HomeMy WebLinkAboutDR-03-01 CU-03-08 SD-03-06 - Decision - 0368 Dorset Street (2)CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR APPROVAL
360-368 DORSET STREET PUD
DESIGN REVIEW #DR-03-01
CONDITIONAL USE #CU-03-08
REVISED FINAL PLAT #SD-03-06
South Burlington Realty Corp., hereafter referred to as the applicant, is requesting
Approval from the Development Review Board (DRB) for relocation of a pre-existing
radio antenna and tower and amendments to the Master Signage Permit for the Planned
Unit Development (PUD) at 360 to 368 Dorset Street. The Design Review Committee
(DRC) reviewed the application on April 28, 2003. The DRB held a public hearing on the
proposal on May 6, 2003. John Jaeger represented the applicant.
Based on testimony given at the above mentioned public hearing and on the plans and
supporting materials contained in the document file for this application, the DRB finds,
concludes and decides as follows:
FINDINGS OF FACT
The applicant is requesting approval from the DRB for relocation of a pre-existing
radio antenna and tower and amendments to the Master Signage Permit for the
PUD at 360 to 368 Dorset Street.
2. The South Burlington Realty Company is the record owner of the subject
property (warranty deed in Volume 219, Page 60 of the city land records).
3. The subject property contains approximately 2.2 acres and falls within the City
Center Design Review District 1.
CONCLUSIONS
MASTER SIGNAGE PERMIT
A Notice of Conditions of Final Plat Approval regarding the subject PUD was
endorsed by City Attorney Tim Eustace and recorded in Volume 482, Page 676
in the city land records. Condition number 3 of this Notice of Conditions states
that the property shall be treated as three separate parcels of land for the
purposes of the South Burlington Sign Ordinance. The applicant has included
properties at 364, 366 and 368 Dorset Street in the proposed Master Signage
Plan. The property at 360 Dorset Street is not included. The DRB concludes that
this is in keeping with previous agreements and approvals.
2. The applicant received DRB approval for a Master Signage Plan for the subject
property on November 17, 2000. That plan included the three existing free
standing signs, 8 wall mounted signs, and a double sided sign directory to be
mounted on the tower structure at 368 Dorset Street. The DRB found that other
future signs on the property "should employ green, blue, and either tan or gray as
the three predominant colors...." The existing signage on the property is only
FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS & DECISION
SOUTH BURLINGTON REALTY CORP.
#DR-03-01, #CU-03-08 & #SD-03-06
partially in compliance with the previously approved Master Signage Plan. In
addition, many signs have been installed on the property without the required
sign permits issued by the Administrative Officer.
3. The property is located at the corner of Dorset Street and San Remo Drive within
the Dorset Street/City Center Sign District (DS/CC Sign District). 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 DRB. Section 8 of the
Sign Ordinance requires all property owners within the DS/CC Sign District to
obtain a Master Signage Permit prior to the issuance of any individual sign permit
for the subject property. Section 8(e)(1) requires that the property owner of
record be the primary permitee of a Master Signage Permit. The record owner of
the property is South Burlington Realty Corp.
4. Pursuant to Section 8 of the Sign Ordinance, a Master Signage Permit shall
establish consistent design parameters for the property to ensure that all signage
is in accordance with goals of the Dorset Street/ City Center (DS/CC) Sign
District. The Master Signage permit shall specify size ranges and the graphic
elements to be used to relate multiple signs to one another.
DESIGN REVIEW CRITERIA
Pursuant to Section 6(b) of the Sign Ordinance, in reviewing an application for signage
in the DS/CC Sign District, the DRC and DRB shall consider the following:
Consistent Design
5. Signage design must be compatible and harmonious with the design of buildings
on the subject property and nearby. The application includes a photographic
inventory of signs on the property, including 2 free standing signs, and several
individual wall mounted signs. The signs are of various sizes, shapes and colors.
Signage at 364-368 Dorset Street is varied in color. In particular, the two identical
free standing signs for 364-368 Dorset Street employ several colors, including
maroon, green, blue, gray, black, and white.
6. The two free standing signs for 364-368 Dorset Street do not offer consistency in
terms of graphic style. Each portion of the sign identifying a different tenant uses
a different font style, size and color. Although this may be acceptable for the
individual tenant wall signs and window signs on the remainder of the property,
the free standing signs should be redesigned to offer more consistency in terms
of color and graphic style in order to be consistent with Section 6 of the Sign
Ordinance. In particular the Master Signage Plan should be revised to establish
parameters for font styles, sizes and colors to be used on all free standing signs.
