The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2007 08 13 Public Hearing 501 Aesthetic Review Sonesta PointeCOMMISSION AGENDA I Consent I I ITEM 501 August 13, 2007 Meeting Informational Public Hearing X Regular ~, MGR. j~'/~n ~ . ., REQUEST: The Community Development Department- Planning Division requests the City Commission hold a Public Hearing for modifications to the Aesthetic Review of Sonesta Pointe (previously known as Sonoma Pointe), a 289-unit Engle Homes duplex/townhome/single-family detached development to be located in the Town Center on the 40 acres immediately south of St. John's Landing on the east side of Tuskawilla Rd. PURPOSE: The purpose of this Agenda Item is for the Commission to consider, provide comment on, and approve, approve with conditions and/or modifications, or disapprove the revised Aesthetic Review for the 289-unit 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, Ciry of Winter Springs Section 9-601. Approval prerequisite for permits. Section 9-605. Submittal requirements. City Code of Ordinances (To~vn 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 Apri124, 2006- Aesthetic Review Tabled until a rear elevation provided May 8, 2006- Rear elevation provided and item removed from the table. Vote to delay further discussion until the next meeting so that the City Manager might negotiate some aesthetic improvements. May 22, 2006- Update provided to Commission regarding the negotiations with the Applicant to diversify the unit types. [Previously, the development included 424 townhouse units, all similarly sized (approximately 1800 SF).] August 13, 2007 PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 501 Page 2 of 4 Au~ust 28, 2006 - Revised aesthetic review approved by City Commission Ma~14, 2007 - Concept Plan revision approved by City Commission CONSIDERATIONS: The Applicant has revised their aesthetic review submittal for the purpose of adding a detached single-family unit to the mix of unit types in the development. The onlv chanqe from the previousiv approved aesthetic review is the addition of the detached sinqle-familv units. The revised submittal includes the same architectural elements and styles and applies them to the detached single-family units. These revisions respond to the comments generated during the conceptual review where the need was indicated 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" as expressed during the conceptual review. The new submittal includes 289 total units comprised of 103 townhomes, 72 duplex (paired villas) units, and 114 detached single-family units on 40' and 50' lots. 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 (~ 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 and a conservation area against Lake Jesup. The development is oriented along the proposed "Spine Road" (Alderbrook 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 planters on each side (see page 56). The round-a-bout has a community icon feature (page 57) 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. August 13, 2007 PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 501 Page 3 of 4 (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 JDC Phase 2A is the closest development that is currently under review in the immediate area. The proposed Alderbrook Road is a collector road which will connect from Tuskawilla Road to SR 434 through the JDC Phase 2A development which will include a mix of townhomes, condominiums, retail and office uses. (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 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, roof line, hardscape improvements, and height or design elements. The project includes twenty-one (21) townhouse buildings with a total of 103 units. All units are three story structures. The units offer a variety of sizes with the smallest being approximately 1800 SF. The buildings include 4, 5, and 6 units. Additional variation is achieved through the use of colors, material, textures, rooflines, and design details including stoops, porches, and balconies. 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. (4) The plans for the proposed project are in hartnony 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 accents of hardie plank and foundations of cultured stone. There are six (6) color groupings that will be applied to the different building elevations. 