[NOTE: These minutes are made available to the public prior to Design Review Advisory Committee acceptance.]
Members absent: Joseph Hickey and Tony Margiotta.
Minutes from the June 13, 2006 meeting. - Jay Hallinan made a motion to approve the minutes as presented. Steve Hine seconded the motion and all voted in favor.
Minutes from the July 5, 2006 meeting. - Steve Hine made a motion to approve the minutes as presented. Bruce Bockstael seconded the motion and all voted in favor.
Minutes from the September 6, 2006 meeting. - Andrea Boyle made a motion to approve the minutes as submitted. Steve Hine seconded the motion and all voted in favor. Jay Hallinan abstained from voting.
Nermin Duric, a member of the Bosnian-American Cultural Center represented the applicant. Bruce Bockstael noted that the applicant had addressed many of the issues and concerns discussed at the previous DRAC presentation. He asked the applicant whether the access point to the porch would serve as the main entrance. Mr. Duric responded that it would. Mr. Bockstael then asked whether the applicant had received approval from the Inland Wetlands and Watercourses Agency. Mr. Duric responded that they had. Chairman Bockstael noted that aside from the construction of a parking area and an access ramp, there were no other exterior renovations currently planned and therefore there would be no comments on the treatment of the building. Mr. Duric described having difficulties complying with the parking requirements. Mr. Bockstael asked whether the reduction in parking would have to be approved by the Zoning Board of Appeals. Ms. Bradley described the application through the Planning and Zoning Commission as being a Special Permit due the proposed change in use. As such, the PZC may waive the immediate installation of up to 25 percent of the required parking spaces however; the applicant would need a reduction in excess of the 25 percent. Ms. Bradley noted that the applicant does not currently meet the minimum requirements and the Planning and Zoning Commission has asked the applicant to seek a shared parking agreement with the neighboring property owners.
Steve Hine commented that the applicant had addressed the issues highlighted by the DRAC at the applicant's last appearance. Jay Hallinan noted that the site looks more proportional now in terms of the amount of parking spaces. Ms. Bradley discussed the need for the applicant to return before the DRAC if a sign is proposed in the future.
Jay Hallinan made a motion to approve the application as revised. Andrea Boyle seconded the motion.
The members voted as follows (4-0-0)
Aye: Bockstael, Hine, Hallinan and Boyle.
Nay: None.
Abst: None.
Jimmy Vu discussed his proposal to install a new 2' -10' (20 s. f.) wall mounted sign. He noted that the space was previously used as a photography studio. He discussed plans to remove an existing 5' - 3" window and replace it with a larger 6' - 6" window. Mr. Vu also proposed to replace the security door with a glass sliding door.
Mr. Vu noted that the space has 26.3 ft. of linear building frontage and because he is not proposing a freestanding sign, he would be allowed 2 s. f. of signage per lineal foot of building frontage or 52.6 s. f. He described his proposal as being in compliance.
Mr. Vu discussed the proposed awning over the entranceway. Andrea Boyle asked the applicant if he intended to have signage on the awning. Mr. Vu responded that he did not. Jay Hallinan asked the applicant what type of material would be used for the awning. Mr. Vu responded that it would be canvas with a metal frame. Bruce Bockstael discussed his concern over lining up the edge of the sign with the edge of the window and the edge of the awning and the edge of the entrance. Steve Hine voiced concern over the applicant's ability to match the improvements with the existing vinyl siding.
Jay Hallinan noted that while the DRAC are supportive of the applicant making improvements to the building and are not voicing any objections, he would like to see a solid proposal showing the design intent as opposed to the DRAC having to talk in general terms and suggested continuing the application to the next meeting. Mr. Hallinan is concerned that if the DRAC accepted drawing of this caliber from any applicant and it represents something general and the end result turns out to be very different than what was represented or agreed upon. Andrea Boyle asked if the mounting bar of the sign would be visible. Mr. Vu noted that it would be gray. Ms. Boyle asked if he would be willing to paint the mounting bar to match the color of the siding behind it. Mr. Vu said that would not be a problem. Mr. Bockstael noted that the DRAC is concerned about what is happening on the Silas Deane Highway and pointed out that the applicant's drawings were not detailed enough to be considered construction drawings. Ms. Boyle stated that she would like to see the proposed improvements presented as a whole. Mr. Hallinan would like to see a drawing that shows what type of materials are involved. He discussed his concern regarding the patching and being able to blend the existing siding. The Committee asked the applicant to revise his plans and resubmit.
