HomeMy WebLinkAbout2012-04-11 BAA MINUTES•
•
•
CITY OF ENGLEWOOD
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND APPEALS
MINUTES
APRIL 11, 2012
[flJ
1. Call to Order
The regular meeting of the Englewood Board of Adjustment and Appeals was called to
order at 7:00 p.m. in the Englewood City Council Chambers, Chair Green presiding.
2. Roll Call
Present: Carson Green , David Sprecace, David Pittinos , Tom Finn , Angela Schmitz,
Jordan May, Marcie O 'Brien
Excused Absence: Sue Purdy
Staff: Nancy Reid, Assistant City Attorney; Audra Kirk , Planner I
Chair Green stated there were seven members present; therefore , five affirmative votes
are required to grant a variance or appeal.
Chair Green stated that the Board of Adjustment and Appeals is empowered to grant or
deny variances by Part Ill , Section 60 of the Englewood City Charter. Variances
granted by the Board are subject to a 30-day appeal period . Variances are effective at
the end of the appeal period . Building permits for construction associated with an
approved variance will not be issued until the appeal period is ended. Building permits
must be obtained and construction begun within 180 days of the variance's effective
date.
Chair Green set forth parameters for the hearing: The case will be introduced;
applicants will present their request and reasons the variance should be granted;
proponents will be given an opportunity to speak; opponents will address the Board; and
then staff will address the Board. Staff will give a preliminary overview of the variance
before testimony is taken.
l!l1
3. Public Hearing:
Case #V AR2012-001
Bill Feid
W & M Dawgs, LLC
2950 South Broadway, Unit A
•
•
•
Chair Green opened the public hearing stating he had proof of posting and publication .
He introduced the case stating the applicant is requesting a variance to erect a seventy
three (73) square foot sign on the wes t fac;ade of the building . This sign would exceed
the use 's maximum allowed sign area of one hundred thirty four (134) square feet by
seventy three (73) square feet. This is a variance to Table 16-6-13.8: Permitted
Maximum Sign Area , of the Englewood Municipal Code.
~
Audra Kirk , Planner I, was sworn in. Ms. Kirk provided an overview of the property and
the variance request. The property is zoned MU-B-2 ; adjacent properties to the north ,
west , and south are also zoned MU-B -2. Properties to the east are zoned MU-R-3-A.
Numerous neighbor notifications were submitted supporting the variance request. A
previous variance exists on the property , which permitted the owner to erect multiple
garages on the rear of the lot. Those garages rio longer exist.
~
Bill Feid , 4913 Silver Pine Drive , Castle Rock , was sworn in. Mr . Feid stated the
physical characteristic of the building location and the surrounding typography are one
of the main reasons he is seeking a variance. The unit is seven feet lower than the
remaining building behind it , and is located closer to Broadway than the other units.
Trees and other business signage block the visibility of his business . He anticipates
75 % of his customers will be from commuter traffic. The sign strategy is to build a
continuum -signage on the north , west , and south side of the building .
When the trees are in full foliage , they will block the south sign. The ability for drivers to
see the sign is limited to 150 feet , which only gives drivers 3-4 seconds to see the sign.
From the north side , there is another tree that will block that sign. The ab i lity to have
three signs will increase the visibility of the business and allow drivers to see the
building in a safe manner.
The signage was designed with a lighting element as shown in the Board's packet. The
lighting is part of the measurement to determine square footage . All of the black
background and lighting underneath the letters is counted toward the total sign square
footage . If the lighting and the black background were removed , the variance would not
be needed . Mr. Feid confirmed that the north and south signs are within regulations .
There is currently no permanent signage on the building.
Mr. Feid answered questions from the Board. If the black background and lighting were
completely removed , the three signs would be within the allowable square footage. The
business is located on a major Englewood corridor; therefore , the building and its
signage should have a certain curb appeal. Removing the background and the lighting
takes away from the character of the interior of the building. Mr. Finn stated that without
some type of background , the letters would get lost on the silver metal framework .
•
•
•
Mr. Feid testified alternatives were considered. He looked at extending above the roof
or placing signage on top of the roof ; both are prohibited by the Sign Code. His initial
design was to have the signs higher to create more visibility. Another alternative was
for larger signs on the north and south , but he felt that even going larger still prevented
northbound drivers to see the business until they passed it due to the tree. If the west
sign was reduced to fit within the Code, it would be too small to be effective . The
request is for 73 square feet above the allowed square footage. Panda and Starbucks
have large monument signs that create a visual impairment for anything behind it.
Chair Green noted that the designs show the signs extending above the roofline . Mr.
