Simsbury, CT - Design Review Board Minutes

These minutes are for informational purposes only. For official minutes, please contact the Town Clerk's Office

DESIGN REVIEW BOARD

I. CALL TO ORDER

The Regular Meeting of the Design Review Board was called to order at 5:45 P.M. in the Main Meeting Room of the Simsbury Town Offices. Present were Chairman Emil Dahlquist, Board Members Linda Kennedy, Charles Stephenson, Kevin Gray, Scott Barnett, Matt Koch, Senior Planner Len Tolisano.

II. APPOINTMENT OF ALTERNTES

Chairman Emil Dahlquist appointed Scott Barnett as an alternate for Stephen Ossias and Matt Koch as an alternate for John Stewart.

III. PRESENTATION, DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE VOTE

a. Application of Alan Wolfson, Owner, for a Site Plan Approval for a sign for the Simsbury Deli located at 563 Hopmeadow Street.

Rick Wolfson represented Alan Wolfson, owner, regarding the application for a Site Plan Approval for a sign for the Simsbury Deli.

Chairman Dahlquist informed the board that the sign is already in place and referred to the memorandum from the Planning Staff dated October 4, 2001 stating that the sign had been placed on the structure without Zoning approval and that the sign is smaller than the size permitted by the Zoning Regulations. Chairman Dahlquist suggested that even though the sign is currently in place, that it be treated as a new application.

Chairman Dahlquist told Mr. Wolfson that typically what the board does is give the applicant the opportunity to present any information about the project regarding sign location, materials it is fabricated from, illumination, etc.

Mr. Wolfson stated that the sign is illuminated by two lights above the sign that were existing.

Chairman Dahlquist asked Mr. Wolfson what the sign material was.

Mr. Wolfson stated it is plywood with a foam burger/sandwich.

Chairman Dahlquist referred to the Design Guidelines regarding signage asking whether the sign had been developed in context with the setting, for example, how does the sign reflect the character of the neighborhood and town.

DESIGN REVIEW BOARD

Mr. Wolfson replied that he feels the sign reflects the character of the neighborhood very well since it indicates what the business is about; that the reason for the design was to emphasize the "fast food" and "take out" aspects of the business; that the idea for the sign came from the Brookside Bagel Sign located across the street; and that they had used the same designer and sign maker as the Brookside Bagel establishment. Mr. Wolfson thought the Deli sign was very similar in context and concept and made a connection between the two businesses.

Chairman Dahlquist asked Mr. Wolfson for his input on the sign's relationship to the site and the architecture, for example, does the sign design conform to the architectural character of the building in terms of the historic era, style, location and size.

Mr. Wolfson stated that the sign was smaller than the size permitted by the Zoning Regulations, and that the color and material are similar to those in the building.

Chairman Dahlquist asked if the sign identified the business and street number and avoided advertising.

Mr. Wolfson replied that the sign identifies the business but does not contain the street number and since the sign only contains the name of the business that it does not contain advertising.

Chairman Dahlquist asked if the materials, color and texture of the sign conform to the architectural character of the building and to the general character of the larger neighborhood.

Mr. Wolfson replied that the sign relates well to other area businesses such as the bagel shop, Simsbury Bottle Shop and The Onion restaurant and that the sign does not stand out in any unusual way.

Ms. Kennedy asked if there should be a unified sign plan for the location.

Mr. Tolisano said that if there are two or more signs that a unified sign plan is required.

Chairman Dahlquist said that in a unified sign plan, the goal is not to replicate signs but to clearly show a relationship between signs, i.e., similar in size, background, lettering or location on the building.

DESIGN REVIEW BOARD

Mr. Wolfson said that there was positive response to the sign from patrons and town residents, and that business has increased since putting the sign up.

Mr. Koch said that the board's concern was not whether or not people liked the sign but its compliance to the Design Guidelines and that clearly the sign does not comply with the guidelines. He further stated that had Mr. Wolfson come to town hall prior to having the sign designed and installed, he would have been given a copy of the Design Guidelines and would have been able to work within these guidelines.

Mr. Wolfson felt that with regard to the questions Chairman Dahlquist had asked, that the sign did fit the character of the architecture, neighborhood and town.

Mr. Gray stated that there was no unified theme in the signage.

Mr. Wolfson stated that he was only aware of the dimension requirements for the sign since the sign design is similar to other signs in the immediate area and that he was unprepared for the questions and information required by the board.

Mr. Barnett stated that the unified sign requirements most likely would apply to this signage even though there is an existing sign on the Simsbury Bottle Shop that does not to conform to the Design Guidelines but existed prior to the guidelines having been developed.

Mr. Stephenson felt that the applicant had made a thoughtful argument regarding the sign in relationship to other signs in the neighborhood.

