Village of Glenview Appearance Commission

Transcription

1 Village of Glenview Appearance Commission STAFF REPORT April 4, 2018 TO: Chairman and Appearance Commissioners FROM: Community Development Department CASE #: A LOCATION: PROJECT NAME: 2550 Waterview Drive Tapestry Glenview CASE MANAGER: Michelle House, Planner SUBJECT: Certificate of Appropriateness ACTION REQUESTED: Staff requests final approval of the proposed building architecture and wall signage. APPLICANT / OWNER: The Connor Group North Springboro Pike Miamisburg, OH Tel: (937) CONTACT: Dustin Werden The Connor Group North Springboro Pike Miamisburg, OH Tel: (937) PROPOSAL: The applicant, Tapestry Glenview, represented by Dustin Werden, requests a Certificate of Appropriateness for architectural changes, wall signage, and real estate signage for the existing Tapestry Glenview apartment building at 2550 Waterview Drive. 1 Report Disclaimer: Village staff makes no representations regarding support, endorsement, or the likelihood of approval or disapproval by any Glenview regulatory commission or the Village Board of Trustees.

2 Site Assessment AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY: 2

3 SITE PHOTOGRAPHY: 3

4 SITE PHOTOGRAPHY: 4

5 SITE PHOTOGRAPHY: 5

6 SITE PHOTOGRAPHY: 6

7 Project Summary BACKGROUND: The applicant, Tapestry Glenview, represented by Dustin Werden, requests a Certificate of Appropriateness for the architectural changes, wall signage changes and real estate signage installed without approvals for the existing apartment building. The original building architecture was approved by the Appearance Commission on September 11, Since that time, the building has changed owners. The new owners did not seek Appearance Commission approval prior to painting the façade of the building. The previous approval featured materials including brick in Pewter Gray and Valley Rose and painted Hardi siding in Autumn Tan, Monterey Taupe, Navajo Beige, and Timber Bark with a bronze storefront system and almond vinyl windows. The applicant painted the Hardi cladded portions Gingery (SW 6363), Anjou Pear (SW 6381), Riverboat (SW 2308), and Tempe Star (SW 6229). The brick, trim, and metal details were not changed. The property previously had one (1) directional sign located at the southeast corner of the site to direct traffic from Waterview Drive to the leasing center. The sign has been altered to include 3.0-inch white Leasing Center lettering and 2.0-inch white Tapestry lettering on a Gingery (SW 6363) and Tempe Star (SW 6229) background. The applicant also changed the real estate signage on site. The largest sign faces I-294, excceds the maximum sign area permitted per ordinance, and includes 23.0-inch white Luxury, inch white Apartments, 12.0-inch white 98% Leased. A new real estate sign was added to the gazebo wall facing the Mariano s Grocery Store. The sign includes 19.0-inch Luxury, 13.0-inch Apartments, 9.5-inch 98% Leased text in white and 7.75-inch tapestry text in gray. Per ordinance, real estate signs between 33.0 and square feet must be approved by the Appearance Commission and are allowed to remain onsite until all space is rented, up to a maximum period of one (1) year. Time extensions must be approved by the Appearance Commission. The applicant has not remitted a sign exhibit including details for the blade signage on the southeast corner of the building. The applicant added a second smaller blade sign below the previously approved blade sign including Move In lettering. Details will be required for the previously approved blade sign which has also been altered. A penalty equal to twice the standard permit fee or $150 per permit (whichever is less) will be applied to the work performed without Appearance Commission approvals. If the noncompliant conditions are not rectified in a timely manner in accordance with the Appearance Commission s decision, additional fines may be applied by the local administrative law judge through the Village s administrative adjudication process for property code violations. 7

8 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Text Luxury Apartments, 98% Leased, tapestry Glenview Luxury Apartments, 98% Leased, tapestry Glenview Location Real estate sign facing I-294 Real estate sign facing Mariano s grocery store Design Digital print vinyl on MDF Digital print vinyl on MDF Letter Height Luxury 23.0 inches, Apartments inches, 98% leased 12.0 inches, tapestry 9.5 inches Letter Color(s) Luxury Apartments, 98% Leased White, tapestry Glenview gray Luxury 19.0 inches, Apartments 13.0 inches, 98% leased 9.5 inches, tapestry 7.75 inches Luxury Apartments, 98% Leased White, tapestry Glenview gray Trim Cap Color N/A N/A Return Color N/A N/A Background Color Gingery (SW 6363), Anjou Pear (SW 6381), and Tempe Star (SW 6229) Gingery (SW 6363), Anjou Pear (SW 6381), and Tempe Star (SW 6229) Illumination Type & Color N/A N/A Raceway Depth N/A N/A Text Leasing Center, tapestry Tapestry Luxury Apartments Move In Glenview Location Directional sign off Blade sign Blade sign Waterview Drive Design Digital print vinyl on MDF Applicant to confirm Applicant to confirm Letter Height Leasing Center 3.0 inches, Applicant to confirm Applicant to confirm tapestry 2.0 inches Letter Color(s) White Applicant to confirm Applicant to confirm Trim Cap Color N/A N/A N/A Return Color N/A Applicant to confirm Applicant to confirm Background Color Gingery (SW 6363), Anjou Gingery (SW 6363), Anjou Tempe Star (SW 6229) Pear (SW 6381), and Tempe Star (SW 6229) Pear (SW 6381), and Tempe Star (SW 6229) Illumination Type & N/A Applicant to confirm Applicant to confirm Color Raceway Depth N/A N/A N/A 8

