HomeMy WebLinkAboutDR-10-03 - Decision - 0205 Dorset Street#DR-10-03
CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND ZONING
TD BANK - 205 DORSET STREET
DESIGN REVIEW APPLICATION #DR-10-03
FINDINGS OF FACT AND DECISION
TD Bank, hereafter referred to as the applicant, is seeking to obtain a new master
signage permit for a property in the Dorset Street/City Center Design District. The
master signage permit would establish the design scheme for the freestanding and wall
signs on the property, 205 Dorset Street.
The Development Review Board held a public hearing on March 2, 2010. Stuart Bennett
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 to obtain a new master signage permit for a property in the
Dorset Street/City Center Design District. The master signage permit would establish
the design scheme for the freestanding and wall signs on the property, 205 Dorset
Street.
2. The application was received on February 2, 2010.
3. The owner of record of the subject property is P& V, LLC
4. The subject property is located in the Commercial 1, Residential 12 Zoning District
5. The Design Review Committee met on February 22, 2010 and voted to approve the
application with the conditions outlined in this decision.
Pursuant to Section 6 of the City of South Burlington Sign Ordinance, the erection,
alteration, or relocation of any sign within this district shall require design review by the
South Burlington Design Review Committee (DRC) and Development Review Board
(DRB). Section 8 of the Sign Ordinance requires all property owners within the DS/CC
Sign District to obtain a Master Signage Permit.
This is an after -the -fact application. The proposed design changes have already been
instituted on signs that have already been erected, without master sign approval or
issuance of a sign permit.
DESIGN REVIEW CRITERIA
In reviewing an application for signage, the DRC and DRB shall consider the following:
I:\Development Review Boa rd\Findings_Decisions\2010\TDbank_DR1003_ffd.doc
#DR-10-03
(a) Consistent Design
The design of a sign must be compatible and harmonious with the design of
buildings on the subject property and nearby. The design of all signs on a
property shall promote consistency in terms of color, graphic style, lighting,
location, material and proportions.
The design of the proposed signs is harmonious with the design of the buildings on the
subject property and nearby. The proposed sign package achieves consistency in color,
graphic style, lighting, material and proportions. The sign posts are to remain the same,
with only a change in the colors permitted.
(b) Promotion of City Center Goals
Signs within the DS/CC Sign District should be of high aesthetic quality and
pedestrian oriented.
This criterion is being met. The colors, lettering, and design come together to present an
aesthetically pleasing sign. The signposts are pressure -treated wood with gray color and
texture to match the exterior of the building. The sign is pedestrian scaled.
(c) Color & Texture
A maximum of 3 colors is encouraged. The applicant is proposing that signs be limited to
blue, green and red, with white or off-white shades permitted for lettering only.
The applicant has submitted a color photo showing existing sign posts which they plan to
re -use.
(d) Materials Used
Pursuant to Section 20 of the Sign Ordinance, all signs shall be of substantial and
sturdy construction, kept in good repair, and painted or cleaned as necessary to
maintain a clean, safe, and orderly appearance.
The applicant is proposing to continue the use of pressure -treated wood. All signs shall
be kept in a clean, safe and orderly appearance.
(e) Wall Mounted Signs
Section 10 of the Sign Ordinance governs the size and location of wall -mounted
signs.
Pursuant to Table 10-1 of the Sign Ordinance, a wall -mounted sign for a multi -
tenant building or a multi -building lot with a master signage permit in any district
with freestanding or landscape sign shall not exceed 15% of the area of the facade
to which it is attached or 100 sq. ft., whichever is smaller.
2
I:\Development Review Board\Findings_Decisions\2010\TDbank_DR1003_ffd.doc
#DR-10-03
Pursuant to Table 10-1 of the Sign Ordinance, the total area of all wall -mounted
signs on the subject property shall not exceed 10% of the area of principal public
fagade of each building.
The code officer shall ensure that these criteria are met when issuing individual sign
permits for the property.
Section 10(c) states that a wall -mounted sign shall not project above the roof or
parapet of the building nor below the top of any first floor doorway unless
permitted through the design review approval process.
The proposed sign locations will not project above the roof or parapet of the subject
building. In addition, the proposed signs will not extend below the top of any first floor
doorways or windows. Thus, the proposed signage is in compliance with this
requirement.
Pursuant to Section 10(d), a wall -mounted sign shall not cover any opening or
project beyond the top or end of any wall to which it is attached.
The proposed signs are in compliance with this requirement.
Section 10(g) stipulates that a wall -mounted sign shall not project from the wall in
excess of 9".
The proposed signs are in compliance with this requirement
(0 Freestanding Signs
Section 9(h) states that free-standing signs along Dorset Street are to be located in a
sign corridor that begins adjacent to the road Right -of -Way and runs sixteen (16) feet
from the edge of the Right of Way toward the building face. In those instances where
dimensions do not provide for a two (2) foot setback from the Right -of -Way before a
sign support post can be located, it is permitted to erect a centered single pole
mounted sign of which the road side edge of the sign is directly outside the R.O.W.
line.
The code officer shall ensure compliance with this criterion such that the subject sign shall
be within this designated sign corridor.
DECISION QQ
Motion by �� seconded by P&5 rl FA KK to
approve Design *Review Application #DR-10-03 of TD Bank subject to the following
conditions:
1. All previous approvals and stipulations which are not superseded by this approval
shall remain in effect.
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.
I:\Development Review Boa rd\Findings_Decisions\2010\TDbank_DR1003_ffd.doc
#DR-10-03
3. A Master Signage Permit shall be issued to the applicant by the DRB, prior to the
issuance of any individual sign permit for the property.
4. The background colors of the freestanding and wall signs shall be limited to green,
red, or blue. Lettering shall be limited to white or off-white shades. No more than two
different shades of any one color shall be used in any combination of signs on the
property at the same time. Sign posts shall be limited to grey or white.
5. Fonts shall be limited to block lettering; script lettering shall not be permitted.
6. All signs shall be kept in good repair; landscaping surrounding the freestanding signs
shall be kept trimmed and neat and shall not obscure the text of the signs.
7. Wall signs shall not extend above the roof or parapet of the building, nor below the
top of any first floor doorways or windows.
8. Wall signs shall not cover any opening or project beyond the top or end of any wall to
which it is attached.
9. Wall signs shall not project from the wall in excess of 9".
Mark Behr — yea/nay/abstain/ lot
Matthew Birming
m —yea. nay/abstain of resent
John Dinklage
nay/abstain/not present
Roger Farley —
nay/abstain/not present
Eric Knudsen —Venay/abstain/not
ay/abstain/not present
Gayle Quimb
present
Bill Stuono —
y/abstain/not present
Motion carried by a vote of
Signed this day of 2010, by
John Dinklage, Chairman
L__,.
Please note: You have the right to appeal this decision to the Vermont Environmental
Court, pursuant to 24 VSA 4471 and VRECP 5 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).
4
I:\Development Review Board\Findings_Decisions\2010\TDbank_DR1003_ffd.doc