HomeMy WebLinkAbout12-04-17 - Public Comment - R. Pertzborn - UDC Update, Building DesignFrom:Rob Pertzborn
To:Jeff Krauss; I-Ho Pomeroy; Cyndy Andrus; Carson Taylor; Chris Mehl
Cc:Agenda; Tom Rogers; Martin Matsen; Chris Saunders
Subject:UDC - Article 5 Building Design - Design Community Response to 11.21.17 Revisions
Date:Monday, December 04, 2017 6:00:18 PM
Attachments:Revised Article 38.530 Building Design 11-21-17 Design Community response.pdfexhibit A Revised Article 38.530 Building Design 11-21-17 Design Community response.pdfexhibit B FIBER CEMENT.pdf
Greetings –
My sincere apologies for the timing of this response so close to the start of the Commission Meeting
tonight . . .
Please see the attached letter and exhibits (digital copy for your records). We will provide hard
copies at the meeting for reference.
As stated in the past, I am happy to facilitate further dialog with the design community as requested.
Regards,
RJP
4 December 2017
Bozeman City Commission
RE: UDC Update
SUBJECT: Article 5
Section 38.530 – Building Design
Alterative Compliance Evaluation Path
Sec 38.530.020.E (placeholder)
Dear City Commissioners -
City Staff met with design professionals twice earlier in the year to discuss the building design
regulations in the UDC. The main topic of discussion at both meetings was the possibility of an alternate
path of compliance in which unique projects could be evaluated based on design merit. Several ideas
were proposed and debated regarding the process and implementation of such a process, including
reconstituted Design Review Board. Although this was noted and mentioned by Staff, it appears no
steps have been taken to further address this item.
During a recent meeting, Staff suggested that the current PUD guidelines were also in need of updating;
and that a re-imagined PUD or PUD “Light” might be the appropriate alternate evaluation path for such
unique projects. We are in support of this idea, in order to encourage exemplary and innovative design
in Bozeman.
In summary, we strongly urge the Commission to direct Staff with re-developing the PUD criteria, or
another alternate means of project compliance, in subsequent phases of the UDC reorganization.
Thank you,
Submitted by Rob Pertzborn
On behalf of the Professional Design Community
From:Rob Pertzborn
To:I-Ho Pomeroy; Cyndy Andrus; Carson Taylor; Chris Mehl; Jeff Krauss
Cc:Tom Rogers; Martin Matsen; Chris Saunders; Agenda
Subject:Building Design - Alternative Compliance Evaluation Path
Date:Monday, December 04, 2017 5:57:43 PM
Attachments:Revised Article 38.530 Building Design Alternative Compliance Evaluation Path.pdf
Greetings II –
Again, my sincere apologies for the timing of this response so close to the start of the Commission
Meeting tonight . . .
Please see the attached letter relating to Alternative Compliance Evaluation Path for project design
(digital copy for your records).
We will provide hard copies at the meeting for reference.
Regards,
RJP
BOZEMAN UDC – ARTICLE 5 DRAFT Page 1
November 22, 2017 UDC update 7-28-2017 draft
Revised section 38.530 Building Design: November 21, 2017
Section 38.530 below replaces the July 28, 2017 draft version in its
entirety.
All changes to the July 28, 2017 draft are identified with double strikeout for deletion and
underlining for addition and highlighted in green to identify the location of changes.
Addition to introductory section:
One of the primary goals of the UDC update is to make it easier to use and understand,
particularly for those who do not use it on a daily basis. Therefore, staff included
photographs and illustrations (collectively referred to as “figures” in the draft) to assist
in explaining the intent and standards of a particular section. The design community
found the photographs unhelpful and requested that they be replaced with illustrations
that more accurately represent the concept. Staff agrees; however, creating new
illustrations would require additional financial support that is currently not included in
the budget for this project.
To facilitate revising, replacing, and adding figures in the UDC in the future, and to
clarify that figures are illustrative and not regulatory, staff suggests adding section
38.100.120:
Sec. 38.100.120. – Figures.
The figures in this chapter are for illustrative purposes only and do not constitute
regulatory standards. Figures may be revised, replaced, or added by administrative order
issued by the Director of Community Development.
38.530 Building Design (New)
Sec. 38.530.010. – Purpose.
See the individual “intent” statements for each section in this division.
Sec. 38.530.020. – Applicability and compliance.
The provisions of this division apply to all development within Bozeman, except single, two-,
and three-household dwellings on individual lots unless otherwise noted. Specifically:
A. For clarification on the relationship between the provisions in this division and other documents and
codes, see section 38.500.020.A.
B. For the application of building additions and remodels and site improvements, see section
38.500.020.B.
C. For clarification on how the provisions of this division are applied, see section 38.500.030.
BOZEMAN UDC – ARTICLE 5 DRAFT Page 2
November 22, 2017 UDC update 7-28-2017 draft
D. The review authority may waive or relax these provisions in the industrial zones depending on the
type of use, number of anticipated employees and customers, and the site’s physical context. The
greater number of employees and/or customers and higher visibility levels warrant a greater
application of building design standards.
