Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council reviews concept plan for Mandalay Gardens light‑industrial flex project
Summary
City councilors heard a concept plan for a proposed five‑unit light‑industrial “flex” building at 10385 Wadsworth Boulevard and gave nonbinding feedback on design, buffering and parking. No formal entitlement decision was made; a preliminary development plan will be required if the applicant proceeds.
Westminster City Council received a concept plan presentation Monday for Mandalay Gardens, a proposed small light‑industrial flex development at 10385 Wadsworth Boulevard, just west of West 103rd Avenue.
The applicant described a roughly one‑acre site plan with approximately 8,700 square feet of building area divided into five units. The concept emphasizes a barn‑like, “bridal farm” aesthetic facing Wadsworth with a flat–faced block building to the rear and an eight‑foot perimeter screening wall to reduce noise for adjacent residential properties in unincorporated Jefferson County.
Planning manager John McConnell told council the site is within an enclave of unincorporated Jefferson County and is zoned planned unit development; the parcel will require a preliminary development plan and official development plan to be entitled. He said the 2040 Comprehensive Plan designates the site as employment flex and staff’s preliminary review focused on design, buffering, and impacts on nearby single‑family properties.
Applicant representatives said the units are intended primarily for small local employers — for example, cabinetmakers, small fabrication or textile shops, or other “work‑and‑store” uses. Each unit would include ground‑level work space with a garage‑door loading area and a small mezzanine office. The team said parking was sized to code but could be adjusted based on a traffic study tied to specific uses.
Council members raised concerns about noise, the visual impact of the proposed eight‑foot wall adjacent to neighboring yards, and the narrowness of the site that limits options for berming or large landscape buffers. Councilors encouraged the applicant to meet with adjacent property owners, explore tree planting and additional landscape screening, and consider a traffic/parking study to support a request for any parking reduction.
Planning staff confirmed the concept review was purely advisory and that council comments do not bind future staff review, the planning commission, or a council decision on any official entitlements. The applicant did not request any waivers; a technical review and PDP/ODP application would follow if the applicant decides to move forward.
Council members who spoke said the proposal could activate a long‑vacant lot and called the design work “thoughtful,” while asking staff and the applicant to continue outreach to neighbors about the wall, sightlines and service access.
The city received the project for concept feedback only; no formal approvals or votes were taken.