9 COMPLIANCE WITH DESIGN GUIDELINES AND ZONING: Wall Sign(s) Tapestry Luxury Apartments Storefront Area 11,842.2 sq. ft. Proposed Sign Area Applicant to confirm 5% per Design Guidelines sq. ft. Compliance TBD 8% per Ordinance sq. ft. Compliance TBD Compliance with Applicable N/A Tenant Criteria Real Estate Signs(s) Luxury Apartments, 98% leased, tapestry Glenview Luxury apartments, 98% leased, tapestry Glenview Proposed Sign Area sq. ft sq. ft. Compliance (120 sq. ft. per No variation required Yes Ordinance) Proposed Sign Height Applicant to confirm Applicant to confirm Compliance (11 ft. tall per TBD TBD Ordinance) Compliance with Design Guidelines N/A N/A 9

10 Appearance Commission Review APPEARANCE PLAN COMMENTS: Staff comments after evaluating the proposal for compliance with the Appearance Plan: Building Design Criteria from Appearance Plan: Quality of design and relationship to surroundings Good scale and harmonious conformance with neighboring development Materials with architectural character and harmony with adjoining buildings Building components with good proportions and relationship to one another Harmonious colors Avoidance of monotony; avoidance of inappropriate, incompatible, bizarre and exotic designs Staff comments: o The applicant repainted the façade of the apartment building without receiving Appearance Commission approval. The applicant chose colors which do not match the color palette utilized on the originally approved elevations of the Tapestry building which featured desert colors. The Appearance Commission should comment on the new colors utilized on the façade and consider whether they are appropriate. If not considered acceptable, the Appearance Commission should consider whether the applicant should repaint the building in accordance with the previously approved colors or the applicant should be allowed time to present alternate colors that would be compatible with the palette of colors utilized in the building s existing brick and trim colors. Any new color palette would need to be approved by the Appearance Commission prior to the façade being painted. If alternate colors will be explored, a deadline of 04/13/2018 should be established for the submittal by the applicant of proposed alternate options for review and distribution prior to the 04/25/2018 Appearance Commission meeting. o The petitioner shall furnish color samples of proposed paint colors for review by the Appearance Commission at the meeting. 10

11 Sign Criteria from Appearance Plan: Compatibility with building architecture Compatibility with signs on adjoining buildings Harmony with surrounding landscape Good scale in relationship to surroundings Use of harmonious colors Staff comments: o The applicant shall submit additional details regarding the blade sign affixed to the southeast corner of the building. The applicant changed the appearance of the panel to include the new colors of the building and changed the text included on the panel. The applicant would need to return to the Appearance Commission for consideration of approval of the changes to this sign. o A second blade sign/standard including Move In text was added below the previously approved blade sign on the southeast corner location. This sign should be removed and the façade repaired as it does not identify the building. o The applicant should clarify the height from grade of the real estate sign affixed to the gazebo in the pool area facing the Mariano s grocery store. o The applicant has stated that the blue and purple boxes on the signs are text that can be changed. Code does not permit changeable copy signage. This feature should be removed from all such signage in favor of permanent text, and any future changes to the sign shall require prior review & approval by the Appearance Commission. o The real estate sign facing I-294 would require a zoning variation for a size greater than square feet. The Appearance Commission should provide comments for the Zoning Board of Appeals to take under advisement regarding whether the conditions warrant a larger real estate sign than the maximum area permitted per ordinance. o The applicant is permitted a maximum of two (2) real estate signs on the property. The applicant is seeking approval of two (2) signs, one facing I-294 and the other facing the Mariano s grocery store. o The applicant shall remove all attention getting devices associated with their leasing operations. Forbidden devices include but are not limited to balloons, streamers, pinwheels, sandwich board signs, and similar displays. o The petitioner shall furnish material and color samples of all proposed signage for review by the Appearance Commission. POTENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD IMPACTS: The alterations to the façade are not consistent with the palette originally approved by the Appearance Commission which featured a desert color theme. While the new colors are not expected to have any negative impacts upon the adjacent properties, the Appearance Commission should consider whether the palette fits with the character of the development. 11