E. Place holder for Alternative Compliance Evaluation Path (ACEP)
Sec. 38.530.030. – Building character.
A. Intent.
1. To promote buildings with an architectural character that reflects the region’s aesthetic
regionally appropriate architecture that and is based on human scaled design details, durable
high quality materials, sustainable design measures, and that responds uniquely to the site’s
context.
2. To emphasize that high quality design is most critical to Bozeman’s high visibility sites and
corridors.
2. To emphasize high quality design in Bozeman’s built environment.
3. To avoid generic, corporate architectural designs that are not readily reusable or convert to
another use that lessens the character and identity of Bozeman. For example, some franchise
convenience uses have very specific architectural features (such as a distinctive roofline design
that functions as a sign) that reinforce their identity.
B. Building character standards and guidelines.
1. Developments within the Neighborhood Conservation Overlay District (NCOD) are subject to
38.340.050compliance with the guidelines for historic preservation & neighborhood
conservation overlay district. Where there is a conflict between the NCOD guidelines and the
standards of this division, the NCOD guidelines prevail.
2. The Bozeman design manual provides building design aspirations and guidance. It may be used as
a tool to help determine whether departures to the building design standards in this division
meet the intent of the standards.
3. The building design standards in this division 38.530 must be used to help form the character of
new and remodeled buildings.
C. Architecture that is defined predominately by corporate identity features and is difficult
to adapt to other uses is prohibited. For example, some franchise convenience uses have very
specific architectural features (such as a distinctive roofline design that functions as a sign) that
reinforce their identity. As tenants change in these types of buildings, these corporate identity
features can negatively impact the character of the area and identity of new tenants. These features
can also be very expensive to reconfigure and adapt to new uses.
Sec. 38.530.040. – Building massing & articulation.
A. Intent.
1. To employ façade articulation techniques that reduce the perceived scale of large buildings and
add visual interest from all observable scales.
1. To articulate building elements in order to achieve an appropriate perceived scale and add visual
interest.
2. To create clear and welcoming building entries.
B. Façade articulation - Storefronts and other buildings with non-residential uses on the ground level façade must include articulation features every 40 feet (maximum) to create a
Commented [TR1]: Staff comment: Significant policy
determination. Without specific review criteria, appeal provisions, costs, staffing requirements, time requirements in place revised path would be difficult to implement, apply, and meet adequate due process standards. Also, we believe the Bozeman Design Manual ought to be in place to support any alternative review path.
To a degree, ACEP is built into the draft through departures and PUD alternative.
Commented [TR2]: Staff comment: Suggested change to “appropriately” not included
Commented [TR3]: Staff comment: An issue of importance to
the community. Adapted language from deleted section 38.530.030.C.
BOZEMAN UDC – ARTICLE 5 DRAFT Page 3
November 22, 2017 UDC update 7-28-2017 draft
human-scaled pattern. At least three of the following features must be employed at intervals no
greater than 40 feet.
B. Façade articulation - Storefronts and other buildings with non-residential uses on the
ground level must include a minimum of three of the following articulation features every 60 feet
(maximum) to create a human scaled façade pattern:
1. Windows. patterns and/or
2. Entries.
3. Use of weather protection features.
4. Use of structural expression. vertical piers/columns.
5. Change in roofline per subsection F below.
6. Change in building material or siding style.
7. Articulation of a single building material through varying colors, textures, or incorporating joints
or an integrated trim pattern.
8. Other design techniques that effectively reinforce a human-scaled pattern compatible with the
building’s surrounding context.
Other features that could be used to meet the standards on block frontages that are not designated
as storefront:
9. Providing vertical elements such as a trellis with plants, green wall, art element.
10. Providing vertical building modulation of at least 12 inches in depth if tied to a change in roofline
per subsection F below or a change in building material, siding style, or color.
Departures will be considered provided they meet the intent of the standards and the design criteria
set forth in subsection D below:
Exceptions:
a. Only two articulation features are required on building façades in the BP district;
b. Only one articulation feature is required on building façade s in the M-1 district;
c. Buildings in the M-2 district are exempt from these standards.
d. Building walls facing alleys, rear or side yards are not subject to the standards herein, except for
zone edge properties, when adjacent to a lower-intensity zoning district.
Commented [TR4]: Staff comment: did not alter to say
“appropriately scaled”. We believe the built environment is for humans and functionally meeting our needs.
Commented [TR5]: Staff comment: Moved to new line and re-numbered.
Commented [TR6]: Staff comment: did not alter to say “appropriately scaled”. We believe the built environment is for
humans and functionally meeting our needs.
BOZEMAN UDC – ARTICLE 5 DRAFT Page 4
November 22, 2017 UDC update 7-28-2017 draft
The left image uses window patterns, weather protection elements, and roofline modulation. The photo example to the right also includes window patterns and weather protection along with brick vertical piers to articulate the façade. The lower example illustrates how a multitenant retail building can successfully be
articulated (windows, weather protection, vertical building modulation, and roofline changes)
Figure 38.530.040.B
Façade articulation examples.
