HomeMy WebLinkAbout04-04-19City of
Wheat�ide
PLANNING COMMISSION
Minutes of Meeting
April 4, 2019
1. CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER
The meeting was called to order by Chair OHM at 7:01 p.m. in the City Council
Chambers of the Municipal Building, 7500 West 29`" Avenue, Wheat Ridge, Colorado.
2. ROLL CALL OF MEMBERS
Commission Members Present: Melissa Antol
Daniel Larson
Janet Leo
Scott Ohm
Richard Peterson
Jahi Simbai
Vivian Vos
Commission Members Absent:
Staff Members Present: Lauren Mikulak, Planning Manager
Scott Cutler, Planner II
Mark Westberg, Engineering Projects Manager
Tammy Odean, Recording Secretary
3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
4. APPROVE ORDER OF THE AGENDA
It was moved by Commissioner LARSON and seconded by Commissioner LEO to
approve the order of the agenda. Motion passed 7-0.
5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES — March 21, 2019
It was moved by Commissioner VOS and seconded by Commissioner LARSON to
approve the minutes of March 21, 2019, as amended. Motion carried 7-0.
6. PUBLIC FORUM (This is the time for any person to speak on any subject not appearing
on the agenda.)
Planning Commission Minutes _ 1
April 4, 2019
No one wished to speak at this time.
7. PUBLIC HEARING
A. Case No. WS -18-06: An application filed by Toll Southwest, LLC for approval of
a major subdivision for a 200 -unit townhome development for property zoned
Mixed Use -Commercial TOD (MU -C TOD) and located at 5060 Ward Road.
Ms. Mikulak gave a short presentation regarding the major subdivision and the
application. She entered into the record the contents of the case file, packet
materials, the zoning ordinance, and the contents of the digital presentation. She
stated the public notice requirements have been met, therefore the Planning
Commission has jurisdiction to hear this case.
Commissioner PETERSON asked about the arched parcel boundary to the east
which is also zoned MU -C TOD zoning.
Ms. Mikulak explained that before RTD purchased the land for their parking lot,
the old Jolly Rancher Factory had included all of the land zoned MU -C TOD and
they had a railroad spur that came into the property where the arch is. She
explained that the zoning was changed on the property in 2012, before RTD had
finished their property negotiations. Transit stations and parking lots are permitted
in MU -C TOD and a Special Use permit in I -E so when the split zoning does not
affect the land use, it is not changed or cleaned up.
Commissioner PETERSON asked if the open space park ends at Union Ct.
Ms. Mikulak said the park will terminate at a detached sidewalk on Union which
can then be taken south to the Wheat Ridge • Ward Station area and eventually
with 2E funds a pedestrian bridge will be built over the station and connect it to a
Linear Park that will continue to the ponds around I-70.
Commissioner PETERSON also inquired if the 37,000 sq. ft. of designated
parkland is enough to accommodate the new residents and the public.
Ms. Mikulak explained that the codified parkland dedication requirement uses an
industry standard of 7.5 acres per 1,000 people and because this property is 13
acres there will be a fee in lieu of parkland dedication in addition to the proposed
3/ -acre park because it does not entirely fulfill the parkland requirement.
Commissioner PETERSON asked about the curvilinear street design and wanted to
ensure that there would be logical wayfinding and addressing particularly where
Vivian St. and 51st Ave. intersect twice.
Ms. Mikulak mentioned that the address plan has not been looked at yet, but will
be once the location of the front doors of the townhomes is known. This will be
Planning Commission Minutes -2-
April 4,
2-
Apri14, 2019
done in conjunction with fire and police in mind so they easily know where to go
in an emergency situation. She also explained there are disconnect streets
throughout the City and the sequencing of number is done per block; so the
numbering will be logical east and west of Vivian St.
Commissioner PETERSON then asked what the percentage of total covered land
area will be and what is required for permeable surfaces.
Ms. Mikulak explained that she does not have an answer for impervious surfaces
because it's related to the site plan, but the zoning requires 15% open space and
that will be exceeded and the two detention vaults will be sufficient to
accommodate all the flows.
Commissioner SIMBAI referenced page 5 of the staff report and asked for
clarification on the statement that the lots "appear" to be shaped and sized
appropriately.
Ms. Mikulak explained the subdivision regulations require a logical lot layout
which needs to be consistent with the proposed site design so it does not need to be
re -platted.
Commissioner ANTOL asked what the distance is to the nearest park from this
development.
