DESIGN REVIEW BOARD MEETING MOTIONS
REGULAR MEETING – TUESDAY, March 22, 2005
SIMSBURY TOWN OFFICES - 5:30 P.M
MAIN MEETING ROOM
CALL TO ORDER
Emil Dahlquist, Chairman, called the Meeting of the Design and Review Board to order at 5: 30 PM in the Main Meeting Room of the Simsbury Town Offices. The following members were present: John Stewart, Kevin Gray, Bill Gardner, Anthony Drapelick, Mark Naccarato, and Richard Schoenhardt.
APPOINTMENT OF ALTERNATES
Tony Drapelick was appointed to serve for Linda Kennedy.
PRESENTATION, DISCUSSION, AND POSSIBLE VOTE
a. Application of Specialty Saw, Inc., Owner for a Site Plan Approval for a proposed addition to their building located on property located at 30 Wolcott Road.
Mr. Guy Hesketh, Engineer, was present to discuss the application. He showed the board the plans and designs.
Recently the area was in a floodplain and has been changed to an industrial zone. They are proposing construction of the addition in two phases. The first phase will be a 5,400 square foot addition to the existing building. The second phase, planned for one to two years from now depending on the anticipated need, will add another 2,730 square feet to the building. There will also be reconstruction of the paved driveway and parking areas, some regrading to facilitate the new addition, and some new utilities installed and landscaping. The front drive will eliminate the second exit/entrance, and a berm installed in its’ place. There will be some additional parking spaces. As for utilities, the current oil tank will be removed and replaced with gas service. The septic system will be
reconstructed.
Mr. Rocco Sabatino, Pelletier Builders, discussed the proposed 5, 400 square foot phase one addition. He stated that the building will keep continuity with the existing building with regards the colors, and materials. Currently the building is painted black with gray coloration.
Chairman Dahlquist asked about phase two addition. Mr. Sabatino stated that it will be identical to the existing building just extended out from the first phase one addition.
Chairman Dahlquist asked about the transformer located in the front of the building. It was explained that it will be hidden by landscaping.
Mr. Gardner stated that the circulation and layout plans look good, and the addition is well placed as it is located around the rear of the building.
Chairman Dahlquist asked about the lighting plan, given the proximity to a neighboring property. Mr. Hesketh showed the site plan noting that there is sufficient screening and that the addition is to be built on the side of the building where there is the least disturbance to neighbors. The only lighting is to be at the rear of the building for egress purposes.
Chairman Dahlquist asked whether signage changes are proposed. Mr. Hesketh responded no not at this time.
Mr. Schoenhardt asked whether the metal siding on the addition could come down to the same elevation as the current material. He also asked to see the windows match in terms of spacing and rhythm. Mr. Hesketh stated that to do this another window should be added to the elevation.
Mr. Schoenhardt asked why there is a roof overhang on the west side but not on the east Mr. Sabatino explained that the east side is where the loading dock is located.
Mr. Naccarato was concerned about the transformer located in the front of the building and asked how far it is from the façade. Mr. Sabatino said that the transformer’s location made the most sense and that landscaping will screen it. It was stated that the transformer is no closer than 5 feet from the façade and that it is relatively small in size.
Mr. Gray asked about the berm. Mr. Hesketh said the berm will replace the second exit/entrance drive.
Mr. Stewart stated he would like to see at a large caliper tree to offset and balance the site, instead of a berm, adding that the berm will be too low, and being out in the front of the building it will not enhance the property. He added that the area should be left open and foundation plantings reinforced. He noted that the circulation is fine and the fact of getting rid of the second drive is a good idea.
Chairman Dahlquist mentioned that the board normally likes to have applicants first come in for an informal review so that the application can be discussed and ideas presented, and then come back for a formal presentation.
Motion
Mr. Gardner made a motion to approve the application with modifications. The proposed berm at the front of the property is to be eliminated and the plantings across the front of the building are to be redistributed so they lean more towards foundation plantings. A large tree is to be planted in the area that is being left vacant. The windows on the addition are to have the same spacing and height as the existing windows, and the bottom of the new metal siding is to be brought down to the top of the windows to match the stack line on the south side of the building.
Mr. Drapelick seconded, with all in favor.
b. Application of Rabbi Paul L. Saal, Congregation Shuvah Yisrael-Owner, Gregory C. Neffinger, Agent, for a Site Plan Amendment for modification to parking and for signage on property located at the Congregational Shuvah Yisrael, One Saint Johns Place.
