Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2006 05 08 Public Hearing 203 Aesthetic Review Sonoma COMMISSION AGENDA ITEM 203 Consent Informational Public HearingX Regular May 8, 2006 Meeting MGR./DEPT Authorization REQUEST: The Community Development Department- Planning Division requests the City Commission remove from the table and hold a Public Hearing for the Aesthetic Review of Sonoma Pointe, a 424-unit Engle Homes townhouse development to be located in the Town Center on the 40 acres immediately south of S1. John's Landing on the east side of Tuskawilla Rd. PURPOSE: The purpose ofthis Agenda Item is for the Commission to consider, provide comment on, and approve, approve with conditions and/or modifications, or disapprove the Aesthetic Review for the 424-unit townhouse development on what is presently a 40-acre wooded site immediately east of Tuskawilla Road, south of St. John's Landing, bordering the Cross-Seminole Trail, on what is described as the"Schrimsher property," within the Town Center. The purpose of the Aesthetic Review approval process is 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. APPLICABLE LAW AND PUBLIC POLICY: Ordinance 2003-43, Aesthetic Review Standards, City of Winter Springs Section 9-601. Approval prerequisite for permits. Section 9-605. Submittal requirements. City Code of Ordinances (Town Center District Code) Section 20-320 through 20-327. Schrimsher Development Agreement, executed June 26, 2000 CHRONOLOGY: Aug. 9, 2004- Concept Plan Approved by City Commission Sept. 27. 2004- Refined Concept Plan Approved by City Commission April 24, 2006- Aesthetic Review Tabled until a rear elevation provided CONSIDERATIONS: The applicant has provided a rear elevation (attached). Previously, the applicant has had two formal submittals before the City Commission. These were in August and September of 2004. At that time a concept and a modification to the concept was presented which included up to 436 townhouse units for the 40-acre site. May 8, 2006 PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 203 Page 2 of 5 One of the primary comments given at time of conceptual approval (related to Aesthetic Review), was the need for "several architectural styles of buildings to provide variety and interest" and "buildings facing the major streets need to be of premium design incorporating finer architectural detail and exterior finishes". At that time, Engle committed to satisfying this comment and indicated that the architectural details and finishes have not been finalized by the architect and that the applicant would bring the finished drawing elevations to the City for review. Therefore, this Aesthetic Review is being presented to the Commission prior to presenting the Final Engineering for the express purpose of approval of the architectural detail and styling of the buildings. 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 of height and their associated materials; (d) elevation of proposed exterior permanent signs or other constructed elements other than habitable space, if any; ( 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 of whether 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 project has a beautiful setting in the Town Center, sandwiched between Wetland Park conservation area on the south and a conservation area against lake Jesup to the north. The development is oriented along the north side of the proposed "Spine Road". The project entrance is perpendicular to Spine Road and includes a boulevard terminated with a round-about. Project signage announces the arrival to Sonoma Point with an 8'x 8'x16' bell tower at the center, flanked by 4'x4'x 8' columns on each side (see page 30). The round-about has a three-tiered fountain as a focal point to the boulevard and at the base of the public park (Grande Park), and identifies to everyone that they have arrived some place special. A significant feature of the project is the major pedestrian corridor that connects the two central lake retention areas and which provide convenient access to off-site shopping, schools, personal services and civic functions, and creating a walkable neighborhood. Buildings are spaced with gaps large enough to provide vistas to the lake from the major streets and terminate at a lake overlook area with places to sit. Each lake retention area includes a fountain. The combination of the retention lakes and Grande Park provides a nice balance and focus for the community. The streets are located to make the lakes feel like public amenities. Breaks between the buildings have been aligned to create views of the lakes. Although the Concept Plans approved on Aug. 9, 2004 & Sept. 27, 2004, included graphics illustrating this basic arrangement, the site plan has been refined and improved. May 8, 2006 PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 203 Page 3 of 5 (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 JOC Phase 2A is the closest development that is currently under review in the immediate area. Spine Road will connect to JOC Phase 2A. This development is proposed to include a mix of town homes, condominiums, retail and office uses. (3) The plans for the proposed proj ect 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 of the proposed site, with respect to one or more of the 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 eighty-one townhouse buildings which include a total of 424 units. All units are three story structures and are approximately 1800 SF in size. The buildings include 4, 5, and 6 units. As a result of the City's directive, the Applicant has tried