HomeMy WebLinkAboutDR-08-11 - Supplemental - 0024 San Remo DriveN
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD
18 NOVEMBER 2008
The South Burlington Development Review Board held a regular meeting on
Tuesday, 18 November 2008, at 7:30 p.m., in the Conference Room, City Hall, 575
Dorset St.
Members Present: M. Behr, Acting Chair; R. Farley, E. Knudsen, P. Plumeau, G.
Quimby (arrived late)
Also Present: R. Belair, Administrative Officer; C. LaRose, Associate Planner; S.
McClellan, L. Llewellyn, B. Gallo, J. Morgan, Mr. & Mrs. DeMaroney, D. & S. Carlson,
L. Chickering, B. McLean, S. Semenink, K. M. Duseblon, P. Martin.
1. Other Business/Announcements:
Mr. Belair advised that the 2 December meeting will be held at the Public Works
Building at 7:30 p.m.
2. Minutes of 4 November 2008:
Mr. Knudsen moved to approve the Minutes of 4 November 2008 as written. Mr. Farley
seconded. Motion passed 4-0.
3. onsent Agenda:
a. Design Review Application #DR-08-11 of David Simendinger to install
a new roof over the existing roof, 24 San Remo Drive:
Mr. Belair noted the applicant had done the same thing at the adjacent building and liked
the result. Staff had no issue with the request.
Mr. Plumeau moved to approve the Consent Agenda as presented. Mr. Farley seconded.
Motion passed 4-0.
4. Continued Final Plat Application #SD-08-50 of William E. Dailey, III, to
amend a previously approved five lot subdivision. The amendment consists
of 1) eliminating a row of cedar trees along the wetland buffer, and 2)
reducing the amount of required landscaping bond, 1500 Dorset Street:
Mr. Gallo said they agreed to amend the plan to show the proposed tree -cutting along the
wetland buffer and to add a note to the plan. He showed the tree lines on the plan. The
note indicates that no other tree cutting will take place along the buffer without approval
of the DRB.
Members agreed to eliminate Stipulation #4 and to amend #3 to add: The tree line along
the 50-foot wetland buffer shall remain in perpetuity.
- 1 -
OavidOimeDdingar
VVesco./no.
32San Remo Drive
South Budington, V7O54O3
Re: Minutes — 24 San Remo Drive & 1118 Williston Road
Dear Mr. Sinnendingec
For your records, enclosed is a copy of the approved November 18, 2008 Development
Review Board meeting minutes.
|fyou have any questions, feel free tocontact me.
Sincerely,
Betsy McDonough Brown
Planning & Zoning Assistant
57Q Darm�l stru'll Saulh Ewmko9lmr^ VT P54S3 noH R02 94i�OM f�X, aU��1' 4 6 �wvV| wve "T'% bmrI.r o m
o rXEVA
��
southburlington
PLANNING & ZONING
November 19, 2008
David Simendinger
Wesco, Inc.
32 San Remo Drive
South Burlington, VT 05403
Re: Design Review Application #DR-08-11, 24 San Remo Drive
Dear Mr. Simendinger:
Enclosed, please find a copy of the Findings of Fact and Decision of the above
referenced project approved by the South Burlington Development Review Board on
November 18, 2008.
If you have any questions, please contact me.
Sincerely,
Betsy McDonough Brown
Planning and Zoning Assistant
Encl.
CERTIFIED MAIL RETURN RECEIPT #7008 0150 0003 6150 5218
575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 tel 802.846.4106 fax 802.846.4101 WWW.Sburl.com
A
4%
southburlinton
PLANNING & ZONING
November 14, 2008
David Simendinger
Wesco, Inc.
32 San Remo Drive
South Burlington, VT 05403
Re: 1118 Williston Road & 24 San Remo Drive
Dear Mr. Simendinger:
Enclosed is the agenda for next Tuesday's Development Review Board meeting and
staff comments to the Board. Please be sure that someone is at the meeting on
Tuesday, November 18, 2008 at 7:30 p.m.
If you have any questions, please give us a call.
Sincerely,
Bets
y McDonough Brown
Planning & Zoning Assistant
Encl.
575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 tel 802.846.4106 fax 802.846.4101 www.sburl.com
south urlington
PLANNING & ZONING
TO: South Burlington Development Review Board
FROM: Cathyann LaRose, Associate Plann11`
"
DATE: November 13, 2008
Cc: David Simendinger, Wesco Inc
Design Review Application DR-08-11
24 San Remo Drive
Wesco Inc, hereafter referred to as the applicant, is requesting design review
approval to install new asphalt roofing, 24 San Remo Drive.
