Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2007 04 09 Public Hearing 504 Aesthetic Review of Your Health Food Store CITY COMMISSION ITEM 504 Consent Information Public Hearin2 X Re2ular March 12. 2007 Meeting f.,MGR. jY/DEPT Authorization REQUEST: The Community Development Department requests that the Commission hold a Public Hearing for the Aesthetic Review of the Your Health Food Store building mounted multi- tenant sign proposed for the Tree Swallow Drive side (south) of the JDC Town Center Building 16. 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 and aesthetic appropriateness set forth in Subsection 20-321 (b) (1) of the Town Center Code. Section 20-327 (f) (1) states that "All signs shall be subject to the Discretionary Aesthetic Review by the DRC in order that signs are consistent and in harmony with the Winter Springs Town Center. APPLICABLE LAW AND PUBLIC POLICY: Section 9-601. Approval prerequisite for permits. Section 9-605. Submittal requirements. Section 20-321.Town Center] Administration. Section 20-327. Architectural Guidelines. CONSIDERATIONS: The applicant, Your Health Food Store, is leasing approximately 40 linear feet of building frontage (2 bays) in Building 16. The lease site is one bay (approximately 20') away from the east end of the building. The 40 SF (2' x 20') internally illuminated channel letter building-mounted identification sign is located between the approved locations, but occupies approximately the same sign area (2' x 10' x 2 bays) as was depicted for 2 separate signs on the Building 3 aesthetic review. One approximately 2' x 10' sign was depicted on the approved rendering for each of the three bays at that end of Building 16. The applicant's portion of the building front (25' tall x 40' wide = 1,000 SF) allows for a maximum of 100 SF total sign area, pursuant to Subsection 20-327 (t) (3). This 10 percent of the fa<;ade area calculation may include both building mounted signage and window signage. Although staff informed the applicant that any proposed window signage beyond 4 square feet requires Commission (DRC) approval, the applicant has declined to request any window signage. April 9, 2007 Public Hearing Agenda Item 504 Page 2 of4 The applicant's submittal includes the proposed signage (option 1) and 4 less desirable alternatives. Architect Rick Maxian, of Randall Paulson Architects, originally recommended against the location of a building mounted sign between the areas depicted on the renderings approved for aesthetic review. He subsequently reviewed this particular sign at this particular location on the building (including a field visit, as part of a larger inspection of the Town Center) and has stated that he believes it is acceptable. Scott Kirkpatrick, a Doran Company spokesman has stated that company's approval. James Dougherty, of Dover Kohl & Partners (the City's Town Center consultant), has reviewed the sign for consistency with TND standards and has stated that he finds this sign acceptable as proposed on the building facade. The submittal requirements for aesthetic review are set forth in Section 9-605 and include: (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. Subsection 20-321 (b) (1) of the [Town Center] Code states that the City Commission (in its capacity as the development review committee for developments with in the Town Center) "shall have authority within reason for approving all aspects of site planning and exterior architecture, including aesthetic appropriateness.. . and other site specific matters not delineated herein." Section 20-327 (f) (1) states that "All signs shall be subject to the Discretionary Aesthetic Review by the DRC in order that signs are consistent and in harmony with the Winter Springs Town Center." Pursuant to Section 9-603 of the City Code, 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 proposed signage appears to adequately address this criteria and fit appropriately with the building, sign age, and other features. (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 proposed signage appears in harmony with existing and future development in the area. 2 April 9, 2007 Public Hearing Agenda Item 504 Page 3 of4 (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 of the 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 sign age is dissimilar to other existing signs on Building 16 on the Doran site (e.g. the dance studio and Merle Norman) in both style and location. This is the only sign, so far, that is not located where it was depicted on the aesthetic review rendering. (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. The sign is different in that it spans between and into portions of previously approved sign age areas depicted on the aesthetic review rendering. (5) The proposed project is consistent and compatible with the intent and purpose of this 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. Staff was initially opposed to this location, consistent with the architect's initial reaction. However, after consultation with the architect and Dover Kohl, staff believes the signage may be consistent and compatible with the intent and purpose of the Town Center 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. This signage appears to be on par with other signage within the Doran development. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff found the Applicant's request for Aesthetic Review in compliance and recommends approval. A TT ACHMENTS: A Location maps B Approved Building Elevation C Proposed Sign 3 April 9, 2007 Public Hearing Agenda Item 504 Page 4 of 4 COMMISSION ACTION: 4 " -" -- .---......... ---- ~~"-.-... "...... 2603 ATTACHMENT A "\:~ ~ --_ I --~ J Continued Pg 2604 v......~ H G .'0_" F D c 159 B 1 Continued Pg 2605 2 3 1 MILE .., "". 5 Continued Pg 2606 6 7 '.'. t A 4 8 NOTES: Municipal Address Map Book ~__""__"~oo PRINTED: REVISED: Apr 2005 1: 2 : City of Winter Springs, FL p:;e 2606 200 , Feel 3. Developed By: Southeastern Surveying & Mapping Corp. i I I 1- " ~ j - ~ I L: - I , ill /'--. ia/ - "- YI ,/", , , ~ ~... " , !P , "'.. . "" I:/IG Cyp l'i'<>-,s I?O"lD If 5 !P 0,sk1 . 117~ l?o"lD ..... >< ?J m n m. i~l~ tJ~ iI! B ~ II! C IiI .i ~ FIELD COpy BP# i2 0 0 7 - n 0 6 2 S' CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS o ~ 'llo (1)", 3 -~ ~z 10 -\ ,[11 0;0 :f{J) :I'll .~ ~~ . Cl _ (J) ~~~ ~ ~ \, .. ~mll m~ ~ I i ~ ;;;lm~ 1~I~D@li ni~111 s. < I I I I fl I I 1< 3 ! 3 I Ii II ,I I" I II : qH IH ~I~: ~ ~ ~ ~111 ~ I~ ! lil~ P I ti . !':' j ~ n~; ! m i LDCHRANE Consuning (') :::;z: Engineers 0, ~ ...?-=:- & Surveyors -..---.- SITE 00'''.'''''' PlAN WINTER SPRINGS TOWN CENTER PHASE I (~ANSION) STA.TE ROAD 434 &; TUSKAWl..LA RD CI1Y OF WlNlER SPRINGS, FI..OR/OA JAlAES ooAAil COMPANY ENGINEER a. -- _J.~"~ R.l.J:.'_ ""'.. ').I. ~ CICJa IUl.