Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2007 06 11 Public Hearing 500 Aesthetic Review of Signage Along 17-92 COMMISSION AGENDA ITEM 500 Consent Informational Public Hearing X Regular June 11, 2007 Meeting MGR. /DEPT Authorizati REQUEST: The Community Development Department- Planning Division requests the City Commission hold a Public Hearing for aesthetic review modification ofthe signage along US 17-92 at Mr. Phil Reece's Nursery Road commercial site. PURPOSE: To encourage creative, effective, and flexible architectural standards and cohesive community development consistent with the intent and purpose of Article XI - Minimum Community Appearance and Aesthetic Review Standards. The applicant requests to upgrade 2 of the approved pole signs to monument signs in the approved locations along 17-92. APPLICABLE LAW AND PUBLIC POLICY: Section 9-601. Approval prerequisite for permits. Section 9-605. Submittal requirements. Chapter 16 Signs and Advertising. CHRONOLOGY: Jan. 22,2001- Adoption of Ordinance 2001-03 Annexing the property. Jan. 26, 2004- City Commission adopted Ordinance 2003-43, establishing minimum community appearance and aesthetic review. Mar. 8, 2004- City Commission voted to approve final engineering/site plan. July 12, 2004- Aesthetic Review of Building 3 by City Commission. Nov. 28, 2005- Aesthetic Review of Building 5 by City Commission. August 14,2006 - Aesthetic Review of Buildings I & 4 and Signage by City Commission October 23, 2006 - Ordinance No. 2006-18 (new Sign Ordinance) adopted BACKGROUND: The site was annexed on January 22,2001. At that time, Nursery Road was then a County owned road, lined with immobilized (often junked) automobiles and often blocked offby tow June 11, 2007 PUBLIC HEARING AGENDA ITEM 500 Page 2 of4 trucks and other vehicles. The existing automobile repair shops were in violation of various health-safety regulations. When this site was subsequently brought forward for a Future Land Use amendment, rezoning, and a site plan, residents came forward and voiced concern over the situation at hand and over plans to enlarge the facility, which was oriented heavily toward automobile repair. Issues of concern were subsequently addressed and incorporated into a development agreement at about the same time as the Future Land Use amendment to Commercial and rezoning to C-2 took place. The development agreement divided site development into phases and addressed the park donation, restricting parking in front ofthe businesses along Nursery Road, temporary and permanent on-site parking, landscape buffers and walls, restricting uses adjacent to the residential properties, replacing the existing on-site residential uses with commercial development, traffic analysis, and site illumination. Pursuant to the development agreement and site plan, the owner has demolished some of the old buildings, reconstructed new ones, and constructed masonry walls around the portions ofthe site that abut residentially zoned properties, as well as across from the park. Pole signs were allowed along highway 17-92, within the City of Winter Springs, until passage of Ordinance No. 2006-18, on October 23,2006. The new ordinance amended Section 16-57, prohIbiting permanent pole signs. Although staff believes the applicant still has valid approvals for the pole signs that were approved prior to adoption of the new sign ordinance, the applicant wishes to upgrade the signage to allow the 2 new signs to be constructed as monument signs. The new signs must be on-site, contain not more than 32 SF of copy area on each side, and extend not more than 12' above the adjacent grade. The dimensions depicted on the plans demonstrate compliance with the height and copy area. The locations are on-site. CONSIDERATIONS: The submittal requirements for aesthetic review are set forth in Section 9-605 and include the following: (a) a site plan; (b) elevations illustrating all sides of structures facing public streets or spaces; (c) illustrations of all walls, fences, and other accessory structures and the indication ofheight and their associated materials; (d) elevation of proposed exterior permanent signs or other constructed