this could all play out, right? Like we have one use case that we've kind of keep batting around, maybe another couple, but like you know these kinds of open doors can lead to other things. And I'm not sure if I feel confident feeling like I know all of those those um how all of those things. So I am um hesitant and um ner maybe even a little skeptical uh of it. And so I mean I think where we sit uh as a as a as a commission here is is kind of that it's like we think this should be a very high bar if at all kind of in that um and uh yeah. Would you like any more specific direction from us tonight?

Um, I think we've got a great feedback from you. We'll share this with the city council in the upcoming study session and see what direction they would like to go. Ryan, did you have anything to add? I just have one quick thing because I looked up Arapjo Acres and they that I cannot find an HOA. It's just basically the residents take pride in maintaining the architectural character that makes this neighborhood extraordinary. So, it's just sort of a loose loose thing. So, I just wanted to let you know what that Yeah, I think there's probably a very specific connotation of HOA versus just neighborhood association, which it seems like it's more or even home owners have done some covenants in their land.

It's totally informal. It's has not even close to an HOA. I guess that Well, this is some Never mind. All right. Well, thank you, Eric. That was informative. I appreciate it. Thank you,

Brian. All right. Um, staff's choice. What else you got for us, guys? Um, so I don't have anything other than a small announcement. This is likely my last or second to last meeting with you all. Um, I've been offered another job in another municipality that I have accepted. Um, my last day is on May 8th. Oh, wow.

So, uh, I appreciate working with everyone over the last few years and thanks for helping me get Code Next across that, uh, so many of you helped work on. Um, it's been great working with you all. Where where are you going? Just out of curiosity. Um, I'm going to the town of Parker. Thanks, Brian. Um, uh, attorney's choice. Yeah, nothing for me tonight. Thank you, guys. Thank you. And commissioner's choice. I think we started this. Let's go from Carl and go this way. Uh, Commissioner's Choice. Uh, nothing really. Thank you.

Well, I just want to say thank you to you, Brian. I I remember when you came on. That's that's how long I've been on PNC. So, it's a little um it's a milestone for me too to see live through a whole staff uh turnover there. But I'm sorry to see you go, but Park is a growing place. I have many friends that live out there and uh you'll find lots to do there, I'm sure. Good luck to you in the future and thank you for your service. Echo the same, but nothing else. Yeah, thanks Brian. I mean, I think you've really brought a steady hand and an even keel and really walked uh the balance of uh you know the political lines really well and done a great job.

Yeah, I'd like to say congratulations Brian. I think that's a a good move and uh appreciate everything you've done for the city and other than that I have nothing further. Yeah, thank you, Brian, for everything you've done with the commission and um I think I can say you've taken the time to meet with me about things that I've brought up outside of commission time as well. Uh and I appreciate your attention to those matters and your insights and uh everything that you've offered to the commission. Congrats. Well done. Um, I just, um, I said this the last time, there are still a number of the state housing and land use laws that we are not in compliance with. And every study session we have about conservation overlay districts could be a study session or a public hearing about the um uh transportation uh corridor uh requirements, the minimum parking requirements, the other state laws on which we have not yet acted. Um and I would really like to see more of that and less of this. That's my commission. Chair, do you mind if I provide an update on on that one?

That'd be great. Um, we have hired a new long range planner. He started last Monday. So, he's going to be spearheading the parking uh title 16 amendments. So, he's doing a lot of background research on that right now. Um, and then for TOC transit oriented communities, we're not out of compliance. Um, we have met all the deadlines to date. This one's more of a longer process. Um, we don't anticipate changes to title 16 with that, but there are some conversations that will have to happen with council. Um, and he's working on that one as well. So, you'll be seeing him soon. I don't know how soon, but it will be uh in the next few months.

Um, Ryan, quick question for your position. Um, is it just a a staff hire? Does council or this body have any input or involvement in the hiring process? Uh, it's a staff. Y well I reject your resignation. Uh and so and we again I'll reiterate just everyone's thanks for the time that you've taken with all of us here and and with the commission. I think title 16 doesn't get done without you. Uh we are all here because you are helping us shepherd it through. So you know appreciate all the time and all the effort and you know good luck in the in the future. Ser cross pants.

All right. Uh with that Nancy is part of staff. Did I check you?

Uh I just remind you that the next meeting which is May 5th will be on the capital improvement project. So I will be sending you the links to the two study sessions where it was the joint meeting with yourselves council board advis budget advisory committee if you could review those and if uh you have any questions ahead of time email those to us and uh so we the directors of those projects will be here at the next meeting only to answer questions not to do presentations because you can view those online. I I really encourage everybody to take a look at those materials. It can be a lot. Um so don't expect to show up and be able to flip through and conversation. Do I I asked this question where do we have really anything that we are have any control over? The priority projects are over the budget allocated. So

I you know I I always come to this with like um just kind of an approach of like, hey, do you really need that much, you know, um and and so, you know, I just want to be confident that we're not just getting kind of round numbers thrown in there. You know, we've had a couple of times where department heads are like, well, you know, maybe we could and that that helped. I know this is a smaller gap than we've had in years past. I I think we've usually had not all the priority like we've there always is a bigger ask, right? But it's usually like the priority numbers come in lower and then we can like take a couple of the other things in. Um if you didn't listen to Noah had some great questions on where some things can go to.

Um so I think maybe we could utilize some of that thought process on some of the equipment that was being requested. Maybe we can't get down to the number that we need to get to and then it'll be a straightforward process, right? Everything's easy. Yeah, I think we've had between seven and 11 million normally. Is that right, Colin? It feels high, but yeah. Yeah, something like that to work.

The difference this year is that they're saying that everything nondiscretionary already puts us over the available budget. Whereas in the past we had a we had a certain amount of discretionary projects from which we could make some choices or recommendations. Um and so yeah I think it it seems to me that if they are truly non-discretionary then there's not really a whole effort.

Yeah I was just talking historically we did have money that we had a a cap that we could work with. So it's a little little different just I was just talking a story. All right, I think with that we can adjourn the meeting everybody.