Design Review Board Minutes 02/23/2015 SPECIAL MEETING
DESIGN REVIEW BOARD MINUTES
FEBRUARY 23, 2015
SPECIAL MEETING
I. CALL TO ORDER
Secretary, John Carroll called the Design Review Board Special Meeting to order at 5:31 p.m. in the Board of Education Conference Room of the Simsbury Town Offices.
II. ROLL CALL
The following Board Members were present: John Carroll, Jonathan Laschever, Anca Dragulski, Anthony Drapelick, Ron Perry and Paul Lanza. Also in attendance were Hiram Peck, Director of Planning; Janis Prifti, Clerk; and other interested parties.
III. APPOINTMENT OF ALTERNATES
No alternates were seated.
IV. DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION
a. Application #14-48 of John M. McCarthy, Agent; Chestnut Hill Associates of Simsbury, LLC, Owner; for a Site Plan Amendment for The Ensign House at Chestnut Hill, consisting of 35 living units, on the property located at 690 Hopmeadow Street (Assessor's Map G11, Block 132, Lot 053). Zones SC-1 and SC-3. (received 11/17/2014; decision must be rendered by 02/02/2015)
Application #14-48 was read into the record.
The Applicant's architect reviewed adjustments to the plan since their last presentation that were made due to survey information received regarding the grade along the south property line, location of wetlands on adjacent property, and based on DRB's input from the last meeting; the property survey along the south side showed a steep grade and dramatic slope toward Ensign-Bickford with wetlands at the slope bottom. The Board was shown a site plan of existing conditions and a plan for the proposed development with 7 units in the existing building and 7-car garage for those units, and 14 units in each of the 2 new buildings – one building along the south property line and one along the east property line. The Applicant's architect noted the south building has been moved east in order to not disturb any portion of the slope with a minimal portion in the buffer zone; because of the proximity to the building along the east line, a connected covered stair area between the buildings was proposed; the west end of the south building would conform to the end of the slope with the building fronting Hopmeadow Street stepping down from 2 1/2 to 2 to 1 story providing a softer scale further from the street; the 7 car garage would be broken up into two 2-car garages and one 3-car garage. The architect showed the Board an elevations of the east building facing Drake Hill incorporating a front entrance option with steps, door, roof, and walkway to Drake Hill; the southern elevation connecting two buildings through covered stairs; the left side of the south building would be wider because it is over the parking spaces providing improved unit views on that end; the right side of the south building would have 3 additional units and allows for stepping down from 2 1/2 to 1 story; the 2 and 3-car brownstone garages would have hip roofs; the trash area adjacent to a garage would be screened by a low stone wall with screen above and two swinging doors around the enclosure would look nice and tie into the development. The Board was shown the new design layout with before/after views from Hopmeadow Street, the intersection, and Drake Hill. The side of the added 2-car garage would be partially visible and the existing trees would remain with scrub removed; various points of access were noted. The Applicant's architect indicated there would be parking for 78 cars or 2 per unit, including the 28 garage spaces, which is 2 more spaces than required; the outside spaces are currently unassigned, which may be reconsidered.
The Board commented that moving the south building to the east would typically decrease the number of units, but in this case 3 units have been added; the Board expressed concern that the site would be overbuilt. The Applicant's architect believed the added town house softens the building end and the upper left layout was the best way to accommodate parking and minimize the narrow space between the buildings, and the 7-car garage was separated into smaller units because of Board comments that it seemed too big plus it would be more convenient to the first floor front and town house units; the Board recalled a previous discussion about garage siding. The architect noted the existing building exterior would be restored using historic state and federal credits; a flag pole was suggested for the front of the development. The Applicant would return for further discussion regarding signage.
Board members reviewed the new site renderings again noting the connection between the buildings looks like one large building, and noting their need to stay off the sloped area. The Board reiterated that this proposed development pushes the limits of density and it might be better to keep the open space between the buildings. The architect indicated moving the building significantly decreases the amount of parking with the narrowest space between the buildings at 35 feet only at the corner, which they believe would be best connected with a low roof and daylight between them rather than a dark narrow wind-blown space. The Board discussed eliminating a unit and keeping 45 feet between the buildings. The architect noted they did not have the survey at the previous meeting and there is a practical need to stay out of the slope with minimal construction in the buffer and the parking was moved to get 5 feet from the top contour, although they are still close to the setback line in the new proposal. The architect indicated they went to the Wetlands Commission for approval and moving the building to the west would cause more of the building to be in the buffer.
