Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutDR-05-08 - Decision - 0366 Dorset StreetCITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD DESIGN REVIEW APPLICATION #DR-05-08 SOUTH BURLINGTON REALTY- 366 DORSET STREET FINDINGS OF FACT AND DECISION South Burlington Realty Co., hereafter referred to as the applicant, is seeking design review approval for the following exterior modifications for the property located at 366 Dorset Street in the Dorset Street/ City Center Sign District: 1) replace one window on the south fagade with a new exterior door. The Design Review Committee voted to support this application with conditions at their meeting on October 24, 2005. The Development Review Board held a public meeting on November 1, 2005. John Jaegar represented the applicant. Based on testimony provided at the above mentioned public hearing and the plans and supporting materials contained in the document file for this application, the Development Review Board finds, concludes, and decides the following: FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The applicant is seeking approval to replace one window on the south fagade with a new exterior entry door at the property located at 366 Dorset Street. 2. The property is located in the Central District 2 (CD2) zoning district. 3. The owner of record of the subject property is South Burlington Realty Co. 4. The applicant has submitted renderings of the proposed doorway and photos showing the location of the change. Design plans for properties within Design District 2 shall comply with the following design criteria as outlined in Section 11.01(F) of the South Burlington Land Development Regulations (SBLDR): (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. The proposed additions are in compliance with this criterion. The applicant has proposed that the new door will be in the same style and color (dark green metal) as the existing front entry door. (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. The applicant is proposing to replace the existing window with a metal door, which is the same material used on other approved doors in the building. (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. The applicant is proposing a green door. This is consistent with the previously approved color scheme for the building and the existing trim and doors. (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. The application to replace the window with the door will actually increase the property's adherence to this criterion. The extra door will serve the public, particularly those utilizing the handicapped parking space in front of the proposed door. The door will be only one foot in depth so as not to interfere with the sidewalk. (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. This criterion is not applicable to the subject application. (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. The proposal is to add a door facing the parking lot but visible to the public street and is in compliance with this criterion. (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. 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. Again, the minimal depth of the new entryway will not interfere with the sidewalk (f) 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 fixtures shall be appropriately shielded to preclude glare and overall illumination levels should be evenly distributed. The applicant did not propose any changes to the existing outdoor lighting. (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 proposal to add an additional door will serve to increase safety and allow for easier and swifter building evacuation, as well as more entry points for emergency personnel. (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. DECISION /� p MOTION by Q(tIM13 , seconded by to approve Design Review Applicatio #DR-05-08 ch South Burlington Realty Co., subje t to the following conditions: All previous approvals and stipulations shall remain in full effect, except as amended herein. 2. This project shall be completed as shown on the plans submitted by the applicant and on file in the South Burlington Department of Planning and Zoning. If any changes are proposed to the outdoor lighting, lighting details (cut -sheets) shall be submitted for review and approved prior to installation. 4. The color of the new exterior entry door shall be dark green. Mark Behr — ye nay/abstain/not present Matthew Birmingham — yea/nay/abstain of present Chuck BoltonVeqay/abstain/not present John Dinklagenay/abstain/not present Roger Farley — nay/abstain/not present Larry KupfermaWenay/abstain/not nay/abstain/not present Gayle Quimby — present Motion carried by a vote of (' - C> - O Signed this / day of )Z-Fl," 2005, by ohn Dinklage, Chair l Please note: You have the right to appeal this decision to the Vermont Environmental Court, pursuant to 24 VSA 4471 and VRCP 76 in writing, within 30 days of the date this decision is issued. The fee is $225.00. If you fail to appeal this decision, your right to challenge this decision at some future time may be lost because you waited too long. You will be bound by the decision, pursuant to 24 VSA 4472 (d) (exclusivity of remedy; finality).