Ms. Mikulak mentioned that the Van Bibber Trail is to the north; the Haskins
Ridge project, to the east in Arvada, will have a park and Prospect Park is to the
south off of 44th Ave.
Commissioner LARSON asked why the ROW dedication on Ward and Ridge
Roads is different compared to 52nd Ave.
Mr. Westberg explained the dedication varies because of differences in what is
going to be built and differences in what right-of-way widths are already existing.
Commissioners LARSON, PETERSON, ANTOL, VOS and LEO asked about
traffic and about the three intersections at Ward Rd (at Ridge, 51 St, and 52nd) and
asked if there will be additional traffic lights installed.
Ms. Mikulak and Mr. Westberg said the City would like to see a signal at Ridge
and Ward Roads, but CDOT has not agreed to that because of the spacing
requirements of traffic lights on State Highways. They also mentioned that CDOT
is going to require that 51St Ave be designed as a right in and right out only at Ward
Rd. Mr. Westberg also added that CDOT has required the City to modify the
access at Ridge Rd to a three quarter movement, so there will be a right in, a right
out and a left in, but no left out at Ridge Rd. CDOT required this because Ridge
Road was previously a low volume dead end street, but now connects through to
Planning Commission Minutes -3 -
April 4, 2019
the north and east of the station area. He reiterated that CDOT has said no traffic
signal at Ridge Road and CDOT has the jurisdiction to tell the City what can and
can't be done on the State Highway.
Commissioner PETERSON then asked what other travel options will be,
specifically to get to I-70.
Mr. Westberg explained that one option would be to go to 52nd and turn left and the
second option is to take Tabor south to the I-70 Frontage Road and take that to
Ward Rd which is also signalized.
Commissioner VOS wanted clarification about the Parkland Dedication and the
"reduced fee" of $2,021.62 per unit.
Ms. Mikulak explained how the parkland dedication and fee amounts are
calculated and codified in the subdivision regulations. Ms. Mikulak then explained
there are several fee classifications—the standard fee, and slightly reduced fees for
properties that are in urban renewal area, in a transit area, or for senior housing.
Ms. Vos also asked if this development will be done in phases and asked about
infrastructure costs.
Ms. Mikulak confirmed this development will be done in phases and the SIA will
memorialize the timing of such and what infrastructure has to be in place before
ending and starting phases. She did not know what the cost of the infrastructure
will be.
Commissioner LEO wanted to confirm that there was no community outreach and
that there were no issues or objections.
Ms. Mikulak confirmed this to be true, and added that there is no neighborhood
meeting requirement for a subdivision plat. Prior to this meeting the posting
requirement were met and the City received one inquiry, but no objections. She
clarified the neighborhood meeting requirement for the concept plan, an associated
application, and general outreach the City had done for 2E infrastructure projects.
Commissioner OHM asked what percentage of single use residential is for this
project.
Ms. Mikulak said she doesn't know the percentage, but 200 of 201 lots is
residential, the ROW dedication is 3.5 acres, and the parks are .75 of an acre and
the rest is residential.
Tom Beyer, Business/Property Owner
12200 Ridge Road, Wheat Ridge
Planning Commission Minutes -4-
April
4 -
April 4, 2019
Mr. Beyer had 3 concerns: he wants to understand if there would be sufficient
parking for the number of units and if parking waivers would be given. His second
concern is what the access to Ridge Road will look like and if there will be on
street parking on Ridge Road. Mr. Beyer's third concern is the no left turn out of
the site or from Ridge Road to Ward Road.
Fred Orr, Property Owner
5040 Acoma Street, Denver
Mr. Orr said he owns the two industrial buildings to the north of the property and
would like the sewer infrastructure accommodated to have a gravity flow instead of
it being lifted to 52nd Avenue.
Sean Baker, Property Owner
5040 Ward Road
Mr. Baker has concerns about people cutting through his property to turn left onto
Ward Road to avoid the no left turn from Ridge Road. He explained this happened
to him when Jolly Rancher was in business.
Answers to public testimony:
• Parking space requirement
Ms. Mikulak explained that the parking design is a site planning issue and
that there are minimum and maximum parking requirements, and she
confirmed that no waivers are given. She also said the internal ROW
dedications and the ROW dedication on the north side of Ridge Road will
provide 94 on -street spaces. There will also be off-street parking with
garages attached to the townhomes. Mr. Westberg added there will be no
parking added to the south side of Ridge Road and it will remain a bike lane
until those properties decide to redevelop.
