Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout07/26/2007 ORIGINAL CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT Minutes of Meeting July 26, 2007 1. CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER The meeting was called to order by Chair BLAIR at 7:00 p.m. 2. ROLL CALL Board Members Present: Tom Abbott Bob Blair Alan Bucknam Bob Howard Betty J 0 Page Board Members Absent: Janet Bell Paul Hovland Larry Linker Staff Members Present: Travis Crane, Planner II Ann Lazzeri, Secretary 3. PUBLIC FORUM (This is the time for anyone to speak on any subject not appearing on the agenda.) No one wished to address the Board at this time. 4. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Case No. W A-07-07: An application filed by Quail Creek Investors for approval of (A) a variance to allow a sign on an elevation not adjacent to the street; (B) a variance to increase allowable wall signage to 160 square feet on the eastern elevation; and (C) a variance to maximum wall height, resulting in a 10- foot tall wall on property zoned Commercial-One and located at 4975 Kipling Street. The case was presented by Travis Crane. He entered all pertinent documents into the record and advised the Board there was jurisdiction to hear the case. He reviewed the staff report and digital presentation. Staff recommended approval for reasons, and with conditions, as outlined in the staff report. Steve Combs Quail Creek Investors 4975 Kipling Street BOA Minutes -1- July 26, 2007 Mr. Combs is one of three partners involved in the subject development. He was sworn in by Chair BLAIR. He thanked Travis Crane for a thorough and professional presentation and offered to answer any further questions from the Board. Regarding questions about the eastern wall, he stated that a six-foot wall as required by Code would cost less to build, however a ten-foot wall would present a better visual image from Kipling. There would be an approximate eight- foot space between the building and the wall. The approximate length of the wall would be forty feet. Board Member PAGE expressed concern that the screening wall with open ends would provide a hiding place for people with ill intentions. There was discussion as to whether or not the wall should have gates on each end, enclosed on each end or enclosed on one end. Mr. Crane noted that if the wall was enclosed on both ends, it would then become part of the building and would not require a variance. Mr. Combs stated that, while he understood Board Member PAGE's concern, it would be problematic to enclose the screening wall because the back doors to the businesses are behind this wall. Deliveries are made through these doors. Delivery trucks would park in front and materials would be delivered to the back door via dolly. Electric, gas and phone services are also accessed in this area. He stated that if problems arise such as homeless people sleeping in the area between the wall and the building, the police would immediately be notified. Board Member ABBOTT suggested enclosing only one end of the wall. Mr. Combs commented that this scenario would still provide a hiding place and would provide some hindrance to shop owners. Board Member BUCKNAM agreed that enclosing one side would provide more of a hiding place than if it were open on both sides. Upon a motion by Board Member ABBOTT and second by Board Member BUCKNAM, the following resolution was stated: Whereas the applicant was denied permission by an administrative officer; and Whereas, Board of Adjustment Application Case No. W A-07-07(A) is an appeal to this Board from the decision of an administrative officer; and Whereas, the property has been posted the fifteen days required by law, and in recognition that there WERE NO protests registered against it; and BOA Minutes - 2- July 26, 2007 Whereas, the relief applied for may be granted without detriment to the public welfare and without substantially impairing the intent and purpose of the regulations governing the City of Wheat Ridge. Now, therefore, be it resolved that Board of Adjustment Application Case No. WA-07-07(A) be, and hereby is, APPROVED. For the following reasons: 1. The building is adjacent to a major arterial, Kipling Street, which carries a large volume of traffic at high speeds. Limiting sign age to the eastern elevation, which is parallel to the street, would be detrimental to the businesses located at the southern end of the building. 2. The variance will not alter the character of the locality. This area is highly commercial and wall signage is an integral component of the viability of commercial businesses. 