Promotion of City Center Goals
7. Signs within the DS/CC Sign District should be of high aesthetic quality and
pedestrian oriented. All signage appears to be of quality design. All of the wall
\d rc\sbrealty\D R-03-01. fcd.d oc
2
FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS & DECISION
SOUTH BURLINGTON REALTY CORP.
#DR-03-01, #CU-03-08 & #SD-03-06
mounted signs are oriented toward pedestrians navigating the subject property.
The free standing signs are oriented toward both pedestrians and vehicles. A
general project sign is incorporated into the tower structure at 368 Dorset Street,
which is visible to vehicular and pedestrian traffic.
Color & Texture
8. Section 6(b)(3) of the Sign Ordinance requires that the color and texture of signs
shall be compatible and harmonious with buildings on the property and nearby.
Texture is smooth for all signs and matches the texture of the vinyl siding that
dominates the facades of the structures at 364, 366, and 368 Dorset Street.
Pursuant to Section 6(b)(3) of the Sign Ordinance, a maximum of three
predominant colors is encouraged. Staff notes that the free standing signs for
364-368 Dorset Street employ at least five predominant colors, including black
and white. One of the buildings on the subject property includes maroon
architectural elements, which the applicant has repeated in the free standing
signage. The buildings also include green architectural elements. The green is
repeated in the signage. Tenant wall signs will all have a pinstriped border, the
outer stripe being black, and the inner stripe being the same color as the door
framework on each building. Minor portions of the individual tenant panels may
include logos which employ other colors. Such minor color additions are
acceptable and in keeping with the color standards of the Sign Ordinance
provided the free standing signs are redesigned to offer more consistency in
terms of font style, size and color.
Materials Used
9. The applicant has indicated that the signage will be constructed of medium
density overlay plywood (edge banded), wood particle composite sign board,
painted sheet metal applied to wood or composite substrate, or other composite
materials of equivalent appearance and performance. Sign posts for free
standing signs will be of white painted wood of a maximum 6" X 6" posts. Wall
mounted directional signs have 1-inch wide raised borders.
FREE STANDING SIGNS
10. Two free standing signs are proposed for the subject property. One in front of
366 Dorset Street for 364-368 Dorset Street, and an identical sign for 364-368
Dorset Street located southerly of 364 Dorset Street on San Remo Drive.
Pursuant to Section 9(a) of the Sign Ordinance, free standing signs shall be self
supporting without the need for ancillary supports. Both free standing signs
appear to comply with this requirement.
11. Section 9(b) of the Sign Ordinance limits the number of free standing signs to two
on a property with two approved access points onto public roads. In such cases
the access points must be separated by more than 300 ft. as measured from
centerline to centerline between the two entrances. In addition, the free standing
signs must be located in the vicinity of the approved access points and visible to
vehicles passing the approved entrances. The subject property has four
\d rc\s b rea Ity\D R-03-01. fcd. d oc
3
FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS & DECISION
SOUTH BURLINGTON REALTY CORP.
#DR-03-01, #CU-03-08 & #SD-03-06
approved access points. Two of them are shared with adjacent property and do
not occur on the subject property. Another occurs on Dorset Street between 366
and 368 Dorset Street. The fourth access point occurs on San Remo Drive
between 364 and 368 Dorset Street. The two 364-368 Dorset Street free
standing signs occur in the vicinity of the two on -site access points. The DRB
concludes that the sign locations are in keeping with the requirements of Section
9(b).
12. Pursuant to Section 9(h) of the Sign Ordinance, for lots that exceed 40,000 sq.
ft., the area of each free standing sign shall not exceed 32 sq. ft. The subject
property contains 101,734 sq. ft. According to the Master Signage Plan
submitted, the free standing signs for 364-368 Dorset Street shall not exceed 32
sq. ft. However, the width and length of the signs is not provided in the current
application. Based on information contained in the previous Master Signage Plan
the free standing signs are 48 inches wide. Based on a 48 inch width, the 32 sq.
ft. limit would limit the length of the signage for each free standing sign to 8 feet.
