Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutDR-05-05 - Decision - 0023 San Remo Driver CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD DESIGN REVIEW APPLICATION #DR-05-05 FOUR BOYS LLC — 23 SAN REMO DRIVE FINDINGS OF FACT AND DECISION Four Boys LLC, hereafter referred to as the applicant, is requesting design review approval for the following exterior modifications: 1) reduce the proposed roof parapet rail to one (1) foot in height, 2) replace the reduction in roof parapet rail by raising the parapet wall, and 3) option to delete porch railings and replace with solid wall. The subject property falls within Design District 2 of the City Center Design Review Overlay District. Pursuant to Section 11.01(D)(1)(d) of the South Burlington Land Development Regulations, the addition or alteration of the roofline of a building or structure shall be subject to design review by the Design Review Committee (DRC) and the Development Review Board (DRB). The Design Review Committee approved this August 22, 2005. The Development Review 2005. Bill Michaud represented the applicant. application with conditions at their meeting on Board held a public meeting on September 6, 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 to 1) reduce the height of the roof parapet rail from two feet to one, 2) raise the parapet wall to maintain safety, and 3) option to delete porch railings and replace with solid wall. 2. The property is located in the Central District 2 (CD2) zoning district. 3. The owner of record of the subject property is Four Boys LLC. 4. The applicant has submitted renderings of the railings and parapet wall proposed for this property. Design plans for properties within Design District 2 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. The design of a building should consider the design features of other structures in the area so as not to be harshly discordant with other nearby buildings. The proposed amendments are in compliance with this criterion. The extension of the parapet wall is consistent with the design of the building. (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, and marble), 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. The applicant is proposing to replace the existing metal railing by continuing the synthetic stucco parapet wall, a material previously approved by the DRC, and in compliance with this criterion. (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 to continue the color of the current wall. (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 fagade 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. This criterion is not applicable to the subject application. There are no proposed changes to windows or doors. (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. For one-story structures, the minimum and maximum slope of a pitched roof shall be 8 on 12 and 12 on 12, respectively. For structures of two (2) or more stories, the minimum and maximum slope of a pitched roof shall be 5 on 12 and 12 on 12, respectively. Only a small portion of roof area may be flat provided it is not visible from the public street, existing or planned, or does not detract from the overall design and harmony of the building. Where portions of a roof are flat, architectural elements such as cornices and parapets shall be included to improve the appearance and provide interest. Large, low -slope (i.e., less than 5 on 12) gable forms are discouraged. This project is unique in its use of a green roof. A parapet surrounding the roof serves not only as a safety measure, but also an aesthetically pleasing architectural element. The reduction in the open railing and the sight increase in the height of the parapet wall will not substantially affect this criterion. (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 proposed changes will affect the existing plans for 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. The proposed changes involved in this application will actually serve for greater concealment of the rooftop structures. (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 application does not change the proposal for a green roof, designed to be visually pleasing as well as retain stormwater. (i) Pedestrian promenade along Market Street. 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 Land Development Regulations: (a) Landscape and plantings. One of the unique features of the building is the roof -top garden. With the open railings that had been previously proposed, some of the plantings were to be visible from the street. With the reduction in the height railing, the plantings will be less visible until they grow to a height greater than the wall. (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, existing or planned. Such features shall be incorporated within or designed as part of the building on the site, not added as an afterthought. 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. The proposed changes will be in compliance with this criterion. (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. Open space should add to the visual amenities of the vicinity by maximizing its visibility for persons passing by or overlooking the site from neighboring properties. If open space is intended for active use, it should include such elements as benches, shade trees, and refuse containers and be so designed to maximize its accessibility for all individuals, including the disabled, and encourage social interaction. The siting of open space on a lot shall also consider the potential impact of buildings, both existing and potential, on shadow casting and solar access. Access to the rooftop garden will not change as a result of this proposal (e) Provide efficient and effective circulation. This criterion is not applicable to the subject application. (f) Outdoor Lighting. 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 provisions for snow and ice removal from circulation areas. The proposed changes will not affect the existing plans for 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 proposed changes will not affect the existing plans for 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. This criterion is not applicable to the subject application. DECISION MOTION by G « G/h1�! seconded by kw C to approve Design Review Applicatio #DR-05-05 of four Boys LLC, subject to the followiI6g 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. Mark Behr — yea, Chuck Bolton — y John Dinklage Roger Farley — Larry Kupferman Gayle Quimby -1 'abstain o presen iay/abstain n resent nay/abstain/not present ay/abstain/not present nay/abstain/not present nay/abstain/not present Motion carried by a vote of 5-- D - v Signed this day of September 2005, by hn Dinklage, Chair 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).