elements other than habitable space, ifany; (e) illustrations of materials, texture, and colors to be used on all buildings, accessory structures, exterior signs; and (f) other architectural and engineering data as may be required. The procedures for review and approval are set forth in Section 9-603. The City Commission may approve, approve with conditions, or disapprove the application only after consideration ofwhether the following criteria have been satisfied: (1) The plans and specifications of the proposed project indicate that the setting, landscaping, proportions, materials, colors, textures, scale, unity, balance, rhythm, contrast, and simplicity are coordinated in a harmonious manner relevant to the particular proposal, surrounding area and cultural character of the community. The aesthetic review for Building 1 and 4 included signage - building mounted signage and 3 pole signs. The existing pole sign nearest the intersection with Nursery Road and US 17 - 92 was approved to remain - the applicant proposes for it to remain. One other pole sign (for Hub Cap Daddy) was to be relocated and reconstructed to specific locations on-site; the other pole sign was June 11, 2007 PUBUC HEARING AGENDA ITEM 500 Page 3 of 4 to be moved on-site - the applicant requests to upgrade the new signs to meet the new ordinance and the character ofthe community. (2) The plans for the proposed project are in harmony with any future development which has been formally approved by the City within the surrounding area. The site is located within the 17-92 Community Redevelopment Area (CRA). The applicant has been in contact with the CRA and has been encouraged to proceed with the proposed remodeling and new building. The area is primarily surrounded by property under County jurisdiction. The site work and vertical construction has occurred consistent with the approved site plan and aesthetic review (with this exception). (3) The plans for the proposed project are not excessively similar or dissimilar to any other building, structure or sign which is either fully constructed, permitted but not fully constructed, or included on the same permit application, and facing upon the same or intersecting street within five hundred (500) feet ofthe proposed site, with respect to one or more ofthe following features of exterior design and appearance: (A) Front or side elevations, (B) Size and arrangement of elevation facing the street, including reverse arrangement, (C) Other significant features of design such as, but not limited to: materials, roofline, hardscape improvements, and height or design elements. The project includes new buildings and one remodeled building. The monument signs appear consistent with the new stucco buildings and remodeled building. (4) The plans for the proposed project are in harmony with, or significantly enhance, the established character of other buildings, structures or signs in the surrounding area with respect to architectural specifications and design features deemed significant based upon commonly accepted architectural principles of the local community. Location of proposed signage along US 17-92 is depicted in the packet. There currently exists 3 pole signs along US 17-92 that are associated with this development. The proposed monument signs will enhance the character of the area. (5) The proposed project is consistent and compatible with the intent and purpose ofthis Article, the Comprehensive Plan for Winter Springs, design criteria adopted by the city (e.g. SR 434 design specifications) and other applicable federal state or local laws. The 2 monument signs meet the requirements of the city's design criteria as specified in the Code. (6) The proposed project has incorporated significant architectural enhancements such as concrete masonry units with stucco, marble, termite-resistant wood, wrought iron, brick, columns and piers, porches, arches, fountains, planting areas, display windows, and other distinctive design detailing and promoting the character of the community. The styling of these signs is a significant enhancement over what existed in the area and will promote the quality of the community. FINDINGS: · The two (2) proposed monument signs add to the appearance and the quality of the proposed project. June 11, 2007 PUBLIC HEARING AGENDA ITEM 500 Page 4 of4 · The new monument signs would complement the adjacent buildings in the same development. · The two (2) proposed monument signs are consistent with the City's sign regulations. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff has reviewed the Applicant's request to modify the Aesthetic Review to upgrade 2 pole signs to monument signs, has found it to be in compliance with the intent ofthe Code, and recommends that the City Commission approve the request. ATTACHMENTS: A Location map B Aesthetic Review Packet including photo ofthe existing Hubcap Daddy Building from US 17-92 (to be removed and replaced with new Building 4), elevation of proposed Building 1 & 4, site plan, photo of newly constructed Building Three from Nursery Rd., and photos of existing signage and site plan indicating proposed location of signage. C Proposed signage COMMISSION ACTION: I i - _A~~~~NTf \i_ 531 }~__----------1 \~ H ~ ~~---- . I 41 --- G -~ --- F 1065 1200 .i s o o:l EI3 Q) .... rJ) Q) ~ ~--.,~---- 1040 1050 1060 10 0 o 1171 1170 1166 c 377 355 327 -... - --- ----... .... ---- t/) w C) o iE 1162 1158 B --...------ ----- 1107 315 A ~'d...~ Continue Pg 2412 3 4 5 6 8 1 2 7 frJ.: ~. :ff: r-v: 200 . Feel . ~ NOTES: .'.~ ..~ ..vP Municipal Address Map Book ~~...._....~~oo PRINTED: REVISED: Apr 2005 1: 2 : 3 . City of Winter Springs, FL p:;e 2412C Developed By: Sou/hem/ern Surveying & Mapping Corp. ATTACHMENT B ~~ ,i~ z6:iflfS-S3snOH:illV 1\\ :O:i:ill _ _ _ _ _ _ _ L___ _ CC.,i) ~K-- . 1'-~' (~_ II~ f-~ r ~<. ~<- LS':so~+ ~III....... 11YU.J!;V ~:'c' @ . ." I' + LfJ"JoL,1- .:1M ,I . .."..,lo --{'do "). .. 5IS~1ltl'lJ1t ItI.L """.~oInw 06al: YllIlIOU ~~.~---'-l.!!<.X()Q Od 'JNJ 'SN~lSlIa lDIllflOll.0 'H .LlI1IV::>1IVJ\l 'ON""" VI 1N --- ~--- .;, ~" 9N.lIIYJ 11"""'" . ,i~' 41'<';.<'.... ~ ~:::O.; II c-D --- 31A-l --" """"""" , .. il . ~~!i: ii ~ " ~ <;') ~: ~, "'::: ..... : V: ~: , \0' ~,' ~,' ....., ~I ~, - ' . ...,!. ... .,~ ~ .._)(~ K J;. ..,1- ..," +~=~~~_- n1'~~~,:.~~-':F~=-~~_~=_i ~-~_~.=~:;~ !./ ~ ~f; i I I I Il , J I tSNOfDAH :ON ~------l I I I d I ! I'IHI~I ! I I I I I I I I 1:- r I , I I I I I I I I I I l - --------, <C zb o~ t= II <. GiN -'~ UJ II o-UJ ~g ...'" z ~~ :I: 0 ~~ Qz 0-0 ~o- ~6 ~~ ZO- om a: ... NOTE: COMPONENT & CLADDING PRESSURES 1. DESIGN WIND PRESSURE IN FORCE COEFFICIENT '" CONFORMANCE WI SEC 6 OF ASCE 7-02 . 120 MPH REGION. 22.4 PSf. 4. STRUCTURAL STEEL ASTM A36 STEEL PIPE: ( PER F.B.C. 2004 ED. '" 2006 SUPP) ASTM A53 GR. B SQUARE TUBE: fy= 46KSI 2. SOIL SHALL BE CLEAN SAND WITH 5. ALL WELDING SHALL BE IN CONFORMANCE wi AWS A MINIMUM ALLOWABLE BRNG PRESSURE 01.1 (LATEST EDITION) USING E70XX ELECTRODES. Of 2000 PSF AND A MINIMUM ALLOWABLE ALL WELDS SHALL BE fULL PENETRATION WELDS AT LATERAL PASSIVE PRESSURE ( FOR ISOLATED AT ALL POINTS Of CONTACT UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE. FOR POLE) Of 600 PSF 1fT. . 3. CONCRETE: SHALL BE 3000 P.S.I. @ 28 DAYS. 6. PRE-ENG RED SIGN fACE BY OTHERS. () I ('.j ~ I ('() ~ 6vl/ '//f~ '-0" 6'-0" 4'-0" -I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I '-0" 5"4' STD PIPE DIREG T EMBED GRADE (i > ~ ('() A CONC. FTG .<1 J 3'-6"SO t SIGN ELEVATION (SCALE ~" = I') x <( TI I: "'t N E1)SECTION@SIGNC.ABINET NTS WIND VELOCITY IMPORTANCE FACTOR EXPOSURE CATEGORY (MMRF) INTERNAL PRESSURE COEFFICIENT 1 20 MPH I I I I 81 I I 1.0 ORLANDO, FL. PH. 321-303-6699 ENRIQUE A. TORRENS, P.E. # 33379 624 BUCKINGHAM DR. OVEIDO, FL 32765 PH/FAX 407-977-3689 NOT VALID FOR CONSTRUCTION UNLESS SIGNED AND SEALED B +0 -0 22.4 psI 1.2 PAREESE PROF. ROLLY TRITON BLDG. 1055 NURSERY RD. WINTER SPRINGS, FL JOB' 70205 JIM RAGSDALE DATE: SHEET" 04-25-07 1 OF 1 ~ "~ C':l :: 0..,); S ~ o ~ Ut-IJ OJ ... tx: ~ OJ Q) "8 ::l E ad ~;.~ ~,.~~ ~....~ ~I.~~, ~~ ~ ~~ "'", <i"?e .,;~ 8 1:)(1'" ;;.. .S r::- ; boo 0. ",C!;e ... _ 0 ~ - u g U ~ ~ . 50 ~"'@! -< 8'~ . .... ~ "'~~ 9r-~ .~~i ~::!.w , ~ . ]~e c:l . 0 u ~~> ~ =,f"'l; o " Co en >< E 'V" ~uo , C 0 ~ ... 0 ... @~~ ~~?r \';;~~9 ].;; ~ o 0.... ~~ .. ~ ~ oS '" ... <= o~ .~ e- ... .. ... ... o Q. o 8 ".