C. Façade articulation - Residential buildings must include articulation features at intervals that
relate to the location/size of individual units within the building (or no more than every 30 feet) to
break up the massing of the building and add visual interest and compatibility to the surrounding
context. At least three of the following features must be employed at intervals no greater than the
unit interval or 30 feet (whichever is less).
C. Façade articulation - Residential buildings must include articulation features at appropriate
intervals relative to the scale of the façade in order to reduce the perceived massing of the building
and add visual interest. The following features must be employed at intervals relative to the
individual dwelling units or at a maximum of every 30 feet. The scale of the façade articulation
should be compatible with the surrounding context.
1. Use of windows
2. Entries.
Commented [TR7]: Staff comment: see new section 38.100.120 above. Applies to all images in this section.
Commented [TR8]: Staff comment: separated line and renumbered.
BOZEMAN UDC – ARTICLE 5 DRAFT Page 5
November 22, 2017 UDC update 7-28-2017 draft
3. Use of weather protection features.
4. Use of vertical piers/columns.
5. Change in roofline per subsection F below.
6. Change in building material, and/or siding style, and/or window pattern.
7. Articulation of a single building material through varying colors, textures, or incorporating joints
or an integrated trim pattern.
8. Providing vertical building modulation of at least 12 inches in depth if tied to a change in roofline
modulation per subsection F below or a change in building material, siding style, or color.
Balconies may be used to qualify for this option if they are recessed or projected from the
façade by at least 18 inches. Juliet balconies or other balconies that appear to be tacked on to
the façade will not qualify for this option unless they employ high quality materials and effectively
meet the intent of the standards.
9. Other design techniques that effectively break up the massing at no more than 30-foot intervals.
10. Providing vertical elements such as a trellis with plants, green wall, and/or art element.
Departures will be considered provided they meet the intent of the standards and the design criteria
set forth in subsection D below.
Below examples use a combination of vertical building modulation, window patterns, material changes, and roofline modulation.
Commented [TR9]: Staff comment. Staff is not supportive of this option, it is included for discussion. The concept is addressed in other line items and there is insufficient criteria to implement.
BOZEMAN UDC – ARTICLE 5 DRAFT Page 6
November 22, 2017 UDC update 7-28-2017 draft
Figure 38.530.040.C
Residential façade articulation examples
D. Departure criteria associated with articulation standards. Proposals must meet the intent
of the standards. The following criteria will be considered in determining whether the proposed
articulation treatment meets the “intent.”
1. The type and width of the proposed articulation treatment and how effective it is in meeting the
intent given the building’s current and desired context (per Bozeman’s growth policy or
applicable adopted subarea plan).
2. The applicable block frontage designation. Undesignated block frontages warrant more flexibility
than block frontages designated as mixed or landscaped.
3. The size and width of the building. Smaller buildings warrant greater flexibility than larger
buildings.
4. The quality of façade materials in concert with doors, windows, and other façade features and
their ability to add visual interest to the street from a pedestrian scale and more distant
observable scales.
This building is a good departure example. Its two clear articulation features are the window patterns and the
entry/building modulation feature (3 minimum are required). However, the overall effectiveness of these
articulation features combined with the high quality of materials and detailing and the relatively small width of
the building help it meet the intent of the standards.
Figure 38.530.040.D
Façade articulation departure examples
E. Maximum façade width. For most buildings, small scale articulation techniques (see subsections B
and C above) are sufficient to reduce the perceived scale of buildings, add visual interest, and
contribute to the pedestrian environment. Larger buildings need more substantial
articulated/modulated features to break up the massing and add visual interest.
Building façades wider than 100 150 feet must include at least one of the following features to break
up the massing of the building and add visual interest. Building walls facing alleys, rear or side yards
Commented [TR10]: Departure criteria is not changed. Adequate objective criteria are required to make objective determinations and eliminate arbitrary and capricious decisions.
BOZEMAN UDC – ARTICLE 5 DRAFT Page 7
November 22, 2017 UDC update 7-28-2017 draft
are not subject to the standards herein, except for zone edge properties, when adjacent to a lower
intensity zoning district. Existing buildings are exempt from subsection E.
1. Provide vertical building modulation at least 20 six feet deep and 30 ten feet wide. For multi-
story buildings, the modulation must extend through more than one-half of the building floors.
2. Use a contrasting vertical modulated design component that:
a. Extends through all floors above the first floor fronting on the street. Exception: upper floors
that are set back more than ten feet horizontally from the façade are exempt;
ba. Utilizes a change in building materials that effectively contrast from the rest of the façade;
cb. Is modulated vertically from the rest of the façade by an average of six inches.
d. Is designed to provide roofline modulation per subsection F below;
3. Façade employs building walls with contrasting articulation that make it appear like two multiple
distinct buildings. To qualify for this option, these contrasting façades must employ all of the
following:
a. Different building materials and/or configuration of building materials;
b. Contrasting window design (sizes or configurations).