Mr. Gregory Neffinger was present to discuss the application.
The plans for the church are to add parking spaces, restripe the existing bituminous concrete and get approval for future parking for the non-bituminous parking area. In the interim the existing area that is process will remain as process. Mr. Sawtitze, town engineer, had suggested having wheel bumpers instead of curbing. There will be no changes to the curb cuts and the traffic flow will remain the same.
Chairman Dahlquist asked if there are any changes to the site or lighting. Mr. Neffinger stated that there will be no lighting changes.
The Board discussed signage. There will be three signs. One double sided free-standing sign in the same location as the existing sign. The sign will be 39 x 39 and the bottom of the posts hit ground level. Two signs, each to be put at either gable end of the church, one mounted on the south-facing end, and the other mounted on the west-facing end. At this time sign illumination has not been decided, and is not a part of the application.
Chairman Dahlquist asked if another location for the freestanding sign had been considered. Mr. Neffinger said that the site gives the greatest visibility and added that the existing sign is currently in the same location.
Chairman Dahlquist expressed concern that most churches do not have signage on the façade itself, and felt that additional signage on the gable ends seems redundant and unnecessary. Mr. Neffinger said that they felt the Hebrew letter logo would help people identify it as a church.
Chairman Dahlquist noted that if one goes east on Route 315, all three signs will be seen at the same time, which is a concern.
Mr. Schoenhardt expressed that the new site sign is ok, and the west elevation gable sign location is ok, but not the west side.
Chairman Dahlquist noted that the freestanding sign lists the service times, etc, but also lists the web site of the church. The board discussed their discouragement of listing the web site address on the sign. Mr. Neffinger sated his case for having the web site listed on the sign considering the current technology.
Mr. Naccarato asked whether landscaping had been considered. Mr. Neffinger said no, not at the moment.
Chairman Dahlquist noted that landscaping around the sign is an issue for zoning, adding that some low growing evergreen shrubs would suffice.
Motion
Mr. Gray made a motion to approve the site plan changes to the parking lot. The signage is approved with modifications; the web site address and the phone number is to be removed from the free-standing sign, the second sign on the south elevation gable end facing route 315 is to be removed, and there is to be landscaping, of an evergreen type, around the base of the free-standing sign. There are no lighting changes are proposed at this time. Mr. Gardner seconded with all in favor.
c. Application of Mary Vincent, Owner-Vincent’s Funeral Home, David Eveleth, Associated Architects, PC-Agent for a modification to a previously approved Site Plan Approval for an addition to Vincent’s Funeral Home, 880 Hopmeadow Street.
Mr. Everleth was present to discuss the application and show designs and plans. Mrs. Vincent was also present.
The application is similar to the proposal that was approved in June 2004.Since then the plans have changed due to cost and budget constraints. They are seeking to increase the size of the existing chapel and modifying the entryway facing Iron Horse Boulevard. The design has been changed with the addition on the southerly end of the building along Hopmeadow Street. A gable end was put on the end of the visitor’s entrance instead of a hip roof, because of the height of the gutter.
Mr. Gardner questioned the look of a window which looks unbalanced. There was a discussion about the window.
Chairman Dahlquist asked if brick will be used on the exterior. Mr. Eveleth responded yes, and he plans to match the existing brick and reuse some of the existing stone. The painted wood trim will stay the same. Columns will be used at the new main entrance.
Chairman Dahlquist asked if the roof is standing seam. Mr. Everleth answered yes.
Chairman Dahlquist asked if there is a canopy is over the preparation room. Mr. Everleth answered yes, and it comes out about 5 feet.
Mr. Drapelick asked if the front beech tree will remain. Mr. Everleth said that it will stay.
Mr. Naccarato said the design looks good but is concerned about the look of the west elevation. He stated that the side emergency door seems off balance and needs more ornamentation. Mr. Schoenhardt said that some carved jams could be implemented. Mr. Everleth said that could be done, and thought it was a good idea.
Chairman Dahlquist asked about signage and lighting. Mr. Everleth stated that the signage remains as is. As far as the lighting, it will not change from the previous proposal.
Motion
Mr. Gardner moved to approve the application as presented with the only modification that the emergency exit door on the south end of the building be enhanced with some additional standard millwork to provide a little more ornamentation.
It was seconded by Mr. Schoenhardt with all in favor.
Chairman Dahlquist made a design note.
