Design Review Board Minutes
January 22, 2008
Regular Meeting
I. CALL TO ORDER
Chairman Dahlquist called the meeting to order at 5:30 PM in the Main Meeting Room of the Simsbury Town Offices. The following members were present: Kevin Gray, Charles Stephenson, Mark Naccarato, Rita Bond and Anthony Drapelick. Also present were Mr. Hiram Peck, Director of Planning, and Alison Sturgeon, Commission Clerk.
II. APPOINTMENT OF ALTERNATES
Chairman Dahlquist appointed Commissioner Bond to serve in the absence of William Gardner and Commissioner Drapelick to serve in the absence of Richard Schoenhardt.
III. PRESENTATION, DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE VOTE
a. Application of Williams S. Walsh, Lessee - Town Farm Dairy, J. William Dryden, Agent, for Signage on property located at the Town Farm Dairy, 73 Wolcott Road.
Mr. Dryden stated that they are looking to double the size of the sign but keep the same graphics on the sign; the sign will be able to still fit between the two posts. They would like the sign to be carved out of wood, although this would depend on the cost. On the bottom of the current sign it states, "Jersey Milk in Glass Bottles". Town Farm Dairy currently sells pasteurized, whole, 1%, skim and raw organic milk.
Commissioner Bond questioned if the hours of operation of the store or products would be listed on the proposed sign. Mr. Dryden stated that the hours of operation would not be on the sign, although they would like to have a dropdown sign during the holiday season letting people know they have eggnog for sale. Chairman Dahlquist stated that the Design Review Board likes signs to identify but not to advertise.
Chairman Dahlquist questioned if the sign would be lit and if there would be a road number identification on the sign. Mr. Dryden stated that the sign would not be lit. The Commission agreed that a number identification should be on the sign. Mr. Dryden stated that they could put the street number on the post of the sign.
Commissioner Naccarato stated that he would like to see the street number on the sign or posts. He feels that the size of the proposed sign and the dropdown sign would be appropriate. The Guidelines state that a sign can include information describing products sold or services provided. Commissioners Bond and Drapelick agreed that the sign would look better bigger, as proposed.
Commissioner Stephenson stated that he agrees that the sign should be larger, although he would suggest that the size of the sign be 4 feet wide but only 3 feet in height with a dropdown sign. This would still allow an expansion for the lettering area. The applicant agreed with the suggested dimensions. Commissioner Stephenson felt that the colors and design of the proposed sign would look nicer than the current sign.
Commissioner Gray stated that although they do not usually like the hanging sign, this would be appropriate for an agricultural use. He stated that he does agree with the changes that Commissioner Stephenson has suggested, and would also like to see a number identification on the sign. The only thing he feels is not clear is that there is a farm store in this location. Commissioner Gray stated that this application is lacking; the applicant is showing what is already there, they are not showing what they are proposing to do. Commissioner Stephenson stated that they would be setting a precedent if they do not have enough information and do not ask the applicant to return with what they are proposing.
Chairman Dahlquist explained to the applicant that there are two parts to the approval process. The first is if there is sufficient information to vote on the application and second is the motion and vote. There is a general consensus on this Board that everything the applicant is proposing is appropriate if they had a more accurate description of the proposed sign. It is now a question of if they need to ask the applicant to come back before the Board one more time with the final plans. Mr. Peck handed the Board a copy of the graphics of the proposed sign, although the proportions now needed to
be changed. Mr. Peck agreed that a street number should be located on the framework of the sign for emergency service access. Because the graphics were presented to the Board, the Board agreed that they should act on this application. Chairman Dahlquist stated that landscaping is not an issue with this Board, although the applicant should be aware that the Zoning Commission would need this information.
Commissioner Gray motioned that the following referral be made to the Zoning Commission. That the Design Review Board find this application in its current form generally consistent with the Guidelines for Community Design and recommends approval by the Zoning Commission with the following conditions: 1) that the applicant agrees to make the dimensions of the sign 4 feet wide by 3 feet tall, with the provision of a hanging sign; 2) that the street number be added either on the crossbar or on the sign post; 3) no lighting will be involved with the sign; 4) in consideration of the location of the sign, landscaping may not be appropriate for this site. Commissioner Bond seconded the motion, which was unanimously approved.
IV. INFORMAL PRESENTATION
a. Informal presentation by Jeffrey P. Euting, MBA, CFT, Stewardship Capital, LTD., for Signage to be located at the Cannon Medical Building, 720 Hopmeadow Street.
