Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout20050750.tiff MINUTES OF THE WELD COUNTY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEETING Thursday, February 24, 2005 A regular meeting of the Weld County Board of Adjustment was held on Thursday„ 2005, in the Hearing Room of the Department of Planning Services, 918 10th Street, Greeley,Colorado. The meeting was called to order by Chair . Roll Call: Tony Evans Absent William Hansen Mary O'Neal Anita Owens Eric Whitwood Joseph Bodine Chad Auer Bruce Fitzgerald Bryant Gimlin Doug Ochsner Absent Also Present: Chris Gathman, Weld County Department of Planning; Bruce Barker, County Attorney; and Voneen Macklin, Secretary. Eric Whitwood motioned to approve and waive reading of the minutes of the last regular meeting of the Weld County Board of Adjustment held on, October 28 2004 and January 15 2005. Mary O'Neal seconded the motion. Motion carried. The first order of business is to elect a new Chairman and Vice-Chairman. William Hansen nominated Joseph Bodine for Chairman. Chad Auer seconded. Motion carried. William Hansen nominated Eric Whitwood as Vice Chairman. Mary O'Neal seconded. Motion carried. The following case was heard: CASE NUMBER: BOA-1031 APPLICANT: BDH&R PLANNER: Chris Gathman LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Lot 1, Block 4 of Corrected Plat, Vista Commercial Center Filing I; part N2 Section 8, T2N, R68W of the 6th P.M., Weld County, Colorado. REQUEST: A variance to allow a monument sign exceeding 25 square feet (as required per Section 26-2-90-3.f of the Weld County Code)and to allow 3 identification signs on a lot(as required per Section 23-4-100.C2 of the Weld County Code). LOCATION: South of and adjacent to State Highway 119; west of and adjacent to CR 3.5. Chris Gathman, Department of Planning Services, presented BOA-1031 along with the conditions of Approval and Development Standards. Staff is recommending denial of the application. There are no special circumstances involved that apply to this lot or any other lot within the subdivision that could justify the approval of this appeal. Mr.Gathman presented overheads describing the existing site and surrounding area. There have been no variances granted inside the Vista Commercial Subdivision. The special circumstances that are occurring are due to the applicant and not related to this parcel. Bruce Fitzgerald asked if the entire site was for the dealership. Mr. Gathman stated there are three total lots and the Saturn dealership will be on two of the three while a Suzuki dealership will operate on the third lot. Mr. Fitzgerald indicated there was a used car dealership further east with a sign over 25 feet. Mr.Gathman stated this could be looked into. Lt fnui,tttc4t4e-ltd> 3- 7- . Z'S 2005-0750 Dan Ripley, architect for the applicant, provided additional information. The sign variance is a gray area particularly when the lettering will be smaller. The total sign area is 5 x 8'3". The lettering is the Saturn symbol and wording which will only take up approximately 10 square feet. There will be joint entrances for the future sites. This monument sign will become a marker for the entrance. The entrance will be on the property line of the first lot. There is an additional 60 feet of property before the adjacent property line. This will be the location of the monument sign. The monument sign will be the only visible signage from the adjacent street. The sign and language on the sign is a standard for Saturn. The only visible signs are located on the Hwy 119 side of the building. Bruce Fitzgerald asked Mr. Ripley if Saturn had any other issues nationwide regarding their signs. Mr.Ripples stated they have asked for variances in other areas. Mr. Ripley added that Saturn's program is set to meet their requirements and they have conditions. Mr. Fitzgerald asked about the other signs that were larger. Mr. Ripley indicated those were not applicable to this type of sign specifically the monument sign is being addressed which is smaller. Bryant Gimlin asked how many square feet of signage is on the building. Mr. Ripley stated there are two foot letters that spell out Longmont Saturn. Mr. Gathman added the elevation drawings will indicate this. Mr. Gimlin asked how many cars will be on the lot. Mr. Ripley estimated 165 cars for two dealership which will include service, customer parking and display. Mr. Gimlin indicated that signage is used for informational purposes or promotional purposes, which is why this monument sign needed. Mr. Ripley stated this sign would identify the main entrance to the offices and showroom. Chad Auer asked if there was a traffic signal at CR 3 1/2 and Hwy 119. Mr. Ripley stated the light is at the intersection that can also be used as an access. Mr. Auer stated that it would be reasonable