Departures will be considered provided the design meets the intent of the standards. Supplemental
consideration for approving alternative designs:
• Width of the façade. The larger the façade, the more substantial articulation/ modulation
features need to be.
• Block frontage designation. Storefront designated block frontages warrant the most scrutiny,
while undesignated streets warrant more flexibility.
• The type of articulation treatment and how effective it is in meeting the intent given the
building’s context.
Less than 100 or 120’ 150’ wide: Meets standard More than 100 or 120’ 150’ wide: Does not meet standard
Commented [TR11]: Departure criteria is not changed. Adequate objective criteria re required to make objective determinations and eliminate arbitrary and capricious decisions.
Commented [TR12]: Illustrations need to be updated to new standard.
BOZEMAN UDC – ARTICLE 5 DRAFT Page 8
November 22, 2017 UDC update 7-28-2017 draft
Building incorporates a
20’x30’ 6’x10’ courtyard
along the façade to
effectively break it up into
smaller components:
Meets standard.
Both buildings use modulated entry feature to help break up the perceived massing and add visual interest.
Figure 38.530.040.E
Illustrating maximum façade width standards and good and bad examples.
The left building on East Main (about 110’ wide) uses an articulated partial third floor along with smaller articulation treatments on the main floors to effectively break up the perceived scale and add visual interest (this would be a good departure example). The building to the right would not be an acceptable example. While the
articulated features on the lower floors help, the monotony of the very long upper floor and roofline would not be acceptable.
Figure 38.530.040.E
Illustrating maximum façade width standards and good and bad examples.
F. Roofline modulation. In order to qualify as a façade articulation feature in subsections B, C, and E
above, rooflines must employ one or more of the following:
1. For flat roofs or façades with horizontal eave, fascia, or parapet, the minimum vertical dimension
of roofline modulation is the greater of two feet or 0.1 multiplied by the wall height (finish grade
BOZEMAN UDC – ARTICLE 5 DRAFT Page 9
November 22, 2017 UDC update 7-28-2017 draft
to top of the wall) when combined with vertical building modulation techniques described in
subsections above. Otherwise, the minimum vertical dimension of roofline modulation is the
greater of four feet or 0.2 multiplied by the wall height an extension of the parapet or a break in
the parapet of at least one foot measured from the adjacent roof or adjacent parapet. If no
parapet is present a horizontal roof edge/eave extension of at least two feet.
2. A pitched roofline segment(s) scaled appropriately to the façade. or gabled roofline segment of
at least 20 feet in width. Buildings with pitched roofs must include a minimum slope of 5:12 and
feature modulated roofline components at the interval required per the applicable standard
above.
3. A combination of the above.
Departures will be considered provided the roofline modulation design effectively reduces the
perceived scale of the building and adds visual interest.
Roofline modulation examples for flat roofs.
Figure 38.530.040.1
Acceptable examples of roofline modulation.
The left building illustrates a pitched roof example and the right building includes a combination of flat and
gabled rooflines.
Figure 38.530.040.1
Acceptable examples of roofline modulation.
Commented [TR13]: Staff comment. No change to departure criteria included. Intent statements are guiding principles and regulatory standards.
BOZEMAN UDC – ARTICLE 5 DRAFT Page 10
November 22, 2017 UDC update 7-28-2017 draft
Sec. 38.530.050. – Building details.
A. Intent:
1. To encourage the incorporation of design details and small-scale elements into building façades
that are attractive at a pedestrian scale.
1. To encourage building façades with attractive design details at an appropriate pedestrian scale
relative to the overall composition of the building.
2. To integrate window design that adds depth, richness, and visual interest to the façade.
B. Façade details – non-residential and mixed-use buildings. All commercial and mixed-use
buildings must be enhanced with appropriate details. All new buildings, additions and buildings
associated with Level II and III Improvements (see section 38.500.020.B) must employ at least one
detail element from each of the three categories below for each façade facing a street or public
space for each façade articulation interval (see section 38.530.040). For example, a building with 120
feet of street frontage with a façade articulated at 40-foot intervals will need to meet the standards
for each of the three façade segments below.
1. Window and/or entry treatment, such as:
a. Display windows divided into a grid of multiple panes;
b. Transom windows;
c. Roll-up windows/doors;
d. Other distinctive window treatment that meets the purpose of the standards;
e. Recessed entry;
f. Decorative door;
g. Other decorative or specially designed entry treatment that meets the intent of the
standards.
C
B A
BOZEMAN UDC – ARTICLE 5 DRAFT Page 11
November 22, 2017 UDC update 7-28-2017 draft
Examples of decorative or specially designed windows and entries. A = Openable storefront window. B = Transom windows. C = Openable window with decorative details. D = Decorative window shades. E = Decorative
door. F = Recessed entry.
