Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutDR-07-10 - Decision - 0222 Dorset Street#DR-07-10 CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND ZONING PAT MALONE — 222 DORSET STREET DESIGN REVIEW APPLICATION #DR-07-10 FINDINGS OF FACT AND DECISION Patrick Malone, hereafter referred to as the applicant, is seeking to obtain a new master signage permit for the property located at 222 Dorset Street in the Dorset Street/ City Center Sign District. The master signage permit would establish the design scheme for the freestanding and wall signs on the property. The Development Review Board held a public meeting on Tuesday, December 11, 2007. Stephanie Hainley represented the applicant. Based on testimony provided at the above mentioned public meeting 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 the property located at 222 Dorset Street in the Dorset Street/ City Center Sign District. The master signage permit would establish the design scheme for the freestanding and wall signs on the property. 2. 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. 3. The owner of record of the subject property is Patrick Malone. 4. The plan submitted is entitled, "Sign Schedule Footprint Vertical Main Sign", prepared by Wood & Wood, dated 11/13/07. The South Burlington Design Review Committee met on November 26, 2007 to discuss the application. 9. 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. The applicant, in consultation with staff, has stated that they will only be seeking master signage approval for the wall mounted signs as part of this application. No permission for - 1 - #DR-07-10 freestanding signs is being requested, approved, or otherwise considered as part of this application. 2. No permission for freestanding signs is being requested, approved, or otherwise considered as part of this application. No signs shall be issued for freestanding signs on this property until the Master Signage permit as amended. DESIGN REVIEW CRITERIA In reviewing an application for signage, the DRC and DRB shall consider the following: (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 proposed signs are not compatible with the design of the building on the subject property. The subject building, per the South Burlington Land Development Regulations and the guidance of the DRC and DRB, is constructed predominantly of natural materials, including brick and concrete block. The proposed signage is to be composed of a plywood material with a paper facing. (b) Promotion of City Center Goals Signs within the DS/CC Sign District should be of high aesthetic quality and pedestrian oriented. The proposed signage is to be composed of a plywood material with a paper facing. The Design Review Committee has recommended approval of the medium density overlay ply -board. (c) Color & Texture The applicant has proposed a wide color palette for both freestanding and wall mounted signs: ■ Pale oak (Benjamin Moore) ■ Terrapin green (Benjamin Moore) ■ Dill pickle (Benjamin Moore) ■ Evening Dove (Benjamin Moore) ■ Gold Rush (Benjamin Moore) ■ Charcoal Slate (Benjamin Moore) ■ Polished Mahogany (Sherwin Williams) ■ Peacock Blue (existing applied copper logo) The applicant is proposing that "Charcoal Slate," "Terrapin Green" and "Peacock Blue" be used as the predominant colors and that "Dill Pickle," "Evening Dove," "Pale Oak," "Polished Mahogany" and "Gold Rush" to be the background, border, and accent colors used. -2- #DR-07-10 Section 6(b)(3) that states, "The use of a maximum of three (3) predominant colors is encouraged to provide consistent foreground, text, and background color schemes." In addition, the satin texture of the proposed signs is compatible and harmonious with buildings on the property and nearby. The Committee has discussed this matter and stated that they feel the applicant is in compliance with this criterion. (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. (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. 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 -3- #DR-07-10 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. Freestanding signs are not under consideration as part of this application Lighting The details of the wall mounted lights for the wall mounted signs are acceptable Other The Design Review Committee reviewed the proposed building over the course of many months. A primary issue at many meetings was the vast expanse of brick along Dorset Street. For many meetings, staff and the Committee advocated for a design which would break up this area and serve the design standard which states that: 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. Such improvements could include installation of doors and windows facing the public street. The applicant met with the Design Review Committee for review on January 22, 2007. The Committee discussed the plans submitted and asked the applicant to propose something that would break up the monotony of the brick wall along the Dorset Street fagade and the western fagade. The applicant then submitted several options for the DRC to review. The DRC unanimously expressed favoritism of the option labeled as #1 which offered concrete blocks and a place holder for a wall mounted sign. This elevation was then approved by the DRB on February 6, 2007. The applicant is now proposing to locate their allowable two wall mounted signs along the northern fagade of the building. No sign is proposed along the Dorset Street fagade, specifically where the approved elevations depict such a sign and where the Design Review Committee advocated very heavily for something which would alleviate the blank fagade of brick. The applicant met with the Design Review Committee and Staff on November 26, 2007 to discuss this matter. All three parties came to a compromise which would replace the wall sign on the Dorset Street fagade with appropriately sized and mounted wall art to be approved by the DRC and DRB and installed prior to issuance of the final Certificate of Occupancy for the building. M #DR-07-10 191 WelL"iCe1kil Motion by A��L��% seconded by to approve Design Review Application #DR-07-10 of Patrick Malone, 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. 3. The applicant shall propose a wall art piece for the Dorset Street fagade. The proposed art shall be reviewed and approved by the Design Review Committee and Development Review Board prior to issuance of a final Certificate of Occupancy for the Building. If this does not occur, the applicant will not receive a Certificate of Occupancy and the Master Signage permit will be deemed Null and Void. 4. The predominant colors (i.e. central logos and principal text) of the wall -mounted signs shall be limited to "Charcoal Slate," "Terrapin Green," and "Peacock Blue." Background, border, and accent colors shall be limited to "Dill Pickle," "Evening Dove," "Pale Oak," and "Polished Mahogany." All listed colors shall be per the color palette and dated 11/30/07. 5. All signs shall be kept in good repair. 6. The applicant shall obtain a sign permit prior to installation of any sign 7. The plan shall be revised to show the changes below and shall require approval of the Administrative Officer. Three (3) copies of the approved revised plan shall be submitted to the Administrative Officer prior to permit issuance. a. The Sign Schedule Footprint plan shall be revised to remove the free-standing sign and to accurately reflect the "Blue Zone" plan details approved on Oct. 2, 2007. 8. Any change to the site plan shall require approval by the South Burlington Development Review Board or the South Burlington Administrative Officer. -5- #DR-07-10 Mark Behr — e&/nay/abstain/not present Matthew Birmingham — e /nay/abstain/not present John Dinklage —(&nay abstain/not present Roger Farley — ye nay/abstain/ ot>�r=e`sen Eric Knudsen — e ay/abstain esent Peter Plumeau — e nay/abstain/not present Gayle Quimby — e nay/abstain/not present Motion carried by a vote of & - V - 6 Signed this / � day of John Dinklage, Chai 2007, by 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).