The subject property falls within Design District 2 of the City Center Design Review
Overlay District. Pursuant to Section 11.01(D)(1)(b) of the South Burlington Land
Development Regulations, the addition or alteration of an exterior wall of a building
or structure shall be subject to design review by the Design Review Committee
(DRC) and the Development Review Board (DRB).
As the Design Review Committee was unable to meet, staff has moved the items to the
DRB for review.
Staff has included the standards for review
Design plans for properties within Design District 1 shall comply with the following design
criteria, as outlined In Section 11.01(F) of the Land Development Regulations:
(a) Consistent design. Building design shall promote a consistent organization
of major elements; and decorative parts must relate to the character of the design. All
sides of a building shall be designed so that they are compatible in terms of material,
window treatments, architectural accents, cornice/parapet design, etc.
(b) Materials used. A wide variety of both natural and high quality man-made
materials are allowed. Examples of acceptable materials include red brick, indigenous
stone (i.e., granite, limestone), architectural concrete, synthetic stucco, wood clapboard
(synthetic materials such as vinyl siding may be used in place of wood provided it is of
high quality and closely resembles wood clapboard/shingles), and glass or glass block.
Other materials may be used as an architectural accent provided they are harmonious
with the building and site.
575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 tel 802.846.4106 fax 802.846.4101 www.sburi.com
Design Review Application DR-08-11
24 San Remo Drive
Page 2 of 4
(c) Colors and textures used. The color and texture of the building shall be
harmonious with the building itself and with other buildings on the site and nearby.
Colors naturally occurring from building materials and other traditional, subdued colors
are encouraged. More than three (3) predominant colors are discouraged.
(d) Windows and doors. Window and door treatment shall be a careful
response to the buildings interior organization as well as the features of the building site.
The treatment of windows and doors shall be in a manner that creates a rhythm that
gives necessary order and unity to the facade, yet avoids monotony. For sides of
buildings that face or front public streets, the majority of the first floor's facade area shall
consist of see -through glass in order to promote pedestrian activity, however, the
windows and doors should be of human scale, so as to welcome pedestrians.
There are no changes to these items as part of this proposal.
(e) Roofs as a design element. Roofs shall be part of, or define, the style of a
building. They shall be used creatively to break up long facades and potentially long
roof lines.
The applicant is proposing to install new asphalt roofing. The applicant has submitted a
diagram of the new roofing. Proposed materials are similar to others on the street. Staff
has no concerns with this proposal. Staff believes that it will fit the goals of the design
review district.
(f) Orient buildings to the public street. Buildings shall be designed in a
manner that relates the building to the public street in order to protect the integrity of city
blocks, present an inviting street front and promote traditional street patterns. New
buildings shall be built to the street property line. For existing buildings undergoing
renovation, improvements shall be done to relate the building better to the public street.
Such improvements could include installation of doors and windows facing the public
street.
There are no changes to the orientation of the proposed building.
(g) Conceal rooftop devices. Rooftop mechanical equipment and
appurtenances to be used in the operation or maintenance of a structure shall be
arranged so as to minimize visibility from any point at or below the roof level of the
subject structure.
This criterion is not applicable to the subject application.
(h) Promote energy efficiency. Where feasible, the design of a building should
consider solar energy and the use of natural daylight by capturing the sun's energy
during the winter and providing shade during the summer.
This criterion is not applicable to the subject application.
Design Review Application DR-08-11
24 San Remo Drive
Page 3of4
(i) Pedestrian promenade along Market Street. In Design District 1, the
provision of a covered pedestrian promenade along Market Street is required in order
to protect pedestrians from inclement weather and promote walking.
This criterion is not applicable to the subject application.
In addition, design plans for properties within Design District 2 shall comply with the
following site design criteria as outlined in Section 11.02 of the SBLDR:
(a) Landscape and plantings. Significant trees and vegetation should be
preserved in its natural state insofar as practicable. Any grade changes should be in
keeping with the general appearance of neighboring developed areas.
This criterion is not applicable to the subject application.
