Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES Board of Adjustment 1998-06-02BRADFORD PUBLISHING CO.RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Board of Adjustment June 2,1998 Board: Attending: Also Attending: Chair John Baudek, Members Jeff Barker, Lori Jeffrey, Wayne Newsom and A1 Sager All Director Stamey, Senior Planner Joseph, Code Enforcement Officer Sigler and Recording Secretary Botic Absent:None Chair Baudek called the meeting to order at 8:00 a.m. MINUTES The minutes of the May 5,1998 meeting were accepted as presented. I.OTS 2A AND 2B. BT.OCK 3. FALL RIVER ESTATES, DOUG AND LINDA COOK/APPLICANTS - VARIANCE REQUEST FROM SECTION 17.16.190 (c) (15) QF THE MUNICIPAI. CODE. Applicant is requesting a variance from 17.66.190(15) off-site signage prohibition, and also a variance from the 8 ft. property line setback reduced to 2 ft. Robert Joseph, Senior Planner, noted both lots are currently owned by the Cooks and there is some difficulty in locating a sign on Lot 2B due to the wide highway r-o-w, existing trees and grade change. He also stated the proposed sign location is m conflict with a ten ft. wide pedestrian/bike trail easement along the property line. Mr. Joseph reviewed staffs recommendations. Member Sager requested clarification from the Applicant regarding the illegal banner currently on the site (Municipal Code 17.66.100) and requested the meeting adjourn until the banner is removed Applicant, Linda Cook, stated she needed signage while waiting for this vanance and was unaware the banner was iUegal; Mrs. Cook agreed to remove the banner immediately after this meeting. Phil Taylor, Applicant’s sign architecture designer, responded to questions regarding the 45 ft. dimension to edge of pavement. Member Sager requested the/fia“ce .renqUnefS tabf^ considered separately (off-site and setback). Chair Baudek requested clmfication of staff recommendation #4 noting sign relocation would be “at owners exPense; suggested the proposed off site sign placement could conform with the 8 setback wit Member Sager in agreement. Mr. Taylor stated the proposed site was chosen so that treeroot interference would be minimal, no tree encroachment and to add to the artistic view centere in an area with the tree backdrop. He noted that by moving away from the trees (closer ^ property line) the sign could be smaller with a high quality. Discussion continued (sign verbiage, potential for two signs if property is sold to a new owner, effects of futurc ig way widening size of the sign). Mr. Taylor noted the Applicants need for identification and advertising noting the sign will be black slate with 24 carat gold inlay. Member Barker requestedMr Taylor address the topography/location issues and Mr. Taylor responded stating the proposed location is before the driveway and will save trees Senior Planner the original conforming sign location is also in the pedestrian/bike path easement. Mr. Joseph responded to Member Jeffrey’s question regarding consideration for traffic floWpotcni aeddents regarding sign location. It was moved and seconded the off-premise (Lot 2B for Lot 2A) location for Lots 2A and 2B, Block 3, Fall Kiv BRADFORD PUBLISHING CO.RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Board of Adjustment - June 2,1998 Page 2 Estates with the following conditions, and it was approved unanimously. All variances granted by the Board of Adjustment shall become null and void if a Sign Permit has not been issued and paid for, and work thereunder commenced within four (4) months from the date the variance is granted. • A covenant shall be recorded on both lots specifying the sign location for both lots. • An easement shall be recorded granting Lot 2B the use of the portion of Lot 2A where the sign is to be placed. • The design concept for the shared signage submitted with this request shall be the approved design. Revisions to the approved sign design shall not be allowed. • The Applicant shall either relocate the existing pedestrian easement around the proposed sign location or agree to relocate the sign upon construction of the trail in the existing easement at their expense. It was moved and seconded (Sager/Barker) to deny the variance request from the 8ft. property line setback to 2ft for Lots 2A and 2B, Block 3, Fall River Estates, and it was approved with the following votes. Those voting “Yes ” Members Barker, Newsom and Sager. Those voting “No,” Members Baudek and Jeffrey. REPORTS - None There being no further business. Chair Baudek adjourned the meeting at 8:40 a.m. Roxanne S. Botic, Recording Secretary