HomeMy WebLinkAboutDRB-01252017 Memo - DesignObjectives
MEMORANDUM
TO:
Design Review Board
FROM:
Rebecca Owens, Associate Planner
SUBJECT:
Review of updated Bozeman Design Objectives Plan DRAFT
DATE:
January
25, 2017
Purpose of Presentation
City Planning staff is soliciting the Design Review Board’s (DRB) review of and in-depth feedback on the first public draft of the revised Bozeman
Design Objectives Plan. Time at the meeting will be managed as a working session. The project team has endeavored to address City and public feedback in updating the document and will
have further opportunity to refine elements in coming weeks as other advisory parties and public processes are engaged.
General Context and Background
The City of Bozeman (City) is
revising the design requirements, known as the Design Objectives Plan for Entryway Corridors and referred to here as the “DOP”. The professional services firm Community Design Group
(CDG) was hired by the City to assist Community Development Department staff and the DRB in this effort. The DOP was originally adopted in 1992 and last revised in 2005, and is treated
as a resource for design standards via reference in the Unified Development Code (UDC), under Chapter 38, Article 17. The supervising City authority for the design standards in the DOP
is the DRB, per Chapter 2, Article 5, Division 18, BMC. For this reason, the DRB’s input is critical prior to bringing further refined drafts of the updated DOP to the public for review.
The original scope of the DOP primarily covered development in entryway corridors, a designated overlay district marking key entry routes into the core of the city. Its purpose was
to set expectations for the quality of new development and commercial renovations as one traveled to/from Downtown. The current DOP organizes review of projects by five chapters, according
to the following hierarchy:
neighborhood, site, building, signage, and applicable entryway corridor characterization.
The scope and content of the revised DOP, as highlighted below, is undergoing significant
modification but its intent is not changing. The revision will continue to promote commercial, multihousehold, and other development with the exception of single household properties
that results in dynamic, attractive neighborhoods and which reflects the overall goals for high-quality design throughout the community.
For more information about the project and
process, including a summary of the November 15, 2016, Design and Development Workshop, please visit the project web site at BznDesignStandards.com.
Current Status & Direction
A
snapshot of the project schedule is provided below. The updates to the DOP and UDC are intricately connected and respective project teams continue to actively coordinate through internal
meetings and draft reviews. Adoption of the revised standards by resolution of the City Commission is anticipated for March 2017 and key upcoming project action items in 2017 include:
DRB:
working session, Jan. 15
Draft 3, Feb. 1
Zoning Commission: review and recommendation, Feb. 7
City Commission: special presentation, Feb. 13
Draft 4 (final), Feb. 15
DRB: formal recommendation,
Feb. 22
City Commission: public hearing on final draft, Feb. 27
City Commission: adoption of final document, Mar. 20
Contract end & wrap-up: official public launch of Manual and completion
of associated support materials, Mar.-Apr.
We have reversed the DOP’s hierarchy to match related code requirements, with sections organized as: Introduction, Building, Site, District,
and Appendix. Main modifications in the revised document include:
New title: “Bozeman Urban Design Manual” reflects the transition in the DOP’s applicability and allows it to encompass
both standards and guidelines.
Topic structure aligns with proposed UDC organization to make it easier to find relevant information.
Scope and Application: On December 5, 2016, the City Commission directed staff to eliminate the entryway overlay district and apply the design objectives standards to all commercial
and large residential developments. The result is that much of the standards-oriented content in the DOP has been translated from the plan into the updated UDC, allowing them to be
applied city-wide.
There is a new horizontal page format but much of the prior section organization remains, with a broad Policy supported by Guidelines and associated Strategies and
Examples, in addition to call-out or side-bar boxes that have additional references, where warranted.
Content is simplified and streamlined, striving to eliminate duplicate language
between sections and also between the Manual and UDC.
Language is stronger, and use of “shall”, “must”, “should”, “may” etc. has been scrutinized.
Content changes include removal of
corridor guidance (Chapter 5 of DOP) and a placeholder for Signage guidance (Chapter 4) for future updating, upon finalization of UDC changes in 2017.
Content changes include more emphasis
on the following topics:
Place-making
Transition areas
Permanence and quality
Complete streets
Urban patterns of development
Landscaping
Water management, such as low-impact development
Sustainab
ility
Character in general terms, rather than by corridor or according to ‘tradition’ (i.e., the Manual is less prescriptive and softens requirements for traditional design styles
and materials in order to promote more innovation and diversity of design)
Appendices:
In addition to the UDC, several City plans are being updated in 2016-2017 that are relevant to
the Manual. The Manual’s relationship to these documents can be updated by City staff as updates become finalized.