Jeffrey Euting, Stewardship Capital, and Steve Walker, Grove Property Fund, presented this application. Mr. Euting stated that his office is located on the side entrance of the Cannon Building. People cannot access his office from the main entrance of this building. He is requesting to add a sign, which will be matching the previously approved sign for the previous tenant. He is proposing to mount this sign as a blade sign on wrought iron brackets; the sign would also be lit. Mr. Euting included picture samples of the brackets and lighting and how the proposed sign will look. Regarding the light, Mr. Euting stated that the lights would be flush against the building and directed at the sign.
Commissioner Gary questioned where the previous sign was placed. Mr. Euting stated that the previous sign was mounted low against the building under the arches; it was not very visible. Commissioner Gray stated that the previous sign was in this location because this Commission would not allow a blade sign. Commissioner Stephenson questioned if the dimensions of the sign would allow for the proposed lighting. Mr. Walker stated that the lighting would be located high on the brick; they would come out approximately 6 inches. Commissioner Gray questioned if this office would be open at night that the sign would need to be lit. Mr. Euting stated that during the winter months, the sun goes down very early and the lights would be necessary during that time of year. Mr. Walker stated that the sides of
the building are very dark.
Regarding the previous signage on this building, Mr. Peck stated that the sign was the same size. The only change for this application is the mounting. He questioned if there was any foot traffic under or around the sign. Mr. Euting stated that the sign would be located above the parking lot; there is no foot traffic in that area. Because the office is toward the back of the building, without a blade sign sticking out, people would not see the sign until they are past the building, and only if they were looking behind them to see the sign flush against the building. Chairman Dahlquist stated that this Board should be looking at this application as new, and not to question why a blade sign was not approved during the previous application. He feels that a blade sign would be very desirable.
Regarding the information on the sign, Commissioner Naccarato stated that the Guidelines stipulate that there should not be advertising or business slogans on a sign. He feels that the image of the tree on the sign is acceptable without the wording underneath. Commissioner Bond agreed; there is too much wording on the sign. She feels that the company name and logo would be enough information on the sign. Mr. Euting suggested that along with the company name and logo, he could put his name on the sign also. Chairman Dahlquist stated that he did not feel that this would be too much information if his name were included. Commissioner Stephenson felt that there was too much wording on the sign also; at least one line should be eliminated.
Chairman Dahlquist stated that these blade signs exist on the side roads in the Town Center. He feels that this is desirable and would be in keeping with this area. He questioned about the ironwork on top of the bracket. Mr. Euting showed the Board what the proposed brackets would look like. Commissioner Bond stated that the blade sign would be helpful for people to locate his office driving by.
Chairman Dahlquist questioned the lighting. He is concerned with surface mounted wiring showing if the lighting is mounted on the brick. Also, the lights will be seen; the light will be directed and seen from one direction. He stated that this Board typically likes to see a down light being shielded from the public right-of-way so there is no glare from the sign. The proposed lighting will be a little bit above the sign angled down. He suggested halogen lights on the bracket that shine the light directly on the sign. This allows the illumination of the sign without causing a glare problem.
Mr. Peck stated that the applicant might need a variance if the sign projects more than 50 inches from the building.
There was a consensus on the Board that the graphics with the changes proposed are sufficient and that the size and scroll brackets are acceptable. Also, the lighting should be revised to be sourced from the brackets supporting the sign and illuminated by small, white halogen lights on either side of the sign.
Commissioner Naccarato questioned if the applicant had considered locating the sign closer to the corner and the stairs. Mr. Euting stated that the thought was to keep the sign closer to the road so it was more visible.
Commissioner Gray motioned to change the agenda so that this informal presentation be changed to a formal application. Commissioner Stephenson seconded the motion, which was unanimously approved.
Commissioner Stephenson motioned that the following referral be made to the Zoning Commission and that the Design Review Board find this application in its current form to be generally consistent with the Guidelines for Community Design and recommends approval by the Zoning Commission with the following conditions and that the applicant agrees to make the following modification more closely with the intent and principles of the Guidelines as noted herein, as presented on drawing titles, "Simsburytown Shops", dated 12/27/07: 1) the modifications with respect to the wording of the sign, the small wording, "Grow Your Future", will be removed, although the logo will be retained; and that the words, "Registered Investment Advisor" will be removed from the sign; 2) the lighting will be modified
as currently proposed to be bracket mounted on the brackets themselves, small halogen light source similar to the lighting currently on the Café Luna sign on Wilcox Street.
Mr. Peck questioned if the bracket was acceptable in this location.
Commissioner Drapelick seconded the motion, which was unanimously approved.