Pursuant to Section 9(h) of the Sign Ordinance, free standing signs shall not
exceed 12 ft in height, measured from the average finished grade at the base of
the sign to the highest portion of any point of the sign structure. The Master
Signage Plan indicates that the maximum height of the free standing signs shall
be 12 ft.
13. Pursuant to Section 9(g)(2) of the Sign Ordinance, free standing signs shall have
a base condition that is attractively maintained year round. The Master Signage
Plan indicates that each free standing sign is to be landscaping with four 18" to
24" shrubs at the base. Small shrubs and wood chips are present at the base of
the 364-368 Dorset Street Signs.
WALL MOUNTED SIGNS
14. Three types of wall mounted signs are included in this master signage plan: (1)
individual tenant signs primarily located above building entrances, (2) directional
signs to advise patrons as to the location of services within the buildings on the
subject property, and (3) address number signs located above building
entrances. Tenant wall signs for 364 and 368 Dorset Street will be applied to
designated sign band areas over entrances. Tenant wall signs for 366 Dorset
Street (a single tenant building) are at eye level on the south facade, and over
the transom window on the east facade. Directional signs are proposed only for
366 Dorset Street and are located at eye level.
15. Section 10 of the Sign Ordinance governs the size and location of wall mounted
signs. Pursuant to Section 10(b)(1), a wall mounted sign shall not exceed 5% of
the area of the principal public facade or 100 sq. ft., whichever is smaller_ None
of the wall signs exceeds 5% of the area of the principle facade of the building to
which it is mounted. Section 10(b)(2) states that a wall mounted sign cannot
exceed 15% of the area of the facade to which it is attached. None of the wall
signs exceeds 15% of the area of the facade to which it is mounted.
16. Section 10(c) of the Sign Ordinance states that a wall mounted sign shall not
\dre\sbrealty\DR-03-01 Jcd.doc
4
FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS & DECISION
SOUTH BURLINGTON REALTY CORP.
#DR-03-01, #CU-03-08 & #SD-03-06
project above the roof or parapet of a building nor below the top of any first floor
doorway unless permitted by the DRB. All wall mounted signs appear to comply
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. All of the wall mounted signs appear to comply with this requirement.
17. Section 10(g) of the Sign Ordinance stipulates that a wall mounted sign shall not
project from the wall in excess of 9". The applicant submitted a copy of Plan
Sheet A-3 dated May 22, 2001, which shows that the individual tenant wall
mounted signs within the sign band above building entrances will not extend 9"
from the fagade. The application does not indicate the extent to which other signs
will project from the facade. Staff notes that none of the signs appears to project
beyond 9" from the fagade; nonetheless, the plans should indicate the extent of
projection.
18. Table 10-1 limits to 2 the number of wall mounted signs per tenant for a multi
tenant building or multi tenant lot with free standing or landscape feature signs
and a master signage permit. Sings may be attached to as many facades as
have an actively used public entrance. So far, the wall mounted signage appears
to comply with this restriction. However 366 and 368 Dorset Street are not yet
fully occupied and that any new wall mounted tenant signs must comply with this
restriction.
19. Pursuant to Section 12(b)(3) of the Sign Ordinance, directional signs shall not be
considered additional wall signs. The number of directional signs shall not
exceed 1 per approved access point to the property, or a maximum of 3,
whichever is less. As already indicated, the subject property has 4 approved
access drives, 2 shared with the adjacent property to the north. According to
Section 3(m), directional signs shall not exceed 3 sq. ft. in area or 5 ft_ in height,
and lettering shall not exceed 6" in height. The 3 directional signs at 364 Dorset
Street comply with the ordinance. However, the Master Signage Plan should
include the dimensions of each directional sign, and indicate the maximum height
of lettering.
20. Window signs are present on the property. Pursuant to Section 18(h) of the Sign
Ordinance, window signs are permitted provided the total sign area does not
exceed 25% of the total window area to which the sign is attached. Window signs
appear to comply with this requirement; however, the Master Signage Plan
should indicate the dimensions of window signage and the area of the
corresponding windows to which they are attached.
21. Pursuant to Section 20(b) 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. That this
requirement should be made a condition of approval.
22. The applicant has indicated that lighting may be provided for tenant wail signs by
means of a shielded fluorescent fixture mounted above the sign and extending 2
ft. from the building. According to the applicant, the fixture would be a Lightron
\dre\sbrea1ty\DR-03-01.fcd.doc
5
FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS & DECISION
SOUTH BURLINGTON REALTY CORP.