Figure 38.530.050.B.1
Examples of decorative or specially designed windows and entries
2. Building elements and façade details, such as:
a. Custom-designed weather protection element such as a steel canopy, cloth awning, or
retractable awning;
b. Decorative building-mounted light fixtures;
c. Bay windows, trellises, towers, and similar elements;
d. Decorative, custom hanging sign(s) (option only available for building remodels);
e. Other details or elements that meet the purpose of these standards.
D E F
C
B
A
D F E
BOZEMAN UDC – ARTICLE 5 DRAFT Page 12
November 22, 2017 UDC update 7-28-2017 draft
Examples of elements attached to façades that enhance the visual intrigue of the building. A = Retractable awning. B = Custom hanging bike rack and repair station integrated as a storefront design element. C = Decorative façade/sign lighting. D and E = Custom decorative canopy. F = Decorative tower.
Figure 38.530.050.B.2
Examples of attached elements that enhance the visual intrigue of the building.
3. Building materials and other façade elements, such as:
a. Use of decorative building materials/use of building materials. Examples include decorative
use of brick, tile, or stonework;
b. Artwork on building (such as a mural) or bas-relief sculpture;
c. Decorative kick-plate, pilaster, base panel, or other similar feature;
d. Hand-crafted material, such as special wrought iron or carved wood;
e. Other details that meet the purpose of the standards.
“Custom,” “decorative,” or “hand-crafted” elements referenced above must be distinctive or “one-
of-a-kind” elements or unusual designs that require a high level of craftsmanship.
Examples of decorative surface materials. A = Decorative brick/design. B = Decorative tile-work and column
pattern. C = Decorative medallion.
Figure 38.530.050.B.3
Examples of decorative surface materials
D = Decorative mosaic tile work. E = Decorative bulkhead. F = Decorative materials and design.
A
B
C
F
E
F D
BOZEMAN UDC – ARTICLE 5 DRAFT Page 13
November 22, 2017 UDC update 7-28-2017 draft
Figure 38.530.050.B.3
Examples of decorative surface materials
Departures will be considered provided the façade (at the overall scale and at the individual
articulation scale) meets the intent of the standards above.
C B. Window design standards.
1 All windows (except storefront display windows) must be recessed at least two inches from the
façade or incorporate other design treatments that add depth, richness, and visual interest to
the façade.
1. All windows (except storefront windows and curtain walls) must include trim or other design
treatment, or alternately be recessed at least two inches from the façade. Understated or trim-
less windows without additional design treatment are permitted provided the placement and design is integrated into the overall composition of the building.
2. Prohibited windows:
a. Mirrored glass is prohibited.
b. Continuous ribbon windows are prohibited.
Departures to the window standards above will be considered provided the design meets the intent
of the standards.
Recessed and/or trimmed windows.
The window in the left image lacks any other detail that adds visual interest.
Figure 38.530.050.C
Acceptable and unacceptable window design examples
DC. High visibility street corner and gateway sites. All development proposals located at
designated high visibility street corners and gateway sites must locate a building or structure within
20 feet of the street corner and include special design features that accentuate the street corner.
Alternatively, the building could be configured with a corner plaza. Corner design features could
BOZEMAN UDC – ARTICLE 5 DRAFT Page 14
November 22, 2017 UDC update 7-28-2017 draft
include a cropped building corner with an special entry feature, decorative use of building materials
at the corner, distinctive façade articulation, a sculptural architectural element, or other decorative
elements that meet the intent of the standards. Figure 38.530.050.D below illustrates acceptable
examples.
Building 1 includes a corner tower. Building 2 features cropped building corners with decorative elements.
Building 3 uses a decorative functional canopy. Building 4 uses a change in building materials and façade articulation at the corner. Building 5 incorporates a plaza at the corner.
Figure 38.530.050.D
Acceptable high visibility street corner /gateway site examples.
Building 6 shows a decorative landscaped area with a trellis and neighborhood gateway sign.
Figure 38.530.050.D
Acceptable high visibility street corner /gateway site examples.
2 1
3
5 4
6
BOZEMAN UDC – ARTICLE 5 DRAFT Page 15
November 22, 2017 UDC update 7-28-2017 draft
E. Cornice/roofline design. Buildings employing a flat roof must feature a distinctive roofline that
effectively provides an identifiable “top” to the building. This could include a traditional cornice line
or a contemporary interpretation of a traditional cornice line. Such rooflines must be proportional
to the size and scale of the building. Understated cornice lines are permitted depending on the
materials and design of the base and middle elements used to reinforce the base/middle/top
configuration. Figure 38.530.050.E below illustrate acceptable and unacceptable examples.
Building 1 uses a dramatic overhanging cornice at the corner. The left portion of Building 1 uses a very simple
cornice line – to complement the upper level setback. Building 2 uses a traditional cornice line.
Figure 38.530.050.E
Examples of buildings employing confident and distinctive rooflines.
