HomeMy WebLinkAboutDR-05-11 - Decision - 0040 San Remo Drive! 4
#DR-o5-ii
Amendment to Master Si�znajze Permit
Signed this % day of 2005, by
�/ John Din lage, Cha
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).
#DR-o5-11
Amendment to Master Sianaze Permit
the allowable limits. This scale promotes a pedestrian orientation. The graphics
are well designed and readable.
iii. Color and texture. The materials and color scheme are acceptable
and compatible with the site.
iv. Materials used. Aluminum and vinyl are suitable in this industrial
transition area of the City Center.
(f) Other issues. Staff recommends the DRC approve the proposed signs and
MSP, with the condition that any subsequent signs other than the freestanding
and window signs approved herein require DRC review prior to approval, and
that the materials, fonts, colors, and treatments used on the free-standing sign be
utilized for any and all other signs on the property. Specifically:
o White background
o Orange, navy and medium blue logos with black or blue lettering
o Consistent fonts
o Cedar posts
Decision and Conditions:
The Development Review Board hereby approves application #DR-05-11 subject
to the following conditions:
1. The window decals are approved as proposed. A sign permit must be
issued by the Administrative Officer prior to installation.
2. The parameters for design (e.g. colors, fonts) in (f) above are approved for
the Master Signage Plan.
3. The applicant shall submit a new and accurate rendering of the free-
standing sign to the Design Review Committee, with the size not to exceed the
dimensions specified in (a) above and with suitable landscaping, for DRC
approval prior to issuance of a sign permit by the Administrative Officer. Further
DRB review and approval shall not be required.
Mark Behr —e nay/abstain/not present
Matthew Birmingham — e nay/abstain/not present
Chuck Bolton — 65ayTabstain/not present
John Dinklage — e nay/abstain/not present
Roger Farley — e ay/abstain/not present
Larry Kupferman — e nay/abstain/not present
Gayle Quimby — 6nay/abstain/not present
Motion carried by a vote of 7- v- 0
#DR-05-11
Amendment to Master Signage Permit
#DR-oS-ii: amendment to a previously issued Master Signage Permit (DS-02-
20) for Randall Munson, 40 San Remo Drive. The existing MSP allowed one wall
sign, and the applicant is now asking to amend that approval to allow one free-
standing sign and two window graphics.
Findings of Fact
The applicant has submitted the following pursuant to Section 8(c) of the Sign
Ordinance:
1. Plot plan showing sign location and landscaping
2. Proposed sign dimensions
3. Design parameters including fonts, colors and materials
4. Lighting — the applicant states that there are "no plans to provide
illumination" for any signage.
(a) Size: the proposed wall sign is 21 square feet in size and 7' tall, which is
well within the square footage and height limits for the district (32 SF and 12',
respectively). Pursuant to Section 18(h) of the Sign Ordinance, window signs
may not exceed 25 % of the area of the window area to which a sign is attached.
There is a note on the application to this effect.
(b) Setback: As this property fronts on San Remo Drive, the sign must be set
back five feet from the right of way. This standard is met.
(c) Landscaping. The plans do not show landscaping of the sign base.
Landscaping or planters should be provided when the sign is installed. Staff
recommends the DRC condition this approval on submittal of a revised site plan
showing landscaping or planters at the base of the sign, with the Administrative
Officer to approve prior to issuance of a sign permit. The other landscaping on
the property was reviewed and approved by the DRB and exceeds the City's
minimum standards.
(d) Lighting. The applicant has stated that no illumination is proposed. The
applicant needs to be aware that the DRC will need to amend the MSP if
illumination is desired in the future.
(e) City Center standards. Section 6 of the Sign Ordinance has four criteria
for signs in this district: consistent design; promote city center goals; color and
texture; and materials used.
i. Consistent design. The graphics on the proposed freestanding and
window signs are consistent, cleanly designed, and easy to read. They are
consistent with the primary structure on site as well.
I Promote city center goals of pedestrian orientation and high
quality. As with the Beacon Townhouse sign, this sign is lower and smaller than