#DR-03-01, #CU-03-08 & #SD-03-06
Series 90-HO-CW "or equal" with a white finish. A cut sheet detail for the Lightron
Series 90 fixture is provided. The Lightron Series 90-HO-CW appears to comply
with city lighting standards; however, if fixtures other than the Lightron Series 90-
HO-CW are employed, the applicant must submit cut sheet and design details for
other such fixtures.
23. The applicant has indicated that the general project sign on the building tower at
368 Dorset Street may be illuminated with two 50W metal halide Cooper
Corodado 710 "or equal" fixtures. These are narrow angle spotlight fixtures that
would be installed in the landscaping and aimed to center light on the general
project sign. A cut sheet detail for the Corodado 710 fixture is provided, which
includes photometric data for a 39W fixture. No photometric data for a 50W lamp
are provided. Again, if fixtures other than the Corodado 710 are employed, the
applicant must submit cut sheet and design details for other such fixtures.
24. Pursuant to Section 21(c) of the Sign Ordinance, no sign shall be left illuminated
after midnight unless the premises are open after midnight, in which case not
sign shall be left illuminated after the close of business. The Code Officer may
allow a wall sign to be left illuminated if it is necessary to protect the property
from theft or vandalism and determination of such is made a part of the permit.
The proposed lighting does not appear to be necessary to protect the property
from theft or vandalism.
25. The subject property contains over a dozen signs designating parking spaces
throughout the PUD. Pursuant to Section 12(b)(3) of the Sign Ordinance, the
number of directional signs shall not exceed 3. However, the Sign Ordinance
does not restrict the number of incidental signs. The DRB concludes that these
parking designation signs are necessary and appropriate in the context of this
multi -tenant medical office complex and should be considered incidental signs for
the purposes of the Master Signage Permit. The Master Signage Plan should be
revised to include sign size and parameters and an inventory of these parking
designation signs.
CONDITIONAL USE REVIEW
26. The application for conditional use was submitted on April 4, 2003, after the
proposed Land Development Regulations were warned for public hearing.
Therefore the conditional use application must comply with both the Zoning
Regulations and the proposed Land Development Regulations.
27. The proposed changes to the subject PUD primarily involve the reinstallation of a
53 ft. tower with a 13.2 ft. attached fiberglass antenna. The total height of the
structure is 66.2 ft. above ground level. Pursuant to Section 25.113(g) of the
Zoning Regulations and Section 3.07(G) of the proposed Land Development
Regulations, structures extending above the height limitations set forth in the
regulations, such as the proposed telecommunications tower, must receive
conditional use approval from the DRB. Although the tower and antenna have
been used historically on the subject property, previous plans submitted by the
applicant did not include the tower and antenna and the PUD did not receive the
\dre\sbrea1ty\DR-03-01 Jcd.doc
6
FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS & DECISION
SOUTH BURLINGTON REALTY CORP.
#DR-03-01, #CU-03-08 & #SD-03-06
necessary conditional use review or approval from the DRB. Consequently, the
DRB must find that the proposed communications tower and antenna will not
adversely affect the following:
(a) The capacity of existing or planned municipal or educational facilities.
28. The proposed tower and antenna will not cause an increase in traffic generation
or school enrollment. The applicant has indicated that the antenna will be
operated in full compliance with FCC regulations and in a manner that will not
interfere with other electromagnetic signals in the area. Consequently, the
proposal will not adversely affect municipal services.
(b) The essential character of the neighborhood or district in which the
property is located, nor ability to develop adjacent property for appropriate
uses.
29. The DRB agrees with the applicant's assertion that the tower and antenna will
not attract significant attention because of the high density of buildings and other
development in the area. Furthermore, it does not obstruct any scenic views. As
the applicant has indicated, the tower and antenna functioned on the property for
many years and were temporarily removed during renovations of 364 Dorset
Street. Consequently, the tower and antenna will not adversely affect the
character of the area or the ability to develop adjacent properties.
(c) Traffic on roads and highways in the vicinity.
30. The tower and antenna will have no effects on traffic in the area.
(d) Bylaws in effect.
31. The proposed tower and antenna is in keeping with the Zoning Regulations and
the proposed Land Development Regulations.
(e) Utilization of renewable energy resources.