Chairman Dahlquist informed Mr. Wolfson that if he contacted the town prior to having the sign designed, they would have provided guidelines for signage, and that he could come for an informal review before the board with a rough schematic of the sign that does not necessarily have to be professionally designed. The idea being that the applicant can be put on the right track.

Chairman Dahlquist asked for a motion on the application.

Mr. Gray made a motion that application of Alan Wolfson, Owner, for Site Plan Approval for a sign for the Simsbury Deli located at 563 Hopmeandow Street not be approved because of failure to comply with the unified sign plan requirements and made a recommendation that the plans be revised and resubmitted.

DESIGN REVIEW BOARD

Mr. Koch amended the motion to add that the sign does not comply with the Design Guidelines.

The amended motion was seconded by Ms. Kennedy and passed unanimously.

Chairman Dahlquist informed Mr. Wolfson that the board is recommending to the Zoning Commission that the application not be accepted and that he should revise and resubmit the design for Simsbury Deli sign.

Chairman Dahlquist informed the board that Mr. Sawitzke invited him and Mr. Stephenson to sit in on the meetings with the DOT regarding the traffic signal development. There were two meetings, one of which he attended and one which Mr. Stephenson attended.

Chairman Dahlquist said that the DOT was more than willing to sit down with representatives of the town and hear their concerns regarding the galvanized pole concept for traffic signal support. In regard to the arm concept, given the geometry of some of the intersections, 65-foot long arms would be required. The DOT is willing to accept the darker painted type, and in fact there are some new signals at the Powder Forest entrance. The fixtures are dark green and the poles are galvanized. Chairman Dahlquist said that they suggested to the DOT that faceted poles be used so as to add detail at the sidewalk level; a single extension arm where appropriate; and cabling where appropriate. Chairman Dahlquist, Mr. Stephenson and Mr. Sawitzke walked through the downtown center looking at each intersection to determine the configuration that was least intrusive.

Mr. Stephenson said that he attended the second meeting at which the town set out its priorities in terms of how the intersections would be handled. The lowest priority would be the long arms with big stanchions; that the most favored method, wherever possible, was to have stanchions and cables with no arms and that in the middle would be shorter arms. Mr. Stephenson said that the DOT was very accommodating and that in the redesign they would take into account the scale of the community and would use cabling wherever possible. The DOT will come back with the new plans; will have a walk through so as to see each intersection; will use dark painted poles with the understanding that if a pole needs to be replaced, it will be replaced with a galvanized pole that the town can

DESIGN REVIEW BOARD

paint if desired. The DOT will make every attempt to obtain fluted poles if they can be competitively bid out. The signals will be repositioned in the intersections for safety reasons and the DOT will move the control box in front of the Phelps House around the corner.

Chairman Dahlquist informed the board that he had received the proof of the Design Guidelines; that several changes had to be made; that they will go back to the printer; and should be completed by mid next week.

V. CORRESPONDENCE

Chairman Dahlquist informed the board that he had received a letter from the assistant to the First Selectman asking for a brief explanation of the duties of the Design Review Board, accomplishments in fiscal year 2000/2001 and goals for fiscal year 2001/2002 for the next Annual Report.

VI. STAFF REPORTS

Mr. Tolisano informed the board that he had spoken to a representative of the Getty Station on Hopmeadow Street regarding modifications to the site including a canopy over the pumps and moving the pumps back. Mr. Tolisano told the representative that the town had completed the Simsbury Center Study and that they should develop a plan in accordance with the study and that they should appear before the Design Review Board for an informal presentation as soon as possible with preliminary plans.

Mr. Tolisano informed the board that the town purchased the land at the intersection of Main Street and Winthrop Street which is currently just a grassy area and suggested that two or three lights on the site might encourage groups such as the Garden Club to work on the site. He asked if the Design Review Board would make a recommendation regarding the installation of the lights.

Mr. Koch asked if there is a long-range lighting plan for Tarriffville. Mr. Tolisano responded that there was not.

Chairman Dahlquist said the board would defer any action on the request until the next regular meeting.

DESIGN REVIEW BOARD

VII. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF SETPEMBER 25, 2001 MEETING

Mr. Barnett noted that his name had not been included in the listing of board members present.

Chairman Dahlquist requested that, since the minutes go to the Zoning Commission, when a board member asks a question of an applicant, that said question and response be included in future minutes so that the discussion between the board and the applicant can be clearly understood by readers of the minutes.

A motion was made by Mr. Koch, seconded by Mr. Barnett and passed unanimously to approve the minutes with the noted correction and comments.

VIII. ADJOURNMENT

On a motion made by Mr. Stephenson, seconded by Mr. Koch and passed unanimously, the meeting was adjourned at 7:05 P.M.

Respectfully submitted,

____________________________________________