• RV parking on the streets
Ms. Mikulak said the City Code only allows for operable and licensed RV's
to be parked on City Streets for no more than a two week period.
Matt Foran, Applicant
2753 E 139 Dr.. Thornton
Mr. Foran mentioned the HOA documents were not finalized, but does not
think that RV parking is going to be an issue.
Sewer line around 52nd Avenue
Planning Commission Minutes -5-
April
5 -
April 4, 2019
Mr. Westberg said staff will talk to the developers and Fruitdale Sanitation
to see if the request can be accommodated. Gravity is typically preferable
to lift stations.
Tom Odle, CVL, Applicant's Engineer
10333 E Dry Creek Road
Mr. Odle explained there will be a sanitary sewer line adjacent to the Toll
Brothers property that the Mr. Orr's parcel can tap into it.
Commissioner PETERSON asked if there will be visitor parking on the site.
Ms. Mikulak explained some of the tracts will accommodate parking and all
interior streets will also allow on -street parking.
Commissioner VOS asked how the no left turns will be enforced.
Ms. Mikulak said by City signs and curbing installed at the City's expense.
Commissioner LEO asked if the businesses will be allowed to turn left off their
properties.
Mr. Westberg said yes unless CDOT decides to build a median on Ward Road.
Commissioner PETERSON asked if Tabor Road can handle truck traffic if there is
no left turns onto Ward Road.
Mr. Westberg explained that Tabor Road was improved a few years ago and is now
a wider two lane road with a bike lane and sidewalks and can accommodate trucks.
It was moved by Commissioner LEO and seconded by Commissioner
PETERSON to recommend APPROVAL of Case No. WS -18-06, a request for
approval of a major subdivision plat on property zoned Mixed Use -
Commercial (MU -C) and located at the 5060 Ward Road, for the following
reasons:
1. All requirements of the subdivision regulations (Article IV) of the
zoning and development code have been met.
2. All agencies can provide services to the property with improvements
installed at the developer's expense.
With the following conditions:
1. The applicant shall enter into a development covenant prior to
recordation of the subdivision plat and subsequently into a
subdivision improvement agreement.
Planning Commission Minutes -6-
April
6 -
April 4, 2019
2. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall enter into a
subdivision improvement agreement and shall provide homeowner's
association covenants for review and approval by staff.
3. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall pay the
required fees -in -lieu of parkland dedication.
Motion carried 7-0.
B. Case Nos. WZ-18-25 and WZ-18-26: An application filed by Ames Partners,
LLC for approval of a zone change from Residential -Three (R-3) to Planned
Residential Development (PRD) with approval of an Outline Development Plan
(ODP) and Specific Development Plan (SDP) for development of two duplexes
located at the northeast corner of W. 33`d Avenue and Ames Street.
Mr. Cutler gave a short presentation regarding the zone change, Specific
Development Plan and the application. He entered into the record the contents of
the case file, packet materials, the zoning ordinance, and the contents of the digital
presentation. He stated the public notice and posting requirements have been met,
therefore the Planning Commission has jurisdiction to hear this case.
Commissioner PETERSON commented on page 6, #4, letter C and explained the
condition has not been met and does not need to be.
Commissioner VOS asked if the R-3 designation does not permit the configuration
of duplexes the applicant wants without applying for multiple variances.
Mr. Cutler agreed and added that if the applicant stays with the R-3 zoning they
could put 5 attached townhomes on the site.
Ms. Mikulak added that the City is prohibited in processing lot size variances to
add additional units.
Commissioner OHM asked if the landscape plan meets the streetscape standards.
Mr. Cutler explained that the Street Scape Manual requires 4 street trees per street
frontage and the applicant is going to be required to build a wider attached
sidewalk with current ADA ramps at the corner.
Commissioner OHM also asked if sight distance triangles are a requirement on the
landscape plan.
Mr. Cutler said there is no sight distance triangle for this landscape plan because
the distance would be 15 ft. x 15 ft. and is not even close for these local streets.
Commissioner VOS mentioned a sign-up sheet not being included in her agenda
packet.
Planning Commission Minutes -7-
April
'7 -
April 4, 2019
Jay Feaster, Applicant
19510 West 55t' Place, Golden
Mr. Feaster did not have anything to add to the presentation.
Commissioner PETERSON asked how the duplexes will be owned.
Mr. Feaster said each door will be sold individually.
Commissioner SIMBAI asked why batten siding had been chosen for the duplexes.
