Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.boa.19860206 CITY OF ASPEN BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT FEBRUARY 6, 1986 City Council Chambers 4:00 P.M. A G E N D A I. MINUTES January 16, 1986 II. OLD BUSINESS Case #86-1 / Schneider, Mularz III. NEW BUSINESS Case #86-3 / Chelsea' s Terrace IV. ADJOURNMENT RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS REGULAR MEETING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT FEBRUARY 6, 1986 Vice Chairman Francis Whitaker called the meeting to order at 4: 02 p. m. with members Anne Austin, Charlie Paterson, Ron Erickson, and Rick Head present. MINUTES January 16, 1986: Ron Erickson moved to approve the minutes of January 16, 1986; Austin seconded. All in favor ; motion carried. OLD BUSINESS CASE #86-1 / SCHNEIDER, MULARZ Whitaker explained that this case had been temporarily withdrawn by letter from Mr. Mularz. NEW BUSINESS CASE #86-3/ CHELSEA'S TERRACE Whitaker read the variance request: "Applicant appears to be asking for a sign variance of 3. 17 sq. ft. projecting and a menu board of 2. 25 sq. ft. Total variance is 5. 42 sq. ft. for signage. Applicant is located on the second floor and not eligible for a sign. Section 24-5. 10A(2) the aggregate sign area permitted along any one street shall not exceed one square foot of signage area for each three feet of linear frontage". Mabel Macdonald, applicant, submitted the affidavit of sign posting to the Board. Ms. Macdonald explained her request for signs in the Aspen Grove Mall and the type of signs they intend to use, if approved. Whitaker asked where the location of the sign would be in relati- onship to the building exterior. Ms. Macdonald replied close to the stairwell to the second floor. Austin commented that there were no signs protruding from the building currently. Bill Drueding said there were awnings with signs on them being used on the first floor. Erickson commented that there was another restaurant in the building and asked if they had a sign. Gary ? , applicant, replied they had an awning with their sign on it. Erickson said he was concerned that this applicant not be denied a right enjoyed by their neighbors and questioned if the neighbors 1 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS REGULAR MEETING BOARD OF ADJUSTRENT FEBRUARY 6. 1986 were enjoying this right presently or will they come before the Board at a later date feeling a precedent had been set by this case. Mr. Drueding said variances were still being done, with a contingency that they will have to conform to the new sign code when it is written. Whitaker asked what the status of the sign ordinance was. Drueding replied that the report had been written and now it was a matter of when it will be on City Council ' s agenda. Drueding thought it could still be a year or more before it came before Council. Austin questioned the appropriate place to locate the sign if approved. Whitaker asked if the sign was put on the second floor would it be too concealed from the street. Ms. Macdonald and the Board agreed that people do not look up. Erickson asked if the applicant had talked to their landlord about the placement of the sign, thinking all of the businesses in that building, on the second floor, could be joined together on one sign. Drueding said a year ago this Board denied a directory sign on that building. Drueding said just this particular case should be considered, rather than a directory for the entire complex. Whitaker closed the public hearing. Austin said she would be in favor of granting the variance, feeling there was a necessity for some kind of directory for an upstairs business. Paterson said he was concerned because the Aspen Grove area has caused problems and all of the directional signs that were protruding had to be cleaned up. He thought this would open Pandora' s box. If one sign is allowed that is opening the door for every business upstairs wanting to put their own sign up. Paterson said he saw the applicants need but thought there was a real problem if the variance was granted. Head asked what exactly the sign was that had to be taken down. Drueding replied that it was a large sign showing all of the shops upstairs. Head commented that this sign was significantly smaller. Whitaker reopened the public hearing. 2 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS REGULAR MEETING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT FEBRUARY 6. 1986 Whitaker asked if the applicant had discussed their sign with the other businesses upstairs in the same building. Ms. Macdonald replied no. Head said there had been no opposition expressed with the noticing of this hearing. Whitaker said the notices go to the property owners, but not necessarily the shop owners. Ms. Macdonald said the shop owners had all seen the sign posted in their business window. Head asked the applicant how they thought other shop owners felt. Ms. Macdonald replied most of the other shops had been -there for several_ years_, - additionally this business is a restaurant not a retail store as the others. Ms. Macdonald said the other shops were anxious to see the restaurant go in that location because it will draw people upstairs. Whitaker closed the public hearing. Erickson said he had the same concerns that Paterson did. He said he would like to see a proposal from the land owner to settle this once and for all. He saw the need for a sign but thought this would be opening a can of worms because only one of about sixteen shops was being addressed. A precedent is being set and the Board will be making a decision that is actually the landlords responsibility. Erickson thought the tenants should get together, talk to the landlord, and come up with a compreh- ensive plan to be presented to this Board and let it be taken care of once and for all. Austin said if a plan was determined for the whole building it would still have to be changed when the new sign code comes in to effect. She saw this as a temporary solution until the new sign code is written. Head said he did not want to penalize this applicant unnecessarily. He said he would be in favor of granting a temporary variance expressing it was not the applicants fault there was not a comprehensive sign code addressing these problems. Head said he did have concerns that other people in that building would come before the Board saying they want a sign as well. Paterson said he might consider this almost a case of survival for the applicant. If the Board looks at this as a very special-- circumstance, that this is a restaurant , not a shop, and not the same as all of the other businesses upstairs, then he would be more inclined to grant a temporary variance. Erickson asked if a time limit could be put on the variance, suggesting 1 year. Whitaker said the sign code did not deal with this type of location and said he would be in favor of granting the variance with a 1 year limitation. Whitaker thought the time had come to 3 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS REGULAR MEETING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT FEBRUARY 6. 1986 no longer say until the new sign code goes in to effect but rather 1 year limitations. The Board asked who would be responsible for the follow up work with a 1 year limitation. Drueding said the building department had tickler files currently and these cases could become a part of that system. Erickson asked Drueding how he felt about this application. Drueding replied that there was a need for the sign, the code is antiquated, and the applicant= is being penalized for it. Drueding added he would limit the size of the sign if it is allowed. Lotion: Head moved to approve the variance for a sign no larger than 24 inches by 19 inches and that it expire in one year from this date, and to approve a 12 inch by 17 inch, plus border, menu box; Austin seconded. Discus sion• Erickson asked about the placement of the sign in that there be enough head clearance and not interfere with anyone walking down the sidewalk. Drueding said code requires a minimum 8 foot clearance. Whitaker asked for a roll call vote: Austin aye Paterson aye Erickson abstain Head aye Whitaker aye Four in favor, one abstention; motion carried. Lotion: Erickson moved- to have the Chairman of the Board draft a letter to City Council urging them to proceed post haste with the development of a new sign code; Austin seconded. All in favor ; motion carried. Head commented that Remo Lavagnino, Chairman of the Board, would be out of town until the end of March. Patterson suggested sending a copy of the letter written by Mr. Whitaker 2 years ago to Council until Mr. Lavagnino's return. 4 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS REGULAR MEETING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT FEBRUARY 6, 1986 Erickson moved to adjourn the meeting at 4: 32 p. m. ; Paterson seconded. All in favor; motion carried. Kim Wilhoit, Deputy City Clerk 5