to accomplish architectural variation. Each unit within the building has a variation in styling from the other units within the same building. This is intended to create a feeling of individual townhomes rather than that of a project or "apartment type" buildings. This variation is achieved through the use of colors, material, textures, rooflines, and design details. The Applicant has gone through numerous modifications to refine the proposed building fa~ades with the intent of providing variety and interest. The resulting units have been much improved as a result. However, it is a difficult task to take 424 three-story units that are essentially the same square footage and vary them both internally and externally to give the appearance of variety and meet the City's criteria when the structure is essentially the same. The project could be enhanced by the development becoming more diversified by the addition of an "Avery Park" style single family home component, condominiums, or a different townhome building style. (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. Stucco is the predominant finish material for the buildings with some accents of hardie plank and cultured stone. Each unit has a separate color. Buildings include porches and stoops with a variety of railing types and detailing. Side and front windows include mullions (slender dividing strips that divide a window into panels as opposed to undivided plate glass) and some windows include shutters. The rear and side elevations do not include any headers above the windows or other detailing other than window mullions. Parking is provided in a 2-car garage off of a pass (alley) or along the street. May 8, 2006 PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 203 Page 4 of 5 (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. Towne Center guidelines, SR 434 design specifications) and other applicable federal state or local laws. The aesthetic review package with its associated amenity package, meets the basic intent of this article, however, could be improved by the inclusion of single family units as a response to the directive of the Commission for architectural variety and premium designed buildings along the major streets. (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. Townhouses are constructed of concrete block with a stucco finish and hardie board and cultured stone on portions of the front elevation for accent as well as and to provide variation in the building texture. The pool building is a single-story structure constructed of stucco and cultured stone to blend in with the community. Buildings include porches and stoops that face directly onto streets or retention lakes. Building rears and garage access are off of passes (alleys) as illustrated on the Site Plan included as sheet 3. The project incorporates many site and architectural enhancements. These include retaining pond fountains encircled by a pedestrian network of sidewalks with benches, a large public park area with a gazebo, community swimming pool, pool clubhouse, dog park, sand volleyball court, bell tower, and entry fountain. Two access connections are provided to the Cross Seminole Trail. Also included are upgraded regulatory signage (street signs, speed limit signs, etc.) and street lighting. FINDINGS: · The Applicant has tried to address the Commission's directives given at the time of Concept Plan Approval for architectural variety (within the confines of a three-story townhouse product). As a result, the building elevations include a lot of variation in railings, colors, materials and detailing. · Since the last Commission Meeting, Dover-Kohl's office has provided the following comments: If every building type includes the same color palette in the same order, the buildings may appear too cookie cutter; Porch roofs should not be continuous between Units A&B but should be broken up with a space or height variation to help differentiate that the units are separate; and All windows should have some form of a header, including those with shutters and on the rear. · The project incorporates many site and architectural enhancements. · The public park area and lake retention areas will be an asset to Winter Springs. · Variations from the Town Center Code as incorporated in the concept plan and in this aesthetic review package (including the proposed entry signage) must be memorialized in a Development Agreement. Additionally, the Development Agreement must address the conveyance of the Grande Park in lieu of the small neighborhood squares required under the previous Schrimsher Development Agreement. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Aesthetic Review Approval be granted to Sonoma Pointe contingent on May 8, 2006 PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 203 Page 5 of 5 the Applicant incorporating the changes mentioned in Dover-Kohl's comments (noted above) and contingent on any further guidance the Commission deems appropriate. ATTACHMENTS: A. Rear Elevation (The Commission indicated at the 2006-04-24 Meeting that the Aesthetic Review Attachment did not need to be provided again.) COMMISSION ACTION: Sonoma Pointe at Town Center 6-UNIT REAR ELEVATION 7a Sonoma Pointe at Town Center 6-UNIT REAR ELEVATION 9a Sonoma Pointe at Town Center 5-UNIT REAR ELEVATION 11a Sonoma Pointe at Town Center 5-UNIT REAR ELEVATION 13a Sonoma Pointe at Town Center 4-UNIT REAR ELEVATION 15a Sonoma Pointe at Town Center 4-UNIT REAR ELEVATION 17a Sonoma Pointe at Town Center Left Side Elevation-A Right Side Elevation-A Left Side Elevation-B Right Side Elevation-B 18a