HomeMy WebLinkAboutDR-01-03 - Decision - 0340 Dorset Street#DR-01-03
FINDINGS OF FACT AND DECISION
STATE OF VERMONT
COUNTY OF CHITTENDEN
CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON
Re: Findings of Fact, design review application #DR-01-03 of John Kennedy to amend a
previously approved master signage plan. The amendment consists of 1) removing one
16 inches by 3 foot wall sign totaling four square feet, and 2) erecting one 40 inches by
70 inches non -illuminated wall sign, 340 Dorset Street.
On the 15th of May 2001, the South Burlington Development Review Board approved
the design review application of Margo Breen, under Section 4 and Section 23 of the
South Burlington Sign Regulations based on the following findings:
1. This project consists of amending a previously approved master signage plan. The
amendment consists of: 1) removing one 16 inches by 3 foot wall sign totaling four
square feet, and 2) erecting one 40 inches by 70 inches non -illuminated wall sign, 340
Dorset Street.
2. The owner of record is Edgar Welch.
3. This property at 340 Dorset Street is located within the Design Review District Two.
It is bounded on the west by Dorset Street, on the north by a mixed use office, retail,
and residential building, on the east by San Remo Drive, and on the south by an office
building.
4. Consistent Design: The approved master signage plan for the property calls for each
business to be represented by two wooden, oval shaped, 16 inch by 3 foot signs. One
of these signs was erected in September after the Development Review Board
approved it at a larger size (40 by 70 inches). The proposed sign would therefore not
be out of character with existing signs. Should the other approved wall signs be
erected, the proposed sign would be nearly five times the size of the approved signs.
While the proposed sign replicates the white background and oval shape of the
approved signs, the applicant should be prepared to address the issue of scale in
relation to other possible signs on the building as well as if there is a need to increase
the size of the other approved signs for the property.
5. City Center Goals: It is a goal of the City Center to promote legible signs of a high
aesthetic quality which promote a human scale. The approved signs were to be hand
painted to promote a high aesthetic quality. It is therefore recommended that the
applicant consider having the proposed sign hand painted. The proposed sign will
utilize a larger scale and therefore will be more legible from a distance.
6. Color, Texture and Materials: The applicant proposed utilizing a white background
with blue lettering. There are therefore less than three predominant colors. Since the
applicant did not clearly stated the materials to be used, it is recommended that the
applicant utilize the previously approved scheme for hand painted wooden signs. In
the proposed master signage plan amendment, the applicant has stated that signs will
be finished in paint or vinyl.
7. Other: The master signage plan amendment also calls for external projection sign
lighting which utilize cut off fixtures. The applicant did not provided details (cut
sheets) for the type of fixture to be utilized. In the Committee's previous approval of
the property, a requirement was placed on the approval that the applicant return to the
Committee to address lighting on the property. The applicant has also added lighting
to the previously approved MacSphere sign without approval. Staff recommended
that the Committee not approve illumination of the signs on the property at this time
as the applicant is not prepared to address the specific type of lighting fixtures or
where the lighting fixtures will be located. This information should be reviewed
within the context of the entire property.
DECISION AND CONDITIONS
Based on the above Findings of Fact, the South Burlington Development Review Board
approves the design review application #DR-01-03 of John Kennedy to amend a
previously approved master signage plan. The amendment consists of 1) removing one
16 inches by 3 foot wall sign totaling four square feet, and 2) erecting one 40 inches by
70 inches non -illuminated wall sign, 340 Dorset Street, as depicted on a two (2) page set
of plans, page one entitled "Master Signage Plan for 338,339, and 340 Dorset Street",
dated April 4, 2001 with the following stipulations:
1. All previous approvals and stipulations which are not superseded by this
approval shall remain in effect.
2. This recommendation for approval of the proposed sign design is based
solely on the application's compliance with the design review criteria
contained in Section 4 of the South Burlington Sign Ordinance. The
determination of whether or not this application complies with all other
requirements contained in the sign ordinance shall be made by the Code
Officer.
3. Prior to review by the Development Review Board, the applicant should
revise the master signage plan to:
a) Remove all reference to exterior lighting of the MacSphere and Caswell
Credit Union signs.
b) Remove 339 Dorset Street from the title of the Master Signage Plan.
4. The applicant shall obtain a sign permit pursuant to Section Five of the
Sign Ordinance or this approval is null and void.
5. Any change to the master signage plans shall require review by the
South Burlington Design Review Committee and approved by the
Development Review Board excepting design review applications made
for erection of freestanding sign panels and 40" by 70" wall sign at 340
Dorset Street. These specific design review applications shall require
administrative review only by the Code Officer if they are determined to
comply with both the master signage plan and the Sign Ordinance in
effect at the time of submittal.
hair or Clerk Date
South Burlington Development Review Board
Please Note: You have the right to appeal this decision to the Vermont Environmental Court, pursuant
to 24 V.S.A. § 4471 and V.R.C.P. 76, in writing, within 30 days of the date this decision is issued. The fee
is $150.00. 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 V.S.A. § 4472(d)
(exclusivity of remedy; finality).