Mr. Feaster said it is durable and will give more of a cottage look which stucco
would not even though it is durable as well. Batten will also complement the
neighborhood.
Commissioner LARSON asked if there is enough room for in the private alley for
cars to get in and out of. He also wondered if there will be on street parking.
Jessie Donovan, Engineer
3253 N Gaylord Street, Denver
Mr. Donovan explained that the City requires a 5 -foot pull out at the end of the
alley for the last unit to have enough room to back out of the garage and drive
away. He added there will be on street parking as well.
Commissioner VOS asked that if this zone change is approved, can the applicant
sell the property and a more dense building be built.
Mr. Cutler said that is not a possibility. He explained that once the ODP is
approved the zoning will be established for the property which will limit the
property to only single family homes or a duplex development. He added that the
ODP is meant to show the development standards and the SDP provided the
specific standards, for example, showing exactly where the buildings will be
placed.
Commissioner LEO said she has a concern that duplexes can be non -owner
occupied.
Mr. Feaster said that of the 45 duplexes he has built and sold he has yet to see a
loan that has not been an owner occupied loan.
Ms. Mikulak added that City Code and Federal Fair Housing laws would not allow
the City to regulate if the duplexes are owner or renter occupied.
Planning Commission Minutes -8-
April
g -
April 4, 2019
Commissioner OHM asked what the two fences on the north and south are for and
why they extend out beyond the line of the building.
Mr. Feaster and Mr. Donovan said they are privacy fences and they extend to
maximize the visual space between the units.
Commissioner OHM asked about the 4.5 -foot sidewalk on the east side of the
garages and didn't think that is not a normal width for a sidewalk.
Mr. Donovan explained that it is not a sidewalk but an approach to the garages
with a slight slope from the alley and is considered a driveway apron.
Commissioner PETERSON asked if there is any requirements for permeable patios
and walkways.
Mr. Cutler said there are requirements for open space on properties and the code
for duplexes requires 25% of the lot be open space. He explained the applicant is
proposing 42% of the lot be pervious, so they are well exceeding the requirement.
Mr. Westberg added that permeable pavers are allowed as part of a water quality
treatment, but this property has a separate water quality facility so the pavers are
not required.
Commissioner LARSON asked if the units will have basements.
Mr. Feaster said there will be unfinished basements with 9 foot ceilings and egress
windows.
Tom Sunheim
5601 West 35th Avenue
Mr. Sunheim is happy with what is being proposed for this site and thinks it will be
a good fit for the neighborhood.
Commissioner VOS said she appreciates the less density, architecture and the
character of the project.
It was moved by Commissioner LARSON and seconded by Commissioner
PETERSON to recommend APPROVAL of Case No. WZ-18-25, a request for
approval of a zone change from Residential -Three (R-3) to Planned
Residential Development with an Outline Development Plan (ODP) for
property located at the northeast corner of W. 33rd Avenue and Ames Street,
for the following reasons:
Planning Commission Minutes -9-
April
9 -
April 4, 2019
1. The proposed zone change will promote the public health, safety, or
welfare of the community and does not result in an adverse effect on
the surrounding area.
2. The proposed zone change is consistent with the goals and objectives
of the City's Comprehensive Plan.
3. The proposed zoning is consistent with the intent of a planned
development, compatible with surrounding land uses, and will result
in a high-quality development.
4. The criteria used to evaluate a zone change support the request.
With the following condition:
1. The minimum lot area shall be revised to 8,425 square feet.
Motion carried 7-0.
It was moved by Commissioner ANTOL and seconded by Commissioner
SIMBAI to recommend APPROVAL of Case No. WS -18-26, a request for
approval of a Specific Development Plan on property located at the northeast
corner of West 33rd Avenue and Ames Street, for the following reasons:
1. The specific development plan is consistent with the purpose of a
planned development, as stated in Section 26-301 of the City Code.
2. The specific development plan is consistent with the intent and
purpose of the outline development plan.
3. The proposed uses are consistent with those approved by the outline
development plan.
4. All responding agencies have indicated they can serve the property
with improvements installed at the developer's expense.
5. The specific development plan is in substantial compliance with the
applicable standards set forth in the outline development plan and
with the City's adopted codes and policies.
Motion carried 7-0.
C. Case No. WZ-18-23: An application filed by Regency Centers for approval of a
Master Sign Plan for Applewood Village Shopping Center on property zoned
Planned Commercial Development (PCD) at the northeast corner of the property
located at 3210-3600 Youngfield Street.