The board feels that the changes made by David Eveleth were very sensitively done to on eof the more important buildings in downtown Simsbury. The board feels that the changes will add to the appearance. Also noted is the fact that some of the more important trees on the site will be salvaged, and this as well benefits the site.
Mr. Schoenhardt recused himself from the meeting at 6:40PM
c. Application of David Bordonaro, McLean Home-Owner, David Neal, The SLAM Collaborative-Agent, for a Site Plan Amendment for the Burkholder Dining Hall addition at the McLean Home, 75 Great Pond Road.
McLean Home is adding a small bump out to incorporate the expansion of the dining area by 600 square feet. They will bring the current overhang from the existing exterior wall out to 8 feet and enclose the space. There is no impact to parking, traffic, deliveries, or neighboring properties.
Mr. Gray asked why windows were chosen as opposed to doors. It was explained that the room is not used very often. It will stay as a separate room. There are no handicap issues with this as it is at grade. It will be slab on grade, and the same materials will be continued.
Mr. Drapelick added that it is regrettable that the columns are gone, as it will not be as attractive.
Motion
Mr. Naccarato motioned to approve the application as presented in drawing A105-A and dated 3/15/05. It was seconded by Mr. Gray with all in favor.
INFORMAL PRESENTATION
a. P.J. Louis, Regional Sales Manager-William Raveis Real Estate, to review proposed Site Plan Amendment for a location change of a sign on property located at William Raveis Real Estate, 961 Hopmeadow Street. (continued from February 8, 2005 meeting)
Applicant not present.
b. Bianca Signs, Inc. to review proposed signage at 244 Farms Village Road, West Simsbury.
Applicant not present.
c. Michael LeFebvre, Owner, Lorri DiBattisto, DiBattisto Associates, LLC, Agent to review proposed building to located on property located at 132 Firetown Road.
Mr. Hesketh was present to discuss the application with the board.
The site is located at132 Firetown Road and is flanked by White Oak Lane and Plank Hill Road. There is currently a raised ranch building on the site facing Firetown Road.They wish to construct a second building on site, a two story 3,424 square foot building. The building will face White Oak Lane, will look like a house to blend into the neighborhood, and will have a 35.2 setback to the street. They will be reconfiguring the driveway and getting rid of the drive at White Oak Lane. The building will not be high intensity use. As for the parking, the ordinance requires more parking than will ever be required. It was suggested by Mr.Voelker that the show some deferred parking spaces. Existing vegetation will be maintained with some supplementing around the foundation of the building.
Mr. Gardner asked why the entrance is at Plank Hill rather than White Ok Lane. Mr. Hesketh answered that Mr. Voelker suggested it in order to soften the look. He also stated that the Fire Marshall wanted the drive to be widened to 26 feet.
Mr. Gray asked if there will be a sidewalk going around to the front door. Ms. DiBattisto explained that the front door will only look like a door it will not be an entrance. She reiterated that they want to keep White Oak as quiet as possible for the residents.
Mr. Nacarato asked if the front doorway will have a front walk. Mr. Hesketh said that it would not have a walk, as they do not want to encourage anyone to think that is the front entrance.
Mr. Stewart asked about screening the parking lot from the residential area. He noted that in other situations parking lots in residential areas have been requested to be screened with lower vegetation. He felt that the foundation plantings could make the structures blend in and pull the two structures together. He proposed putting in a berm.
Chairman Dahlquist said that currently the site has a commercial appearance to it and anything that can be done to so the harshness of the site is desirable.
Mr. Drapelick asked if anything is to be done to the existing structure. Ms. DiBattisto said no.
Board members discussed ways to improve the look of the site and ways to make plantings work on the site.
Mr. Gray asked if an island could be implemented into the parking area. It was explained that parking spaces is the concern regarding this, and there is the snow plowing issues.
Chairman Dahlquist asked that Mr. Hesketh bring in photos of the site, materials, and colors for the building for the next meeting.
No motions made
DISCUSSION
none
CORRESPONDENCE
none
STAFF REPORTS
none
APPROVAL OF MINUTES of February 22, 2005
Mr. Stewart motioned to approve the minutes of February 22, 2005 with changes.
Mr. Naccarato seconded with all in favor with Mr. Gardner abstaining.
ADJOURNMENT
Mr. Gardner motioned to adjourn the meeting at 7:05 PM
Mr. Drapelick seconded with all in n favor.
| 