The Board noted a previous concern regarding the view from the street and that this design improves upon that, and took another look at the street view renderings showing many of the structures well hidden. Regarding density and visibility concerns, the Board discussed the ramifications of the project's more urban location in Town Center next to a factory and suggested more attention to having design details on the end building facades similar to the main building, e.g. canopies, brackets, etc. The Board noted the need to review this Application and others in the context of the Guidelines for each area. The Board noted that this is the first project of its kind in Town Center and sets a precedent. While Board members continued to be concerned about the density of the project and felt it was overbuilt, the project was well presented with lower roof lines with the corner pushed back and less visibility to people driving by and fell within the Guidelines. The Zoning Commission Chairman commented their previous review similarly reflected DRB's comments and noted the Applicant's effort in revising their plan in response; Zoning will look at the revised proposal and decide whether it is consistent with Town Center Code.
Commissioner Drapelick made a motion to approve Application #14-48 of John M. McCarthy, Agent; Chestnut Hill Associates of Simsbury, LLC, Owner; for a Site Plan Amendment for The Ensign House at Chestnut Hill, consisting of 35 living units, on the property located at 690 Hopmeadow Street (Assessor's Map G11, Block 132, Lot 053). Zones SC-1 and SC-3, as presented, with the added recommendation for the corner to be less dense.
Commissioner Perry seconded the motion, and it was passed with 5 in favor and 1 opposed.
b. Application #15-03 of Lorri DeBattisto, Agent; Shepherd of the Hills Evangelical Lutheran Church, Owner; for a site plan amendment for the expansion of the existing building on the property located at 7 Wescott Road (Assessor's Map I03, Block 402, Lot 004B). Zone R-40. (received 02/02/2015; decision must be rendered by 04/08/2015)
Application #15-03 was read into the record.
The Applicant's engineer explained the building originally built in the late 60's has structural issues, including: 1) water coming in through an ellipse skylight area that would be replaced with a gable in a similar finish to what they currently have; 2) the main 3 front doors have moisture damage in the beam system and they proposed moving the wall 2 1/2 feet past the existing structure line, adding a 5-foot overhang in glass with pillars to protect the area and for people to be dropped off in a protected area, and changing from 3 to 2 doors and window entry in a horizontal vinyl presentation; the front color would be a light gray with white trim complementing the light blue building. The Board discussed the moisture issues resulting from Rhino paint.
The Board commented positively on the proposed design and believed it would improve the building entry, as well as increase space for the 80 members.
Commissioner Laschever made a motion to approve Application #15-03 of Lorri DeBattisto, Agent; Shepherd of the Hills Evangelical Lutheran Church, Owner; for a site plan amendment for the expansion of the existing building on the property located at 7 Wescott Road (Assessor's Map I03, Block 402, Lot 004B). Zone R-40, as submitted.
Commissioner Lanza seconded the motion, and it was passed unanimously.
V. INFORMAL DISCUSSION
a. Signage and awning at 720 Hopmeadow Street (Assessor's Map G10, Block 227, Lot 001-2). Zones SC-1 and SC-3.
The owner proposed turning an 894 sq. ft. space on the first floor of the Canon Building into a retail space turning a side entrance facing the parking lot into the tenant's main entrance including, replacing brick pavers in the worn patio area, replacing the guard rail around the patio, and adding 2 shed-type awnings over windows on each side and a domed awning over the main entrance door. The Building Inspector agreed to the handrails for aesthetics with access from the opposite side of the building due to the historic character of the building to avoid building an outside ramp; the slope up to the stairs to a ramp was described as much less than 30 inches. Access to the tenant space would be through a common open corridor shared with a first floor medical facility and there would be no change to parking or handicapped bathrooms, etc. It was explained the space may be used as a design studio for antiques, gifts, and special events and they will return soon with a formal application including patio repair, guard rail replacement, awnings; review would also be required for colors, signage, and potential logo on the building. The Board suggested black awnings could be very elegant.
VI. CORRESPONDENCE/ANNOUNCEMENTS
Town Staff noted: 1) a letter provided from the Historic District Commission expressing concern regarding what happens on the Vincent's building; the owner should be coming in soon for a permit; 2) the potential impact of a possible NU change and unknown State-level discussions in relation to the recently presented Greenberg plan for the 60-acre parcel he owns with more beneficial proposals for that area expected; 3) Zoning Regulations will begin to be revised and modernized to provide clear, easily read language, eliminating confusion - public meetings will be held and the Board will be advised of meeting dates; and 4) a review of parking issues downtown when the Board reviews a site plan, including meetings with Town Center property owners - the Board will be informed of those meeting dates. Regarding the Andy's location, an athletic club tenant is moving in with a new building sign application coming to the Board soon and no change to parking.
VII. APPROVAL OF MINUTES from January 5, 2015
Board Member Drapelick made a motion to approve the January 5, 2015 minutes, as written.
Board Member Laschever seconded the motion, and it was approved unanimously.
VIII. ADJOURNMENT
Secretary Carroll adjourned the meeting at 6:50 p.m.
_____________________________
John Carroll, Secretary