Definitions are updated to provide clarification and align with the
UDC update
Request for DRB comments
DRB members are asked to consider the first take on a revised DOP in advance of the meeting on 1/25/17. Please share written comments in advance if desired,
and provide replies to the following queries (focusing on the first 4 *questions) during the session as relates to:
*To what degree does the draft Manual achieve the project goals and
how could it be improved within the remaining timeline?
Consistency (with other policies/standards/plans)
Clarity
Compatibility/appropriateness (with transition areas)
User-friendliness
Flexibil
ity
Predictability
An evolution in City guidance for design quality
*Does the draft Manual adequately and accurately integrate with the proposed UDC Article 5 Amendments, specifically
for:
Does the Manual provide appropriate and accurate references to complement the third column “Examples and Notes” in the updated UDC Article 5 block frontage standards tables? Is
there a sufficient range of strategies and associated examples in the Manual for the distinct Block frontage types, i.e., treatment of the setback area and primary façade?
Do the examples
support applicants’ pursuit of departures where requested, per the new departure criteria in UDC Article 5? Note that departures replace deviations and are alternative approaches equivalent
to or exceeding the intent of the minimum code requirement.
Does the Manual also support best practices for “superior design” that go above and beyond the minimum code requirements?
UDC
plan review criterion #4 of Section 38.19.100.A, BMC, requires evaluation of the “Relationship of plan elements to conditions both on and off the property…” Does the Manual support clarification
of strategies that meet this criterion?
*Does the revision meet expectations for the Manual to continue serving as a functional standalone document from the UDC? Note that it is the ultimate objective to utilize the Manual
as a best practices reference and to transfer and contain all standards with clear metrics to the UDC.
*Are there content edits that should be considered, in terms of accuracy, clarity,
gaps, consistency, etc.? What are key improvements or critical edits prior to presentation of a final draft to the City Commission for broader public critique?
What do you think of
the revised format? Are the photograph and illustration graphics moving in a constructive direction?
Does the DRB still request a checklist function to be integrated with the Manual
and if so, what might that look like?
Also based on prior DRB feedback, do you feel that the updated Introduction clearly states how to use the Manual? Or, based on prior DRB feedback,
is it still desired to rework an existing City diagram to display permit types, review/board responsibilities and processes, and related standards/plans such as the Manual?
Does our
vision of next steps beyond adoption of a final draft mesh with the DRB’s in terms of continuing the City’s role in developing the Manual as a dynamic resource? Examples in the document
and in an associated appendix/weblink image portfolio can be enhanced and categorized beyond the project’s formal completion. The City’s ability to edit the document’s content will also
be important once the UDC updates are adopted and more detail is on hand for guidance around signage requirements, for example.
If you were to take 1-3 recent projects reviewed by
the DRB and compare the application of the current DOP to how the revised Manual would impact the project outcome, what are the main differences and are they improvements? A sampling
of DRB projects is listed below. Note that Tom Roger will present an example development proposal to the DRB to analyze the project against the new code; this is a similar exercise,
if time allows.
Taco Bell at Catron Crossing (retail)
Golden Gate Condos (residential)
Black Olive (residential/mixed use)
The Lark (commercial)
Winco grocery (retail)
Egbert commercial building (warehouse and offices)
Lakes at Valley West (residential PUD)
Bozeman Gateway Sites B, D (retail PUD)
Bridger
Vale (residential PUD)
Blackmore Crossing (mixed use)
Rialto Theater (commercial)
Cannery District (mixed use PUD)
Murdochs (retail and office)
Lewis and Clark Commerce Center (commercial)
West
Winds (residential PUD)
Northside Lofts (residential)
5 West Building (mixed use)
Ridge (mixed use PUD)
Ferguson Farm Market (retail)
Baxter Lane Hotel (commercial)
The Element Hotel
(commercial)
Rocky Mtn. Credit Union (retail)
Initial staff comments on the draft include the following:
Content
The guidelines and strategies do not show significant progress from
the existing DOP and lack the desired detail for specific strategies.
Graphics
Inadequately demonstrate the City’s need to advance direction for design quality
Format
Needs to be converted
into a printable (8.5x11, double-sided) file format that has page numbers and is mobile-friendly
Revise the Chapter numbering to exclude the Table of Contents as a chapter and add
detail to the TOC that is akin to the existing DOP’s format
It is not clear how the Manual relates to the updated UDC’s Community Design Framework (CDF) Maps.
Attachments: Draft 1-19-17,
Bozeman Urban Design Manual