to assume a majority of the customers will access from that intersection. Mr. Gathman provided the site plan map with locations of monument sign and site. Dan Ripley continued by pointing out the locations of the existing signs on the building on a plat map overhead. There are two pole signs on the location and they are within the regulations. The signage on the north side of the buildings cannot be seen when on the south side of building. Mr. Ripley added there will be another sign at far west end for the Suzuki dealership and it will be the same size as the Saturn signs. Bryant Gimlin asked the square footage of the signs on the north building were. Mr.Gathman stated he would calculate the approximate coverage according to a submitted plan. Mr. Ripley added other municipalities use the lettering and border around it not the entire sign. Mr. Gimlin indicated he was curious as to if there was a maximum allowable space on wall and also if there was any question as to the dealership being Saturn. Mary O'Neal asked Mr. Gathman if this sign is allowed can the applicant change the lettering without having to come before the board again. Mr. Gathman stated staff would look at it but they could change the sign and fill it completely without having to come back. Mr. Ripley added they would submit a letter stating the lettering or the sign will remain the same or be removed. Mr. Gathman stated the two wall signs are on the south face of the building and approximately 27 feet x 2 feet high which is just under 100 square feet of signage. Bruce Fitzgerald asked about the four entrances. Mr. Gathman stated there are three lots with two seperate business. Mr. Fitzgerald asked Mr. Barker about the definition of the size of the sign in the sign code. Mr. Barker stated staff does not look at the lettering but at the total size of the sign. Mr. Barker is reluctant to allow just the lettering because the next step would be to limit the lettering which would not be beneficial. Joseph Bodine asked if this could be interpreted based on just content? Mr. Barker stated it could but the interpretation of the size of the sign is better. This takes into account the height and maximum area per face. There is no specifics on the lettering located on the sign. The regulations would need to be changed. Mr. Auer stated that in his experience it has been determined on the size of structure not content and this is consistent of other municipalities. Anita Owens asked if he was aware if Suzuki would want another sign of similar size and shape at their end of the lots. Mr. Ripley indicated he has not worked with Suzuki before and if that be the case they will be back for another variance. The Chair asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak for or against this application. No one wished to speak. Bruce Fitzgerald asked for clarification on the process of approval, no motion or denial. Mr. Barker indicated this would need to be a motion to grant the appeal for variance. If there is no motion it would fail for lack of motion, it also could fail for lack of a second. There could also be a motion to grant and it fail. Mr. Barker clarified that there needs to be six voting in favor in order to grant the appeal. Bruce Fitzgerald added this is a new area which is growing and he would not be in favor of granting the appeal. Mr. Fitzgerald would not like to set a precedent for a sign of this type. Bryant Gimlin added signage is for promotional or informational or a combination of the two. There would be no question that this is a Saturn dealership. Chad Auer agrees with concern for a precedent if the variance is approved. It would be more difficult to deny another request when one has already been granted. A majority of the patron will be entering the site along the Hwy 119 and a smaller number will be accessing along the adjacent roadway which does not justify the need for the sign. Mary O'Neal indicated she was worried about the wording being changed at a future date. Anita Owens indicated there is no need for this sign because there is enough on the building already. There was no motion for granting of the appeal, therefore it does not pass. The other business discussed was the possibility of moving the BOA meeting to the similar dates and times of the Planning Commission. Eric Whitwood indicated he is preference to Tuesdays as well as Bruce Fitzgerald. Mr. Gimlin indicated the third Tuesday would pose a problem. Ms. Mika stated it could be arranged to have BOA at the first meeting of every month. The consensus seems to be the first Tuesday at 11:00am prior to the Planning Commission meeting. Ms. Mika stated it would be taken under advisement and a final decision could be made at a later date. Meeting adjourned at 4:40 pm. Respectfully submitted, Voneen Macklin Secretary Hello