3. The application is in substantial compliance with applicable standards set forth in the Architectural and Site Design Manual although wall sign age is not discussed at length in the Manual. With the following conditions: 1. The signage on the southern elevation shall not exceed the amount as allowed by Chapter 26, Article VII of the Code of Laws. 2. Only one monument sign shall be allowed for the property. The right to install the second allowable 103 square foot freestanding sign is voided by this decision. The motion passed 5-0 with Board Members BELL, HOVLAND and LINKER absent. Upon a motion by Board Member PAGE and second by Board Member ABBOTT, the following resolution was stated: Whereas the applicant was denied permission by an administrative officer; and Whereas, Board of Adjustment Application Case No. W A-07-07(B) is an appeal to this Board from the decision of an administrative officer; and Whereas, the property has been posted the fifteen days required by law, and in recognition that there WERE NO protests registered against it; and BOA Minutes .3- July 26, 2007 Whereas, the relief applied for may be granted without detriment to the public welfare and without substantially impairing the intent and purpose of the regulations governing the City of Wheat Ridge. Now, therefore, be it resolved that Board of Adjustment Application Case No. W A-07-07(B) be, and hereby is, APPROVED. For the following reasons: 1. The increase in wall signage on the eastern elevation will be offset by the decrease in wall sign age on the northern elevation and the installation of only one freestanding sign. 2. The applicant will be installing less total signage on the property than what is allowed by the Sign Code. The applicant is proposing to re- allocate sign age in areas on the property where it will be the most desirable and effective for the tenants. With the following conditions: 1. The wall sign age on the northern elevation shall be limited to a maximum of 40 square feet. 2. Wall sign age on the eastern elevation shall not exceed 160 square feet. Board Member ABBOTT offered a friendly amendment to add a third condition as follows: Only one monument sign shall be allowed for the property. The amendment was accepted by Board Member PAGE. The motion passed 4-1 with Board Member HOWARD voting no and Board Members BELL, HOVLAND and LINKER absent. Upon a motion by Board Member BUCKNAM and second by Board Member PAGE the following resolution was stated: Whereas the applicant was denied permission by an administrative officer; and Whereas, Board of Adjustment Application Case No. W A-07-07(C) is an appeal to this Board from the decision of an administrative officer; and Whereas, the property has been posted the fifteen days required by law, and in recognition that there WERE NO protests registered against it; and BOA Minutes -4 - July 26, 2007 Whereas, the relief applied for may be granted without detriment to the public welfare and without substantially impairing the intent and purpose of the regulations governing the City of Wheat Ridge. Now, therefore, be it resolved that Board of Adjustment Application Case No. W A-07-07(C) be, and hereby is, APPROVED. For the following reasons: 1. The wall will hide unattractive mechanical equipment, which if left un screened, would detract from the building architecture. 2. The wall will be architecturally compatible with the building. 3. Granting of the variance will allow the freestanding wall to conform with the spirit of the freestanding wall requirement to screen utilities on commercial buildings from view. Board Member ABBOTT offered a friendly amendment to add a fourth reason as follows: Due to orientation on site, the Kipling side is actually the rear of the building; and add a condition as follows: The wall will be structurally sound and architecturally compatible with the building as described by the applicant. The friendly amendment was accepted by Board Member BUCKNAM. Board Member HOWARD stated he would vote against the motion because the rear of the building faces Kipling Street. The motion passed 4-1 with Board Member HOWARD voting no and Board Members BELL, HOVLAND and LINKER absent. Chair BLAIR advised the applicant that his requests for variance were approved. Mr. Combs commended the city for its excellence and professionalism in processing his application. 5. CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING Chair BLAIR closed the public hearing. 6. OLD BUSINESS There was no old business to come before the Board. 7. NEW BUSINESS A. Approval of Minutes - June 28, 2007 BOA Minutes - 5- July 26, 2007 It was moved by Board Member HOWARD and seconded by Board Member ABBOTT to approve minutes of June 28, 2007. The motion passed unanimously. 8. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 8:22 p.m. f- cL.-;XVY/~ I J Ann Lazzeri, Secretary ~ Robert Blair, Chair BOA Minutes .6- July 26, 2007