32. The tower and antenna will not affect renewable energy resources.
(0 General public health and welfare
33. The applicant has indicated that the antenna will be used in full compliance with
FCC regulations. Therefore, the DRB concludes that the tower and antenna will
not adversely affect public health or welfare.
34. Pursuant to Section 14.10(G) of the proposed Land Development Regulations, a
conditional use permit shall expire if the conditional use ceases to operate for
more than six months for any reason. Furthermore, pursuant to Section 27.302 of
the Zoning Regulations and Section 17.04(B) of the proposed Land Development
Regulations, conditional use approval shall expire six months from the date of
DRB approval if the project is not pursued. Therefore, the proposed
\d rc\sbreaity\DR-03-01.fcd. d oc
7
FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS & DECISION
SOUTH BURLINGTON REALTY CORP.
#DR-03-01, #CU-03-08 & #SD-03-06
telecommunications tower must be used within six months of a conditional use
approval, and its use cannot be discontinued for a period of more than six
months or conditional use approval shall expire. Furthermore, if conditional use
approval expires, the tower and antenna must be removed.
REVISED FINAL PLAT
35. The revised final plat application was submitted on February 12, 2003 and
therefore must comply only with the Zoning and Subdivision Regulations.
Primarily the proposed changes involve the reinstallation of a 53 ft. tower with a
13.2 ft. attached fiberglass antenna. The total height of the structure is 66.2 ft.
above ground level. Although the tower and antenna have been used historically
on the subject property, previous plans submitted by the applicant did not include
the tower and antenna. Furthermore, previous final plat approvals have not
included the tower and antenna. Therefore, the final plat must be revised to
include the tower.
36. The applicant has submitted antenna details, and photographs showing the tower
and antenna structure. In addition, the plans have been hand revised to indicate
the location of the tower. However, the final plat must be professionally revised to
indicate the location and height of the tower and antenna structure.
PUD REVIEW STANDARDS
Pursuant to Section 26.15 of the Zoning Regulations, PUDs shall comply with the following
standards and conditions:
(a) Will not result in undue water or air pollution. In making this determination
the DRB shall at least consider (1) the availability and capacity of municipal
sewer facilities or the nature of soils and subsoils and their ability to support
waste disposal adequately, (2) the elevation of land above sea level and in
relation to floodplains, (3) protection of ground and surface water through
appropriate vegetative buffers and retention structures, and (4) all applicable
State of Vermont regulations.
37. The proposed changes will not result in undue water or air pollution.
(b) Will have sufficient water available for the foreseeable needs of the
development.
38. No changes to the water service or allocation are proposed.
(c) Will not cause unreasonable soil erosion or reduction in the capacity of the
land to hold water so that a dangerous or unhealthy condition may result.
39. The proposed changes will not affect the capacity of the land to hold water or cause
soil erosion.
W rOs brea Ity\D R-03- 01. fcd. d oc
8
FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS & DECISION
SOUTH BURLINGTON REALTY CORP.
#DR-03-01, #CU-03-08 & #SD-03-06
(d) Will not cause unreasonable highway congestion or unsafe conditions with
respect to the use of highways, existing or proposed.
40. The proposed changes will not affect traffic levels in the vicinity of the subject
property.
(e) Will not cause an unreasonable burden on the ability of the city to provide
educational services or facilities.
41. The proposed changes will not impact the South Burlington School District.
(0 Will not cause an unreasonable burden on the ability of the city to provide
municipal or governmental services and facilities.
42. The proposed changes will not affect the provision of municipal services.
(g) Will protect important natural resources, including streams, wetlands, scenic
views, wildlife habitats, and special natural features.
43. The proposed changes do not affect natural resources within the PUD.
(h) Will not have an undue adverse effect on the scenic or natural beauty of the
area, is aesthetically compatible with surrounding developed properties and
will protect rare and irreplaceable natural areas and historic sites.
44. The DRB concludes that the project is aesthetically compatible with surrounding
developed properties. No historic or rare and irreplaceable natural areas are known
to occur on the subject property.
(i) Will provide convenient allocation and distribution of common space in
relation to proposed development and will conform to the city's recreation
plan.
45. The changes do not affect the distribution of common space within the PUD and do
not conflict with the South Burlington recreation plan.
(j) Will provide efficient layout and high -quality installation, construction, and
maintenance of public facilities and conform to the city's street and utility
plan.
46. No changes to public facilities are proposed.
(k) Will provide for cooperation with adjoining properties in the extension of
roadways, drainage facilities, and utility lines.