12 Technical Review PROJECT TIMELINE & OUTREACH: A. 01/17/18 Application Submitted B. 04/04/18 Appearance Commission Meeting C. TBD Permit Issuance D. TBD Inspection 2018 A B C D Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec REQUIRED APPROVAL(s): The following chart details the necessary required approvals: Required Regulatory Review A. Annexation B. Annexation with Annexation Agreement C. Comprehensive Plan Amendment D. Official Map Amendment E. Rezoning F. Planned Development G. Conditional Use H. Final Site Plan Review I. Second Curb Cut J. Subdivision (Preliminary, Final, and Waivers) K. Variation(s) (Zoning Board of Appeals) L. Certificate of Appropriateness (Appearance Commission) M. Final Engineering Approval & Outside Agency Permits N. Building Permits O. Building & Engineering Inspections P. Recorded Documents (Development Agreements, Easements, Covenants, etc.) Q. Business License R. Certificate of Occupancy Attachments & Exhibits 1. Sample Motion 2. Original Approved Exhibits 3. Excerpt from Minutes of the September 11, 2013 Appearance Commission Meeting 4. Petitioner s Application & Exhibits 12

13 Sample Motion I move in the matter of A , Tapestry Glenview at 2550 Waterview Drive, the Appearance Commission grant a Certificate of Appropriateness for building architecture, wall signage, and real estate signage based upon the findings the petitioner, through testimony and application materials, has demonstrated compliance with Section Appearance Plan and in accordance with the following exhibits and conditions: A. Front Scheme Three; B. Side Scheme Three; C. Real Estate Signage and Leasing Signage; D. Removal of the Move In wall signage; E. Removal of the illegal nonconforming real estate sign in excess of 120 square feet facing I- 294; F. Removal of the changeable copy features from all existing signage; G. Removal from the property of all attention getting devices; and H. All plans needed to facilitate the Appearance Commission s review of remaining modifications to the site shall be remitted by 04/13/2018 for review and distribution in advance of the 04/25/2018 Appearance Commission meeting. 13

14 EXCERPT FROM MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 11, 2013 APPEARANCE COMMISSION MEETING A Waterview Dr Tapestry Glenview - Architecture, Signage, Landscaping and Lighting Ryan McBride and Sharon Dixon were present to petition for the Tapestry. Ms. House stated that the applicant had included all documents requested by staff for complete submittal. Also, renderings of all four elevations for visual understanding of the proposal were included which included all downspouts and gutters on the buildings and balcony unit lighting. With the use of power point, Ms. House summarized the changes made from the last meeting. The landscape plan had been revised to incorporate the Gardner School landscaping to the south of the park and as requested for reference, a copy of the Gardner School landscape plan was included in the commissioner packet. Details for outdoor furniture, pergola, and privacy wall were included. Petitioner would elaborate on details during the meeting. The photometric was for reference only. Light fixtures were for reference only and would be presented for approval at a later meeting. Continuing, signage remained as proposed but additional detail was added to the blade and canopy signage. Ms. House pointed out that the orientation of the TAPESTRY sign was changed to vertical orientation and would read from top to bottom. Also included were cut sheets for doors, windows, and hardware. In response to Chairman McJilton, applicant stated that he had nothing to add to Ms. House s summary. At this time, Ms. Dixon reviewed the landscape plan and samples: Jericho stone was a blend of browns, red, buffs and tans to compliment the building and landscaping and would be used for the four (4) foot high planter and six (6) foot high wall in pool courtyard area. It was basically the border between the Mariano s and Tapestry sites and would help create screening. Wood panel for grill station in courtyard area which was only visible in the courtyard area. Finish would remain in a brown color or weather to silver gray color Smooth wood posts with some knots for character would be in a deep brown color or weather to silver gray color Unilock block for raised planters would be in a Prairie color, which was a mixture of reds and tans. Location of planters were noted Landscaping was created with more ups and downs to create interest and in courtyards and more room-like private space for residents use Fabric swatch in toasty beige, # for cabana. Cabanas would have louvered side and rear walls with fabric top Ms. Dixon stated that the landscape plan was same as previously submitted but samples were included for review. Regarding landscaping, both Commissioners Shaw and Demsky stated that the proposed landscape plan was outstanding. Regarding the architecture, comments made were: Commissioner Demsky commented that the plan had been reviewed several times and that it continued to look good. 14

15 Commissioner Reynolds mentioned that the perspective shots were very helpful, especially for the courtyard. Commissioner Shaw commented on the downspouts being made an accent color Regarding lighting, Mr. McBride asked to clarify the lighting to be reviewed at a future meeting. He stated that the lighting package had not changed. The photometrics was submitted for review. Ms. House stated that the ratios were not yet calculated and needed to be reviewed for compliance. Mr. Brady, staff, and applicant were agreeable to staff approval for lighting when calculations were determined. Consensus was that the pergola, grill station, and signage were all acceptable as proposed. Commissioner Shaw moved in matter of A , Tapestry Glenview, 2550 Waterview Drive, that the Appearance Commission grant a Certificate of Appropriateness based on the findings the petitioner through testimony and application materials has demonstrated compliance with Section Appearance Plan and in accordance with the following conditions A-G, as noted in the staff report. Lighting and photometrics would be submitted and approved by staff. Commissioner Reynolds seconded the motion. Upon voice vote, motion carried. 15