Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board tables Bighorn Sheds display after architectural, access concerns
Summary
The board declined to approve a temporary Bighorn Sheds display on Sheridan Avenue, citing architectural incompatibility with surrounding homes and parking/access concerns; following a 3–1 nonapproval the board voted to table the item to the next meeting for further consideration.
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Planning and Zoning Adjustment Board voted down an initial motion to approve an architecture, landscape and sign plan for a Bighorn Sheds temporary display on Sheridan Avenue and then voted to table the item to the next available meeting for further review.
Staff described the proposal as a temporary display of seven storage sheds (each under 120 square feet) with two banner signs and planter boxes; because the sheds are temporary staff recommended removing a previously listed stormwater-retention requirement. Jenny (planning staff) said there would be no utility services and no new site disturbance tied to the current proposal, and therefore recommended the stormwater condition be removed.
Board members pressed the applicant and staff on driveway alignment, parking, and whether additional gravel or paving would be installed. One board member (speaker S4) opposed approval on compatibility grounds, saying the sheds did not fit the character of nearby single-family residences and criticizing the proposed planter boxes as decorative rather than true landscaping. "Sheds are not buildings that look like houses," the member said, and argued that fake planter boxes did not meet the district's landscaping intent.
After voice and tablet voting the initial motion failed as a 3–1 nonapproval. The board then moved to table the item to the next meeting to allow additional review; that tabling motion carried. Staff and applicants may return with supplemental materials or a site-plan application if they propose additional improvements.
Next steps: the item is continued to the next available meeting for further consideration; staff noted formal site-plan review would capture parking and driveway paving requirements if a future application includes new structures or site disturbance.