Building 3 uses capped projecting columns along with an understated cornice line. Building 4 uses a very simple roofline – which is acceptable in this case due to the prominence of the wooden canopy.
Figure 38.530.050.E
Examples of buildings employing confident and distinctive rooflines.
D. Active Solar Collection Units (electronic and hydronic) Rooftop solar units are permitted,
provided the placement and design of units visible from the surrounding streetscape is carefully
integrated into the overall design concept of the building.
2 1
4
3
BOZEMAN UDC – ARTICLE 5 DRAFT Page 16
November 22, 2017 UDC update 7-28-2017 draft
FE. Articulated building entries. The pPrimary building entrance(s) for an office building, hotel,
apartment building, public or community-based facility or other multi-story commercial building
must be designed as a must be clearly defined and demarcated standout architectural feature of the
building. Such entrances must be easily distinguishable from regular storefront entrances on the
building. Such entries must be scaled proportionally to the building. See Figure 38.530.050.F below
and the Bozeman design manual for good examples.
Figure 38.530.050.F
Acceptable building entry examples.
F. Departures to building detail standards will be considered if they are determined to meet the intent of
the standards in section 38.530.050 – Building Details.
Commented [TR14]: Staff comment. Departures now apply generally to all building details standards. No change to language.
BOZEMAN UDC – ARTICLE 5 DRAFT Page 17
November 22, 2017 UDC update 7-28-2017 draft
Sec. 38.530.060. – Building materials.
A. Intent.
1. To encourage the use of durable, high quality, and urban building materials that minimize
maintenance costs and provide visual interest from all observable vantage points.
2. To promote the use of a distinctive mix of materials that helps to articulate façades and lends a
sense of depth and richness to the buildings.
3. To place the highest priority on the first floor in the quality and detailing of materials at the
pedestrian scale.
1. To encourage the use of durable materials to provide visual interest from vehicular and
pedestrian vantage points with the highest priority at locations susceptible to damage from
maintenance and weathering.
B. Quality building materials. Applicants must use high quality durable materials. This is most
important for the base of buildings, particularly for commercial and mixed-use buildings where the
façade is sited close to sidewalks. At a minimum, stone, brick or tile masonry, or architectural
concrete (first two feet only) must be used (excluding window and door areas) for the first floor of
cladding on non-residential or mixed-use buildings and the first two feet of residential buildings.
B. Durable building materials. Applicants must use durable materials. Where façades are located
directly adjacent to a city sidewalk, impact resistant materials must be used (excluding window and
door areas) for a minimum of the first 18” above the walking surface.
C. Special conditions and limitations for the use of certain cladding materials.
1. Concrete block (a.k.a. CMU) may be used as a secondary cladding material if it is incorporated
with other permitted materials. Alternative designs that use concrete block as the primary, but
not the only, cladding material will be considered via departure provided the design
incorporates a combination of textures and/or colors to add visual interest. For example,
combining split or rock-façade units with smooth blocks can create distinctive patterns. The
figures below illustrate acceptable concrete block use/designs.
1. Concrete block (a.k.a. CMU) when used as a primary cladding material, must be treated or
articulated to provide visual interest above and beyond natural (uncolored, untreated) block
with (matching) natural colored grout. Examples of such treatments include using ground,
polished or split face units; creating patterns/texture with different block sizes, face treatments,
or colors; creating patterns/textures by modulating the finish plane of units; utilizing contrasting
grout color; or utilizing sealers or painted treatments that enhance the finish of natural concrete
block. Industrial zoning districts are exempt from subsection C.
Commented [TR15]: Staff comment – Generally revised intent based on design community comments. “Appropriate” is also
vague, no definition or reference point. Focus on human and pedestrian scale to maintain community character and desires.
BOZEMAN UDC – ARTICLE 5 DRAFT Page 18
November 22, 2017 UDC update 7-28-2017 draft
CMU is the primary cladding for the corner element above, but secondary to brick on the main façades. The corner element uses a combination of decorative split faced CMU closer to the sidewalk and smooth-faced CMU that is colored to look more like traditional white terra cotta tiles.
The above façade illustrates an acceptable alternative example, as CMU is used as the primary cladding material. Note the use of split-façade CMU’s above each of the awnings and coupled with the use of smooth-façade CMU’s on the vertical columns (which employ black accent tiles for added interest).
Figure 38.530.060.C.1
Acceptable concrete block use/design
2. Metal siding may be used as a secondary cladding material if it is incorporated with other
permitted materials and complies with the following standards
a. It must feature visible corner molding and trim and must not extend to the ground level of
non-residential and mixed-use buildings, and extend no lower than two feet above grade for
residential buildings. Masonry, concrete or other durable material must be incorporated
between the metal siding and the ground plane;
b. Metal siding must be factory finished, with a matte, non-reflective surface.
a. Metal siding must be a minimum 24 gauge thickness. Re-purposed metal siding is exempt
from minimum thickness requirements provided its material integrity is intact.
b. Metal siding must feature appropriate molding, trim, or hemming at all exposed edges and
corners.
c. Metal siding must be factory finished, or alternately purposefully designed to naturally patina.