As a design consideration, Chairman Dahlquist stated that the Design Review Board understands the limitation in the Zoning Regulations for a 15 inch maximum blade signage, however, in this particular case, given the size and location of the building and the height above the ground, the Design Review Board feels that the 36 inch dimension being proposed by this applicant is in keeping with the Design Guidelines. Similar to the signage on Wilcox Street, this is consistent with that particular application. The Design Review Board also feels that the blade signs on side streets between Hopmeadow and Iron Horse are an attractive feature for many of the businesses.
Commissioner Naccarato thanked the applicant for the presentation and for the information provided. This helps the Commissioners expedite the review process.
Chairman Dahlquist stated that there was a special meeting on December 6, 2007, regarding the Eno entrance. He showed the drawings that came out of that meeting. The drawings showed the existing and proposed plans. At that December 6th meeting, they decided to eliminate the walk to create the same 22-foot wide entrance with an alcove. The Veteran's stone and the benches would also be moved. They would like to see 5-foot planters on either side of the granite stairs; these could possibly be donated. Also at that meeting, Commissioner Stewart's idea was to plant a low hedge along the base to screen the retaining wall and another similar to that as an entrance gateway by the sidewalk. The Commissioners had also discussed the Bluestone. Commissioner Naccarato stated that with the scale of the
building, the front lawn is rather short and they were visually trying to get as much of a ceremonial entrance to the stairs as they possibly could. Chairman Dahlquist stated that he has shown these plans to the Main Street Partnership and to Mr. Sawitzke. Also, there is approximately $80,000 set aside which is allocated for the front entrance of Eno. He stated that the Main Street Partnership is also interested in fundraising for certain items, such as the clock tower.
V. DISCUSSION
a. 2008 Budget Request
Chairman Dahlquist stated that he recently discovered that there was a deadline for the budget and needed to move rather quickly. One of the ideas being discussed was this Board's involvement with the Planning Commission and the Zoning revisions and the preparation for the PDD. He stated that after the Victor Dover presentation, his understanding was that there was a great deal of support for getting Mr. Dover back into Town for a consultation to introduce his ideas and to get into a dialogue about how best to approach mixed-use development. He stated that Mary Glassman was very supportive of this idea. It was her recommendation to follow up with Victor Dover's organization. Chairman Dahlquist stated that all three Commissions felt that the Town Center was the most important piece in Town with relation to
the north, south, and other potential developable sites of a large scale and that the emphasis should be on the Town Center. Although, Victor Dover's recommendation was to deal with three different areas and evaluate one in relation to the others, he had stated that they cannot be treated independently without some kind of impact to the others. Initially, the idea was to do a Charette for the Town Center only. Chairman Dahlquist stated that he got the numbers from Victor Dover's office and put the application in; he thought this could be a project for the Design Review Board to assist them in putting together a Charette. During subsequent meetings with the Chairman of the Zoning and Planning Commissions and Mr. Peck and Mary Glassman, there was a consensus that they should be considering all three areas if they were thinking about a Charette approach. At this time, Mr. Peck was asked to contact Mr. Dover's office to get a proposal with an anticipated
cost, which was approximately $300,000 - $500,000. Ms. Glassman felt that approximately half of that money could be covered by available money. They will also be pursuing other grant sources to raise the balance of the money needed. There will be a follow-up meeting on Thursday, January 24th to discuss this further.
Commissioner Gray questioned how much money actually went into the budget. Mr. Peck stated that $250,000 went into the budget. Chairman Dahlquist stated that they would like to get Mr. Dover on board then go to the mixed-use regulations. This would help the Zoning Commission so they would have a set of guidelines to go by. This would also help the Design Review Board in updating the Design Guidelines for the Town Center, north and south. Chairman Dahlquist stated that it is great to see all of the Commissions working together.
VI. CORRESPONDENCE
There were none.
VII. STAFF REPORTS
There were none.
VIII. APPROVAL OF MINUTES of November 27, 2007 and December 6, 2007
The Commissioners made two changes to the November 27, 2007, minutes.
Commissioner Gray made a motion to approve the minutes of the November 27, 2007, meeting as amended. Commissioner Stephenson seconded the motion, which was unanimously approved.
Regarding the December 6, 2007, minutes, Chairman Dahlquist stated that there were not enough Commissioners present tonight that were present at that meeting. These minutes were tabled to the next meeting.
IX. ADJOURNMENT
Commissioner Drapelick made a motion to adjourn the meeting at 6:50 PM. Commissioner Gray seconded the motion, which was unanimously approved.
________________________________________
Kevin Gray, Secretary
| 