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 all windows have trim around them. Parking is provided in a 2- car garage off of a pass (alley) or along the street. (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. The aesthetic review package with its associated amenity package, meets the intent of this article. (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 units are constructed with a stucco finish and Hardie board and cultured stone along the foundation. Some of the paired villas include a cultured stone fa~ade for the first floor. This is an August 13, 2007 PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 501 Page 4 of 4 especially nice feature. The detached single-family units include the use of cultured stone as a watermark near the base of the units and a mixture of Hardie board and stucco on the remainder of the facades. FINDINGS: ^ The project incorporates the same architectural style for the detached single family units as was approved for the townhome and paired villa units. ^ The building elevations include variation in building materials, colors, and detailing in response to Staff and Dover-Kohl's comments. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the modification to the Aesthetic Review Approval to include detached single family units be granted to Sonesta Pointe contingent on any further guidance the Commission deems appropriate. ATTACHMENTS: A. Revised Aesthetic Review Submittal COMMISSION ACTION: e~one~t~ pointe Addendum Apri127, 2007 Revision 1- May 4, 2007 c~WY~y!±sarv,c•,N~n~,~nni~n~.tiid;~~~~,~rm.n~~~wn„~m~.~P~ni~~m~~~~rn~ i'IA~11i1 ~Y ^1 1 YiSQ~IN~iS rcpnduMnrtnnanit~d6yan, rv.MlM~mnxitmipenm+.~v~nfn~m(i~tinACVaiein,loi. contents ProposPd ~irEgln Fam~i/ i-iorr,es 40' Lot Plan 1 ........................................................... ...4 40' Lot Plan 2 ........................................................... ...5 40' Lot Plan 3 ........................................................... ...6 40' Lot Streetscape ................................................. ...7 50' Lot Plan 1 ........................................................... ...8 50' Lot Plan 2 ........................................................... ...9 50' Lot Streetscape ................................................. .10 Buiidinq Ca~tr~~i Proposed Site Plan ...................................................12 Building Control Streetscapes ...............................13 Building Contro] Streetscapes ...............................14 ENGbE Sonesta Pointe . Addendum . April 27, 2007 . GQY1 GSS0~~5 2 proposed single fa s estimated sales price 40' lot homes $400,000 to $500,000 50` lot homes $500,000 to $600,000 40' Lot - Plan 1 2,000 - 2,100 S.F. streetscape diversity: Three elevation styles for each floor plan ENGbE Sonesta Pointe • Addendum . April 27, 2007 . CQYIOSSOQO~~S 4 ~'Rp-~'~" EL'~Y4'flC}t~l A F~`t' ~1GtSTiC1N b ~ F~X+R' lFJ.~Vh.Ti4N G ' 40` Lot - Plan 2 2,300 - 2,400 S.F. ~NGLE Sonesta Pointe . Addendum • April 27, 2007 ~ GQY14~pQG~(S 1~oN'r ~.~va~- ~ #~rst' ~a~ ~, r-~rrr ~a~+ c 40' Lot - Plan 3 2,600 - 2,704 S.F. ~~~~~ Sonesta Pointe . Addendum = April 27, 2007 . CGy1 GSSOGG~~S 6 I~~r.rr ~e.TU~v ~ ~r ~Ya-no~ ~ t~otrr r~~'~- c ~ 40' Lot Streetscape ENGbE Sonesta Pointe ~ Addendum • April 27, 2007 • CGY1 GSSOQG~IS 50'Lot- Plan 1 streetscape diversity; Three elevation styles for each floor plan 2,500 - 2,600 S.F. ENGLE Sonesta Pointe ~ Addendum . April 27, 2007 • CCy1 CSSO~l~S 8 I ~r~rrr ~va~nvN A ~~'r ~~~~av a ~tr~.v,x~av c ; 50' Lot - Plan 2 2,800 - 3,000 S.F. E~ `~~ Sonesta Pointe ~ Addendum • A ril 27, 2007 p • CG11'1 GSSOQG~~S FRp~-'T' ~A'f{C3~1 ~t~, fRONT ~I.EVbTiON 6 Fp~t1" fIEYATiO~N C 50' Lot Streetscape ENGLE Sonesta Pointe ~ Addendum . A ril 27, 2007 p ~ CQ11'I4SSOCIO~~S 10 . U I I ~~~ J Proposed Site Plan ents 289 x 2.8 = 809 Total 579 231 809 ~ ~;~ 1 ~~~~ - .~~ . ^? 3:a_1~; `~f`1tiC.~-: - ..::~.~ ~.~.~.~ti~~ ~ ~UPLEX ~ TC7WN}SCME Q ~ ~or ^ a~ ~ ProductType Units Townhomes 1D'3 Duplex 72 9-0' Lots 70 50' Lots 44 Total 289 LNGbE Sonesta Pointe • Addendum . April 27, 2007 ~ CQ'1~1 GSSOQG~~S ~z Building Control Streetscapes Same Floor Plan, Different Elevation - 2 lot Maximum _ ~ ~ .. ENGbE Sonesta Pointe ~ Addendum • April 27, 2007 . GGy1 GSlOGG~~S 13 Same Paint Color - Minimum 5 Lot Separation Building Control Streetscapes Same Style, Different Color - 2 lot Maximum Same E ~- J "t ENGLE Sonesta Pointe = Addendum . A ril 27, 2007 . P CQYt GS50qG~IS 14