Highly reflective galvanized finished are prohibited. Re-purposed or re-claimed metal siding
is permitted.
Departures will be considered provided the material’s integration and overall façade
composition meets the intent of the standards.
BOZEMAN UDC – ARTICLE 5 DRAFT Page 19
November 22, 2017 UDC update 7-28-2017 draft
The use of metal siding in each example above is secondary to masonry. The left and right images are more contemporary in character, whereas the middle image is more rustic and industrial, with more refined windows.
Figure 38.530.060.C.2
Acceptable metal siding examples
3. Standards for the use of Exterior Insulation and Finish System (EIFS). Such material/finishes may
be used as a decorative accent cladding material if it is incorporated with other permitted
materials and it complies with the following:
a. On buildings of three or more stories or 5,000 square feet in footprint or greater EIFS is
limited to no more than 205 percent of the total façade area and is not the primary cladding
material. On buildings of two stories or less or less than 5,000 square feet in footprint, EIFS
is limited to 60 percent of the total façade area.;
b. EIFS must feature a smooth or sand finish Highly textured EIFS finishes are prohibited;
c. EIFS must be trimmed in wood, masonry, or other material and must be sheltered from
weather by roof overhangs or other methods EIFS must include an integrated joint or trim
pattern;
d. EIFS must not be used on the ground floor when facing a street, internal access road or
pathway. Concrete, masonry, or other durable material must be used for ground level wall
surfaces to provide a durable surface where damage is most likely. EIFS must not be used on
the ground floor when directly adjacent to a sidewalk, pedestrian or vehicular pathway.
Departures will be considered provided the material’s integration and overall façade
composition meets the intent of the standards.
BOZEMAN UDC – ARTICLE 5 DRAFT Page 20
November 22, 2017 UDC update 7-28-2017 draft
Note the use of brick and decorative concrete block on the ground level and EIFS on the second floor of the left image. The window treatments visible on the second floor add depth and interest to the façade. The
right image employs EIFS between the window and sidewalk – this design is prohibited.
Figure 38.530.060.C.3
Acceptable and unacceptable EIFS examples.
4. Cementitious wall board paneling/siding may be used provided it meets the following provisions:
a. Cement board paneling/siding may not be used on the ground floor of non-residential or
mixed-use buildings where adjacent to a sidewalk or other pedestrian path;
b. Where cement board paneling/siding is the dominant siding material, the design must
integrate a mix of colors and/or textures that are articulated consistent with windows,
balconies, and modulated building surfaces and are balanced with façade details that add visual
interest from the ground level and adjacent buildings.
Departures will be considered provided the material’s integration and overall façade
composition meets the intent of the standards.
D. Departures to building materials standards will be considered if they are determined to meet
the intent of 38.530.060 – Building Materials.
Sec. 38.530.070. – Blank wall treatments.
A. Intent.
1. To avoid untreated blank walls.
2. To retain and enhance the character of Bozeman’s streetscapes.
B. Blank wall definition. A wall (including building façades and retaining walls) is considered a blank
wall if it is over ten feet in height, has a horizontal length greater than 15 feet, and does not include
a transparent window or door.
Commented [TR16]: Staff comment. Design community wishes to delete this section in its entirety. Staff agrees cementitious wall board can be durable. However, there appears to be a conflation of the terms durable and quality. Staff cannot determine based on the information provided by the design community that removing this section does not unduly burden the community by ignoring the majority of the goals and objectives to focus on creating guidelines that simply allow architectural expression.
BOZEMAN UDC – ARTICLE 5 DRAFT Page 21
November 22, 2017 UDC update 7-28-2017 draft
Figure 38.530.070.B
Blank wall definition
C. Untreated blank walls visible from a public street, pedestrian-oriented space, common usable
open space, or pedestrian pathway are prohibited. Methods to treat blank walls may include:
1. Display windows with at least 16 inches of depth to allow for changeable displays. Tack on
display cases do not qualify as a blank wall treatment.
2. Landscape planting bed at least five feet wide or a raised planter bed at least two feet high and
three feet wide in front of the wall with planting materials that are sufficient to obscure or
screen at least 60 percent of the wall’s surface within three years.
3. Installing a vertical trellis in front of the wall with climbing vines or plant materials.
4. Installing a mural as approved by the review authority.
5. Special building detailing that adds visual interest at a pedestrian scale. Such detailing must use a
variety of surfaces; monotonous designs will not meet the purpose of the standards.
For large visible blank walls, a variety of treatments may be required to meet the intent of the
standards.