47. The proposed changes do not affect plans for the extension of roadways and utility
lines.
(I) Will conform to the city's Comprehensive Plan.
\d rc\s brealty\DR-03-01.fcd.d oc
9
FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS & DECISION
SOUTH BURLINGTON REALTY CORP.
#DR-03-01, #CU-03-08 & #SD-03-06
48. The proposed changes are in keeping with the goals and objectives outlined in the
Comprehensive Plan.
SITE PLAN REVIEW STANDARDS
In accordance with Section 26.154(b) of the Zoning Regulations, PUD applications shall
be reviewed under the site plan requirements. Pursuant to Section 26.102 of the Zoning
Regulations, the DRB may consider the following in its review of a site plan application:
(a) Pedestrian and vehicular access.
49. No changes to vehicular or pedestrian access configurations are proposed.
(b) Circulation.
50. No changes to circulation patterns are proposed.
(c) Parking.
51. No additional parking is necessary.
(d) Landscaping, screening, and outdoor lighting.
52. No changes to the landscaping plan are proposed.
SUBDIVISION DEVELOPMENT REQUIREMENTS & DESIGN STANDARDS
Section 400 of the South Burlington Subdivision Regulations establishes general design
requirements for subdivisions according to the following categories.
Streets
53. This is not relevant to the current proposal.
Lot Layout
54. No changes to the lot boundaries are proposed.
Pedestrian Access
55. No changes to existing pedestrian access facilities are proposed.
Water
56. The proposed changes do not affect water service to the subject property.
\dre\sbrea1ty\DR-03-01 Jcd.doc
10
FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS & DECISION
SOUTH BURLINGTON REALTY CORP.
#DR-03-01, #CU-03-08 & #SD-03-06
Fire Protection
57. Section 405 of the Subdivision Regulations requires that the plans are reviewed by
the Fire Chief or a designee to insure that adequate fire protection can be provided.
The Fire Chief has no concerns about the proposed tower and antenna.
Sewage Disposal
58. The proposed changes do not affect wastewater service to the subject property.
Utility Lines
59. The proposed tower and antenna do not require modifications to existing utility lines
on the subject property.
Outdoor Lighting
60. In accordance with Section 408 of the Subdivision Regulations, outdoor lighting
shall be provided in compliance with the site plan and performance standards set
forth in the Zoning Regulations. The applicant has proposed lighting of some of the
wall mounted signage on the property. The proposed fixtures are shielded and
downcasting with the exception of the fixtures that will illuminate the general project
sign within the tower at 368 Dorset Street. These fixtures will be directed upward
from the ground to illuminate the tower signage. As indicated already, the
applicant needs to submit photometric data for these fixtures.
Storm Drainage
61. The proposed changes do not affect stormwater drainage on the subject property.
Monumentation
62. No changes to lot boundaries are proposed.
Open Space & Recreation Areas
63. As stated already, the proposal does not affect the distribution of open space within
the PUD.
Site Preservation & Landscaping
64. Section 412 of the Subdivision Regulations establishes standards for site
preservation and landscaping. Section 412.3 establishes guidelines for erosion and
sediment control during and after construction. The proposed changes will not
involve construction, which would require such site preservation measures.
Excavation & Grading
65. No excavation or regrading of the site is proposed.
\d rc\sbrealty\D R-03-01.fcd. d oc
11
FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS & DECISION
SOUTH BURLINGTON REALTY CORP.
#DR-03-01, #CU-03-08 & #SD-03-06
Energy Conservation
66. Pursuant to Section 414 of the Subdivision Regulations, the proposed subdivision
shall be designed to take advantage of solar radiation and landscaping should be
designed to provide wind barriers and reduce heat loss and heat gain. These
measures are not relevant to the current proposal.
Utility Easements
67. No utility easements are necessary.
Directional Signs & Addresses
68. Addresses shall be appropriately labeled on the final plat. Addresses for each lot
are indicated on the plans, but these are hand revised. The final plat must be
professionally revised to indicate the current building addresses.
DECISION
Motion by Mark Boucher, seconded by Roger Farley, to approve design review application
#DR-03-01, conditional use application #CU-03-08, and revised final plat application #SD-
03-06, subject to the following conditions:
All previous approvals shall remain in effect except as amended herein.