Mr. Cutler gave a short presentation regarding the Master Sign Plan and the
application. He entered into the record the contents of the case file, packet
materials, the zoning ordinance, and the contents of the digital presentation. He
stated the public notice and posting requirements have been met, therefore the
Planning Commission has jurisdiction to hear this case.
Planning Commission Minutes _10 -
April
10 -
April 4, 2019
Commissioner PETERSON asked about the illumination of signs with regards to
LED lighting/lightbulbs. He also asked if changing signs are allowed.
Ms. Mikulak and Mr. Cutler explained that the LED is referring to electronic
message centers such as a monitor or video screens. They said it will be subject to
the Code's illumination standards which were recently adopted and there will be
meters to monitor the illumination's brightness. Mr. Cutler also explained there is
limitations on how the screens change and there is an 8 second transition time
which is an industry standard and there will be no animation or scrolling signs,
only instant change.
Commissioner PETERSON also asked if there will be plastic box signs.
Mr. Cutler said that as a part of this sign plan, plastic box signs will not be allowed.
Commissioner SIMBAI asked how long it will take to install the PSI sign, which is
the largest sign due to traffic concerns.
Ms. Mikulak said the applicant can answer that question, but usually the signs of
this size are pre -fabricated and can be lifted into place by a large crane which will
cut down on the time to install the sign.
Commissioner LARSON asked if the Mattress Firm building is included in this
sign project.
Mr. Cutler explained that that building is under separate ownership and is not a part
of this master sign plan and would have to follow the standard City Sign Code for
their signs.
Commissioner LARSON asked for clarification on what a wayfinding sign is.
Mr. Cutler said wayfinding signs are directional signs to let patrons know where
the tenants of the shopping center are located and are all interior signs.
Commissioner VOS asked if the applicant is required to do the Master Sign Plan.
Mr. Cutler explained that the PCD does not call for the sign plan but due to the size
and location of the signs, the City could not permit them under the standard sign
code.
Ms. Mikulak added the City's sign code works well for a single business with a
single sign, but not for a property this large and it needs its own unique set of rules.
Commissioner VOS asked about the materials that will be used for these signs and
if this hearing will approve or deny the variances in height and size and adding
interior signage.
Planning Commission Minutes -
April 4, 2019
Mr. Cutler said the materials are listed on page 4 of the sign plan and once the
applicant applies for a building permit the permits are public record. He mentioned
the applicant has proposed the backing material of all the signs will be the same.
Ms. Mikulak added this is typical detail shown in the plan and there are no code
requirements for materials. The only code requirement is that the base of the sign
be consistent with the building. She also said the applicant is allowed to have a 50 -
foot sign on Youngfield because they are highway oriented. The square footage of
the sign is larger than usual, but this is a package deal and it is all being approved
or denied as a whole.
Commissioner VOS also asked if the corner signs are attached to the buildings and
if they stick out.
Mr. Cutler explained that those signs will follow the City Code and are not a part
of the master sign plan.
Commissioner LEO asked what the height of the current sign is on Youngfield.
Mr. Cutler said the current sign is not 50 feet, but the Chili's and Applejack Liquor
signs are 50 feet in height.
Commissioner LEO also wondered if this plan is approved can the applicant add
more freestanding signs at a later date.
Mr. Cutler explained that if the applicant wants to add signs in the future they will
have to come to the City with an amendment to the plan.
Commissioner LEO inquired why the applicant is now requesting a Master Sign
Plan.
Mr. Cutler said the City has been pushing the Regency Centers to apply for a
Master sign plan to allow for more cohesive signage on the site. Ms. Mikulak
explained it is difficult for new business on the site to add a sign because the
Development Plan does not allow for any more signs.
Commissioner OHM said he has safety concerns for pedestrians if the 50 and 30 -
foot signs are placed too close to the sidewalks if there is no sight triangles
required due to signalized traffic lights being in place.
Mr. Cutler explained that the applicant has proposed a 15 -foot setback for the 50 -
foot sign and an 8 -foot sidewalk will be set behind a 6 -foot amenity zone. He
added that the 1 -foot setback for the 30 -foot signs is a minimum and the final
setback will be determined on how the parcel develops and if there is an unsafe
sight distance condition then the setback will be increased.
Planning Commission Minutes -12-
April
12 -
April 4, 2019
Commissioner OHM also wondered what the positioning of the signs on
Youngfield is in relation to the overhead power lines.
Ms. Mikulak said she believes the City is using part of the I% funds to place the
power lines underground.