(b) Integrate special features with the design. Storage areas, machinery and
equipment installation, service areas, truck loading areas, garbage and refuse collection
areas, utility connections, meters and structures, mailboxes, and similar accessory
structures shall be positioned in such a way to minimize visibility from the public street.
This criterion is not applicable to the subject application.
(c) Walls, fences or other screening features: Such elements, if used, shall be
employed in a skillful manner and in harmony with the architectural context of the
development. Such features should be used to enhance building appearance and to
strengthen visual linkages between a building and its surroundings.
This criterion is not applicable to the subject application.
(d) Accessible open space. When providing open space on a site, it shall
be designed to be visually and physically accessible from the public street.
This criterion is not applicable to the subject application.
(e) Provide efficient and effective circulation. With respect to vehicular and
pedestrian circulation, special attention shall be given to the location and number of
access points to public streets and sidewalks, to the separation of vehicles and
pedestrians, to the arrangement of parking areas and to service and loading areas, and
to the location of accessible routes and ramps for the disabled. Site design shall also
provide for interconnections, both vehicular and pedestrian, between adjacent
properties.
This criterion is not applicable to the subject application.
(0 Outdoor Lighting. Outdoor lighting shall be designed to be both aesthetically
pleasing and functional. The lighting type shall be metal halide, compact fluorescent,
and/or induction lamps, and shall be of a white color (e.g., CRI 70 or greater). Light
Design Review Application DR-08-11
24 San Remo Drive
Page 4 of 4
fixtures shall be appropriately shielded to preclude glare and overall illumination levels
should be evenly distributed.
The applicant is not proposing any changes to the existing outdoor lighting. If any
changes are proposed to the outdoor lighting, lighting details (cut -sheets) shall be
submitted for review.
(g) Provide for nature's events. Attention shall be accorded to design features which
address the affects of rain, snow and ice at building entrances and on sidewalks, and to
provisions for snow and ice removal from circulation areas.
This application is in compliance with this criterion.
(h) Make spaces secure and safe. With respect to personal safety, all open and
enclosed spaces should be designed to facilitate building evacuation, and provide
reasonable accessibility by fire, police or other emergency personnel and equipment.
The new roof will only serve to enhance the building's compliance with this criterion.
(i) Streetscape improvements. An applicant for new development shall be
responsible for implementing streetscape improvements (e.g., sidewalks, street lighting,
street trees, etc.) within the portion of the public street ROW directly fronting the parcel
of land for which development is proposed. Such streetscape improvements shall be in
accord with the specifications contained in the City Center Streetscape Design
Guidelines.
This criterion is not applicable to the subject application.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Development Review Board approve Design Review
Application #DR-08-11.
Wesco Oil Co
24 San Remo Dr
S. Burlington, VT 05403
802-864-5155 e 222
New Roof Layers
IKO Asphalt Shingles
charcoal gray
5/8 in plywood
Existing steel roof
1 ft overhang
8 in white Azak
trim board
Permit Number DR- c> d - /
CITY OF SOUTH BURLE",TGTON
APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW
All information requested on this application must be completed in full. Failure to provide the requested
information either on this application form or on required design plans will result in your application
being rejected and a delay in the review before the Design Review Committee and Development Review
Board.
1) Approval is being sought for (check all that apply):
® Design Plan Approval
❑ Sign Design Approval
2) OWNER OF RECORD (Warne as shown on deed, mailing address, phone and fw. #)
3) APPLICANT (Name, mailing address, phone and fax #)
(fxk ZZZ
4) CON -TACT PERSON (Name, mailing address, phone and fw. #)
s) PROJECT STREET ADDRESS:
6) TAX PARCEL, ID # (can be obtained at Assessor's Office)
7) PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Provide a brief description of the improvement. or modification for which design review approval is
being sought. If sign design approval is being sought, provide a description of the sign(s) type, size and
height.
The information listed on Exhibit A attached shall be submitted along with this application form. Five
(5) regular size copies and one reduced copy (11" ; 17") of all required plans and drawings (e.g., site
plan, building elevations, sign details) must be submitted.
I hereby certify that all the information requested as part of this application has been submitted and is
accurate to the best of my knowledge.
,tZ? J7
V, hi, W= Mils:aMWWWO-m 90 rw a ?M-. - r i 11 11 too
..!n I I
Do not write below this line
DATE DF,SUENiISSION: 1 l
I have reviewed this design review application and find it to be:
Complete ❑ Incomplete
erector f Planning �i 'Zoning or Designee