2. This project shall be completed as shown on the plans submitted on February 12,
2003, and April 4, 2003, as amended by this decision, and on file in the
Department of Planning & Zoning.
3. The applicant shall obtain a zoning permit for the tower and antenna within six
months of this decision pursuant to Section 27.302 of the Zoning Regulations and
Section 17.04(B) of the proposed Land Development Regulations.
4. If after a zoning permit is issued for the telecommunications tower it remains
unused for a period of more than six months, conditional use approval for the
tower shall be deemed expired and the tower and antenna will need to be
removed.
5. The parking designation signs shall be considered incidental signs exempt from
the requirements of Section 12(b)(3) of the Sign Ordinance, which limits the
number of directional signs to a maximum of three.
6. A Master Signage Permit must be issued to South Burlington Realty Corp. by the
DRB, prior to the issuance of any new individual sign permit for the property.
7. Pursuant to Section 9(g)(2) of the Sign Ordinance, the free standing signs shall
have a base condition that is attractively maintained year road.
\dre\sbrea1ty\DR-03-01 Jcd.doc
12
FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS & DECISION
SOUTH BURLINGTON REALTY CORP.
#DR-03-01, #CU-03-08 & #SD-03-06
8. Pursuant to Section 20(b) 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.
9. Wall mounted signs shall be limited to 2 per tenant within the PUD.
10. 360 Dorset Street shall be exempted from the Master Signage Permit for the
subject PUD.
11. Prior to the issuance of any new permits on the subject property, the following
changes to the Master Signage Plan must be accomplished:
a. To offer more consistency in terms of color and graphic style, the Master
Signage Plan must be revised to establish parameters for font styles,
sizes and colors to be used on all future individual sign bands added to
the free standing signs for 364-368 Dorset Street.
b. The applicant shall explore replacing the red background at the top of
each free standing sign for 364-368 Dorset Street with black or another
color acceptable to Staff.
C. The Master Signage Plan must be revised to provide the width and length
parameters for all free standing signs on the property.
d. The Master Signage Plan must be revised to indicate the extent to which
wall signs shall project from the facade in inches.
e. The Master Signage Plan must be revised to include dimensional
measurements for all directional signs and include the maximum lettering
height.
The Master Signage Plan must be revised to include dimensional
measurements of all window signs and include measurements of the area
of the windows to which they are attached.
g. If the incidental parking designation signs must be included in the Master
Signage Plan.
12. If fixtures other than the Lightron Series 90-HO-CW are proposed for tenant wall
sign lighting, the applicant must submit cut sheet and design details for other
such fixtures.
13. Prior to the issuance of any new permit for subject property, the applicant must
submit photometric data for the proposed lamps to illuminate the general project
sign on the tower at 368 Dorset Street. Furthermore, if fixtures other than the
Corodado 710 are proposed, the applicant must submit cut sheet and design
details for other such fixtures.
\d rc\sbrealty\DR-03-01.fcd.doc
13
FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS & DECISION
SOUTH BURLINGTON REALTY CORP.
#DR-03-01, #CU-03-08 & #SD-03-06
14. No sign shall be left illuminated after midnight unless the premises are open after
midnight, in which case no sign shall be left illuminated after the close of
business.
15. The final plat must be recorded in the office of the city clerk within 90 days of this
approval. Prior to recording, the final plat must be endorsed by the DRB and the
following changes must be made:
a. The final plat must be professionally revised to indicate the location and
height of the tower and antenna structure.
b. The final plat must be professionally revised to indicate the current street
addresses of each building within the PUD.
16. Pursuant to Section 509 of the Subdivision Regulations, no changes, erasures,
modifications, or revisions shall be made on the final plat without DRB approval.
In the event that such subdivision plat is recorded without complying with this
requirement, the plat shall be considered null and void.
17. The applicant shall obtain a certificate of occupancy/compliance from the
Administrative Officer prior to use of the tower and antenna.
Chuck Bolton —jLea/nay/abstain
Mark Boucher —yea/nay/abstain
John Dinklage —Lea/nay/abstain
Roger Farley — eaea/nay/abstain
Michele Kupersmith —not present
Larry Kupferman —yea/nay/abstain
Gayle Quimby —not present
MOTION CARRIED by a vote of 5-0-0.
L +:
Signed this day of� ) i �: = 2003, by
/Y 2;�
John Dinklage, Chair
\dre\sbrea1ty\DR-03-01.fcd.d oc
14