Commissioner OHM asked if the Master Sign Plan incorporates the existing and
proposed free standing signs for this project.
Mr. Cutler explained the Master Sign Plan defines separately the two existing non-
conforming, single -tenant, freestanding signs which are the Chili's and Applejack's
signs.
Commissioner PETERSON asked about the 1.5 to 1 ratio for wall signs and the
scripts square footage. He also asked if there is maximum size for a wall sign.
Ms. Mikulak responded that when a sign is not a box or cabinet sign, but is channel
letters, the smallest polygon is used to figure the ratio and there is no maximum
size for a wall sign.
Commissioner SIMBAI wanted to know what the reasoning is of the one person
who opposed the Master Sign Plan.
Mr. Cutler explained she was not opposed to the sign plan per say, but to the
construction, traffic, noise and redevelopment. He added she might have been
opposed to the 50 -foot sign illuminating beyond the borders.
Commissioner LARSON is concerned about the 50 -foot sign being placed on the
island and then possibly moved if the island is changed.
Mr. Cutler agreed and said the reconstruction of the island and the sign placement
would happen in tandem.
Ms. Mikulak added that the purpose of the Master Sign Plan is to provide a future
vision but it doesn't specify a time period for building the signs. It shows
generally where the signs will be located.
Tom Metzger, Applicant
8480 E. Orchard Rd, Ste. 6900, Greenwood Village
Mr. Metzger showed a few images of the signs and what they will look like.
Commissioner Simbai asked how long it will take to install a sign.
Planning Commission Minutes -13 -
April 4, 2019
Mr. Metzger explained the signs are pre -fabricated and can be installed in a one -
day period. He added the 50 -foot sign might be moved to the south a little and out
of the island.
Commissioner VOS asked if the RTD facility is moving, or not.
Mr. Metzger confirmed the facility will be moving May 18 to Ward Road with
continuing service down Youngfield Street.
Commissioner LARSON asked if the sign on 38th Ave. will be oriented to east and
west bound traffic
Mr. Metzger agreed. He also explained some of the agreement between Regency
Centers and the two businesses and their non -conforming signs.
Commissioner LARSON asked if approved when the effective date will be.
Mr. Cutler said effective date will be when the Master Sign Plan is recorded at the
County.
Commissioner OHM said if approved he hopes staff will keep in mind to have an
open sight triangle with regards to sign placement for safety reasons.
Ms. Mikulak said it is a provision in Chapter 26-707 of the Municipal Code.
Commissioner PETERSON asked if the new sign code applies to lighting of signs.
Ms. Mikulak replied that it applies to new signs, but not existing. Mr. Cutler said
the dimmers will also be installed on these new signs.
It was moved by Commissioner LARSON and seconded by Commissioner
PETERSON to APPROVE Case No. WZ-18-23, a request for approval of a
master sign plan for a planned commercial development (PCD) located on the
east side of Youngfield Street between W. 32nd Avenue and W. 38' Avenue,
for the following reasons:
1. The site is eligible for a master sign plan.
2. The master sign plan promotes well-planned and well-designed
signage.
3. The master sign plan is consistent with the intent of the sign code
and is appropriate for the context of the development.
With the following conditions:
1. An edit be made to item C on page 2 regarding non -conforming
signs to clarify damage for wall signs.
Planning Commission Minutes -14-
April
14 -
April 4, 2019
2. The applicant will work with staff to create a maximum size
allowance for wall signs for a tenant over a certain square footage.
Motion passed 7-0.
8. OLD BUSINESS
9. NEW BUSINESS
A. Planning Commission Dinner Training April 18, 2019
Ms. Mikulak reminded the commission that dinner will be at 6:00 p.m. in one of
the Conference Rooms and the training will start at 7:00 p.m. in Council
Chambers.
B. Commissioner VOS handed out information regarding a Golden Planning
Commission meeting. She also said she was finally receiving the Planning
publication for APA again, after a year of not receiving it. Ms. Mikulak
explained there were some membership issues and it is good to know things have
been corrected.
C. Commissioner LARSON let the Commission know he attended a seminar held by
the American Institute of Certified Planners discussing short term rentals and how
Denver has approached the issue; it was very informative.
10. ADJOURNMENT
It was moved by Commissioner LEO and seconded by Commissioner VOS to
adjourn the meeting at 9:52 p.m. Motion carried 7-0.
17
S t Ohm, Chair
Planning Commission Minutes
April 4, 2019
Tammy Odean-Wcording Secretary
-15-