Feid responded that staff reviewed the preliminary adjustments for the "B" extending
above the roofline approximately 14 inches. The roofline behind is 7 feet higher. Staff
responded that it was internally decided to be a little flexible on the sign age to
encourage businesses on South Broadway.
[?]
There were no other persons present to testify for or against the variance . Chair Green
incorporated the staff report and exhibits into the record and closed the public hearing.
MOTION: THAT CASE VAR2012-001 2950 SOUTH BROADWAY, UNIT A BE
GRANTED A VARIANCE TO ERECT A SEVENTY THREE (73) SQUARE FOOT
SIGN ON THE WEST FA<;ADE OF UNIT A TO EXCEED THE MAXIMUM
ALLOWED SIGN AREA IN THE SOUTH BROADWAY SIGN AREA. THIS IS A
VARIANCE TO TABLE 16 -6-13.8 OF THE ENGLEWOOD MUNICIPAL CODE.
MOVED BY DAVE SPRECACE SECONDED BY TOM FINN
The Board had a brief discussion. Chair Green stated the sign would be the same size
without the black background ; however, the background makes the sign more effective .
He is pleased that a business has located at that location ; it was vacant for a long time.
Ms. O'Brien stated it will not affect another business's ability for signage . Ms. Schmitz
stated she doesn 't believe the request meets Criteria 1 or 2. If this property is
considered unique , others will point to this case and use foliage and large signage as a
justification. Chair Green stated he believes the property is unique because the
business is closer to the street than other businesses. Mr. Sprecace stated he believes
there are also safety issues .
[?]
With no further discussion, the secretary polled the members ' votes , and members
provided their findings.
Mr . Pittinos voted yes.
Ms . Schmitz voted no ; there are no unique property conditions .
•
•
•
Mr. May voted yes .
Mr. Sprecace voted yes; all four criteria have been met. There are unique conditions to
the property and it will not weaken the general purpose of the Title or regulations
prescribed for the district. It encourages business , which is a goal of City Council and
the general populous. The business is located on South Broadway so it will not alter the
essential character of the district. The variance will not substantially or permanently
i mpair the appropriate use of adjacent conforming property; the surrounding properties
are businesses with signage .
Ms. O'Brien voted yes , concurring with Mr. Pittinos, Mr. May , and Mr. Sprecace.
Further Ms. O 'Brien found the following:
• The property is unique because it is positioned 15 feet off the Broadway curb,
in a building that is 5 to 7 feet shorter than adjacent property. It is shielded
by public sidewalk trees , with no access for southbound commuters, no street
parking, and confusion exists on how to access the parking lot.
• The General Statement at the beg inning of the Sign Code states : "The City
also understands that the economic health of specialized areas of the City,
such as the South Broadway commercial corridor, may be enhanced by
permitting different sizes and types of signage than those permitted
elsewhere in the City."
• The variance will not alter the character of the district. The proposed sign
package is within the total number allowed signs . The signage fits
appropriately within the community.
• The variance will not substantially or permanently impair the appropriate use
of adjacent conforming property, because the sign is located on the west side
of the building which does not impact any other properties.
Mr. Finn and Cha i r Green voted yes , concurring with Ms. O 'Brien 's stated conclusions.
Vote: Motion passed by a roll call vote (summary: Yes= 6 No=1.)
Yes: Marcie O'Brien , Jordan May , Tom Finn , Carson Green , David Pittinos ,
David Sprecace
No: Angela Schmitz
Motion passed.
The Chair instructed the appl icant to contact staff for any additional or necessary
information .
•
•
•
l!l
4. Elections
~
MOTION: ELECT CARSON GREEN AS CHAIR. MOVED BY JORDAN MAY;
SECONDED BY DAVID PITTINOS.
Vote: Motion passed by unanimous vote (summary: Yes= 7 No=O.)
Yes: Marcie O'Brien , Jordan May , Tom Finn , Carson Green , David Pitt inos ,
David Sprecace , Angela Schmitz
MOTION: ELECT DAVID SPRECACE AS VICE CHAIR. MOVED BY MARCIE
O'BRIEN ; SECONDED BY JORDAN MAY.
Vote: Motion passed by unanimous vote (summary: Yes= 7 No=O.)
Yes: Marcie O'Brien , Jordan May , Tom Finn , Carson Green , David Pittinos ,
David Sprecace , Angela Schmitz
5. Staff's Choice
A va riance for a front porch encroaching into the front setback will be heard at the May
meeting .
lll1
6. Attorney's Choice
Ms . Reid updated the Board on the Sign Code amendment.
~
7. Board Member's Choice
Members welcomed Mr. Finn to the Board , and introduced themselves. Members were
reminded to provided their conclusions when they vote for granting or denying a
var iance request.
8. Adjourn
The meeting adjourned at 7:45 pm .