Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Land Use topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Council reviews Mandalay Gardens concept plan; neighbors and councilors press applicant on noise, screening and parking

2756793 · March 25, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

At a March 24 concept plan review, the applicant for Mandalay Gardens — a small light-industrial 'flex' project at 10385 Wadsworth Blvd — presented a five-unit proposal and councilors raised concerns about proximity to nearby houses, sound attenuation, and parking demand.

Westminster City Council heard a concept plan review March 24 for Mandalay Gardens, a proposed light-industrial flex development at 10385 Wadsworth Boulevard, and offered feedback on design, buffering and parking.

The project team said the site — just under one acre on the west side of Wadsworth and formerly zoned retail commercial — would include approximately 8,700 square feet of small “flex” industrial space divided into five units. The applicants described façade treatments intended to reflect a “bridal farm” or barn-like aesthetic facing Wadsworth and said lots of landscaping and an eight‑foot masonry screening wall would be used to mitigate noise and visual impacts toward nearby residences.

Why it matters: The site abuts rural‑residential properties in unincorporated Jefferson County and councilors focused questions on whether the proposal adequately buffers adjacent homes, whether an eight‑foot tall wall would create undesirable visual impacts for immediate neighbors, and whether the parking count matches likely tenant needs.

Questions from council and staff: Councilor Ireland asked about likely end uses; the applicant described small-employment tenants such as cabinet makers, sign shops, small machining shops and textile work — operations with occasional deliveries and limited customer traffic. The applicant said units would be roughly 2,000 square feet, with a smaller 700‑square‑foot end unit.

Councilors and staff pressed several operational points: - Sound and screening: Councilors asked whether the eight‑foot wall and landscaping will sufficiently limit noise for the house immediately north of the lot. The applicant acknowledged the wall would be very close to the neighboring yard and said the neighbor to the north had told the team he “loves the block wall.” Staff noted the narrowness of the site limits space for a berm plus a wall. Council members suggested the developer continue conversations with adjacent property owners about fencing, trees, and joint solutions. - Parking and truck access: Several councilors and staff recommended a traffic study and said the applicant could propose a reduced parking count if backed by data. Councilors noted small employers often park work trucks and that reducing parking could limit tenant types. - Trash and service access: The applicant said trash pickup will be arranged so trucks can pull straight in to the west‑side notch away from Wadsworth.

Design and next steps: Planning manager John McConnell introduced the item and reminded council that a concept plan review is nonbinding; if the applicant proceeds a preliminary development plan (PDP) and official development plan (ODP) will be required. Staff emphasized future review will consider the site’s small size, surrounding rural context and design details to soften the interface with residences.

Taper: The council’s comments were largely supportive of the applicant’s vernacular design approach while requesting additional information — a traffic study, ongoing neighborhood outreach and detailed landscape and screening plans — ahead of any formal PDP/ODP entitlement requests.