City Council Minutes 1996 04 02 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

was proposed at 36%. Staffhad recommended that the height of the roofbe increased from 36' to 42'7" to allow the roof pitch to break up a long continuous roof line on the building. Proposed building exterior was a smooth stucco finish in a frosty white color with a red metal tile roof. They proposed three wall signs, one 50 s.f. and two 33 s.f., and a monument identification sign 9.5 s.f. in area located on Dillon Road. February 22 Planning Commission recommended approval with 13 conditions. The revised PUD reflected compliance with all conditions with the exception of two issues, lowering of the ridge line tower and deletion of the monument sign from the PUD, reflected in Resolution No. 28. The applicant requested the monument sign be authorized as part of the PUD. Davidson called for the applicant's presentation. Don Shonkwiler, 623 Manorwood Court, Louisville, Colorado, representing Sears Development Co., stated that the applicants were requesting a directional sign rather than a monument sign. He introduced Jim Kessel, KatWeen Kraeger of Kraeger & Associates for traffic, Jeff Hollow with CLC Associates for the civil engineering. Bill Kraft, La Quinta Corporate Architect, stated that the 4' tower is architecturally very important to them. It had been incorporated into all of their new constructions and most of their existing properties as a signature feature. He went on to review the project. Bonnie Lutz, Sign Coordinator for La Quinta, stated that they wanted a directional sign at the entry to La Quinta, which she felt was consistent with Code. Malcom Murray, Attorney, emphasized that the height of the tower and the directional sign was well within the requirements. He pointed out that the building sits about 200' from the curb line at Dillon Road and the directional sign would help people coming to La Quinta. Lowell Campbell, 586 Cleveland Avenue, Louisville, Colorado, spoke in favor of the La Quinta proposal, but was concerned about the signage. He did not want the directional sign or the "bell" tower. If there was going to be a bell tower, he did not want the signage on it be above 25'. He wanted the landscaping at the detention pond well maintained and irrigated. He felt a darker color on the exterior of the building would be very compatible. Davidson called for Council comments or questions. Lathrop did not understand the concern with the tower being 4' higher than the 42' roofline, for a total of 46', when the building next door is at 45'. Going further west there is a building with a 47' roof line. He stated that everything seemed to be scaling down to the east. He did not have a problem with the red metal tiled roof or the monument/directional sign. Howard did not mind the tower, but was not pleased with the monument sign. Mayer felt the monument sign was too large. 8