Vinnie DeFillipo discussed proposed renovations, additions and site improvements. He indicated that he would square off the northwest corner roofline of the existing building and add a 2nd story and constructing an identical building to the southeast of the existing building. Bruce Bockstael asked Mr. DeFilippo what uses he envisioned occupying the space. Mr. DeFilippo indicated that it would all be used for offices. Mr. Bockstael asked what Boards or Commissions had reviewed or would need to review this application. Ms. Bradley noted that the DRAC was the 1st to review the proposal but that the application would ultimately need approval from the Inland Wetlands and Watercourses Agency, the Planning and Zoning Commission and possibly the Zoning Board of Appeals if the applicant proceeds with expanding the non-conformity of the existing structure by adding the 2nd story.
Mr. Bockstael noted that a lot of detail was missing from the site plan including a zoning matrix that demonstrates compliance with the regulations, dimensions showing building separation and width of parking stalls, accommodations that provide for handicap accessibility and a landscape plan. A brief discussion ensued regarding the interior layout and concerns arose due to the accuracy of the stair detail and the proposed office spaces and proximity to stairs/elevator. Mr. Bockstael also commented that the proposed building entrances don't have enough of a presence and that resultantly, the structure resembles a disproportionate house. The Committee asked the applicant to revise the plans and resubmit.
Ramo Feratovic discussed his proposal to install a 4' by 16' (64 s. f.) wall sign at the former Blockbuster Video site. Bruce Bockstael asked the applicant if he knew the dimension of the storefront window. Mr. Feratovic responded that each window is 18' long. Mr. Bockstael noted that instead of having the placement of the proposed sign haphazardly located partially over the door and partially over the window he would like to see it line up with the door. Mr. Feratovic agreed. Andrea Boyle asked about the placement of the other business signs in the plaza. Mr. Feratovic said that his proposed sign would line up with the existing ones. Mr. Bockstael pointed out that while they would line up, there are proportionally smaller. Ms. Boyle asked the applicant how he was planning on treating the evidence of the previous sign. Mr. Feratovic responded that he would utilize the electric plugs for down lighting. His electrician would relocate any of the fixtures necessary to make the lighting fixtures equally spaced. Mr. Bockstael suggested using a patch.
Chairman Bockstael then asked whether the proposal complies with the Zoning Regulations. Ms. Bradley noted that there is 48' lineal feet of building frontage and because there is no freestanding sign on the property, the applicant would be allowed a maximum of 2 s. f. of signage per lineal foot of building frontage or 96 ft. Ms. Bradley then pointed out that the applicant would need to remove the business phone number from the proposed sign. Jay Hallinan commented on the weathering of the face of the building behind the previous sign and discussed the need for the applicant to clean up the remnants. Mr. Feratovic said that he would paint the area. Mr. Bockstael asked what materials would be used. Mr. Feratovic responded that the sign would be aluminum and the lettering will be decals.
Mr. Bockstael stated that the DRAC would like to review a proposal for any new lighting. Jay Hallinan noted that part of the Committee's mandate is to minimize glare. Mr. Feratovic agreed. Mr. Hallinan made a motion to approve the application with the conditions as follows
Mr. Hine seconded the motion.
The members voted as follows (4-0-0)
Aye: Bockstael, Hine, Hallinan and Boyle.
Nay: None.
Abst: None.
Allen Polovani discussed his proposal to install a new 6' by 4' (24 s. f.) freestanding sign. Mr. Polovani noted that there is existing wall signage (channel letters) on the building totaling approximately 25 - 30 s. f. Dance 10 is located on the 2nd floor and Dancer's Closet currently occupies 40% of the 1st floor. Each business will have a 3.3' by 1.5' (4.95 s. f.) "aluminite" resin core aluminum panel with vinyl graphics, fastened to the posts. Mr. Polovani stated that the sign would be located 5' from the property line.
Bruce Bockstael asked how the proposal would impact the compliance of existing wall signage. Ms. Bradley noted that the maximum allowed wall signage would be reduced from 2 s. f. per lineal foot of building frontage to 1 s. f. per lineal foot of building frontage. Ms. Bradley stated that it was necessary to ensure that an issue of non-compliance isn't created. The building has 60' of lineal frontage and approximately 30 s. f. of wall signage, therefore non-conformity will not be created with the addition of the freestanding sign. Mr. Bockstael asked if the applicant was proposing any lighting. Mr. Polovani noted that the business closes at 5 p.m. and that lights would not be necessary. He also noted that the proposed sign also falls under the maximum allowable 32 s. f. Steve Hine made a motion to approve the application as submitted. Andrea Boyle seconded the motion.
The members voted as follows (4-0-0)
Aye: Bockstael, Hine, Hallinan and Boyle.
Nay: None.
Abst: None.
Respectfully submitted,
Denise Bradley, Assistant Planner