Figure 38.530.070.C
Acceptable and unacceptable blank wall treatments. Note in the far right example, the display cases don’t meet
the 16” depth requirement, nor does the design meet the intent of the standards.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
4 December 2017
Bozeman City Commission
+
Tom Rogers, Senior Planner, AICP
City of Bozeman
Department of Community Development
RE: UDC Update
SUBJECT: Article 5
Section 38.530 – Building Design
Response to 11.21.17 Revisions
Greetings -
As representatives of the professional design community, we submit this letter in response to the
11.21.17 “Building Design” revisions/replacement proposed by DCD staff.
We appreciate the continued opportunity to collaborate with staff on this section, and believe that the
code will be more effective as a result. We are in support of the majority of revisions/replacement to
the section, however we have significant concerns with a few remaining items. Please refer to the
attached Exhibit A for specific proposed revisions.
The information below is for more detailed discussion on items that are of most concern.
A. Cementitious Cladding
In reference to Section 38.530.060.C.4 (page 20; 11.21.17 revisions)
We have strong reservations about limiting cementitious siding on commercial and mixed-use buildings.
Staff has stated that the reason for leaving this unchanged is that they cannot verify the durability and
quality of the material and could it’s use unduly burden the community.
The reality is that cementitious siding is a durable material. Cementitious siding is one of the most
widely used products in our region and beyond because of its proven durability. These products carry
some of the highest warranty coverage of similar cladding materials, and the durability offered for the
cost is matched by few products. We are unable to make a claim as to its “quality”, as that is a
subjective evaluation (and removing the word quality from the code intent is an improvement).
In the edits proposed by the design community (11.04.17), we proposed removal of the section
restricting use of this material not to simply allow architectural expression, but rather to promote the
use of a material that is able to achieve the goals and objectives of this code section, specifically
durability. The reality is, if anything, restricting this material to this extent will unduly burden the
community by adding unnecessary development costs.
During recent discussions with City Staff, the primary reason given for limiting this material was not
durability, but the material’s appropriateness to the pedestrian experience. This criteria is a matter of
opinion, and differs from person to person. Evaluation based on this factor is subjective. Furthermore,
there is an extremely wide range of products and applications that are appropriate for commercial and
mixed-use application. We believe that cementitious siding in its many forms is an excellent product
that can be utilized in ways that are compatible in the context of our community and that restricting its
use is unnecessary and will negatively impact architectural designs. See the attached Exhibit B which
includes images for reference of commercial projects that use this material in a variety of successful
ways.
B. Intent and Departure Criteria
In reference to several sections (pages 6, 7, 9, 19; 11.21.17 revisions)
Overall, there still seems to be some inconsistency with the intent language and the departure criteria.
Our understanding, based on the second meeting with Staff, is that departures should simply be
evaluated based on meeting the intent. By adding additional departure criteria to specific portions of
the code, intent becomes less clear and more subjective.
We understand the desire to add additional language for a more objective evaluation, but in practice,
this criteria is still subjective and is either already covered by the intent, or should be added to the
intent.
For example:
The intent of “Building Massing and Articulation” reads: “to articulate building elements in order to
achieve an appropriate perceived scale and add visual interest” (Sec. 38.530.040. – page 2, 3)
D. Departure criteria #3 reads: “The size and width of the building. Smaller buildings warrant greater
flexibility than larger buildings” is completely subjective.
The criteria is still subjective. What is the definition of “smaller” or “larger” buildings? The importance of
size and width of the building is already covered in the intent: “appropriately perceived scale”. Although
“appropriately” is subjective, it promotes evaluation based on a site-specific basis, rather than a clear
definition of scale which will differ on every project.
In summary, we feel a simple clause at the end of each subsection point back to the intent is the most
clear and succinct way to cover departures and associated criteria for evaluation. See attached Exhibit A
in reference to specific locations we find this problematic.
C. Variation of a single material to ad visual interest
In reference to 38.530.040.C.7. (page 3; 11.21.17 revisions)
Comment states Staff is not supportive of this suggested change.
After discussing with Staff, we learned that they are in support of this item, and we strongly support this
additional language. We believe that this item will allow for interesting strategies to articulate building
façades, and will result in creative and progressive ways to utilize different materials.
D. Building Materials Intent Language
In reference to 38.530.060.A.1 (page 17; 11.21.17 revisions)
The language reads: “To encourage the use of durable materials to provide visual interest from vehicular
and pedestrian vantage points with the highest priority at locations susceptible to damage from
maintenance and weathering.”
This language is confusing in multiple ways. First, this language seems to suggest two different intents:
durability and visual interest. If Staff wishes to add visual interest to the intent of this section, we
suggest this be designated in a separate intent item.
“locations susceptible to damage from maintenance and weathering” is confusing. Damage from
maintenance is not clear. Does this mean damage from lack of maintenance or from actual building
maintenance and equipment associated with it? Weathering is also not clear in this statement, as all
materials on a building’s façade will weather.
In order to clearly state that durability is a priority at specific problematic locations, the design
community strongly suggests the language be changed to read:
“To encourage the use of durable materials in appropriate locations; with the highest priority at
locations susceptible to damage from pedestrian and vehicular use.”
In summary, we are supportive of most of the current proposed revisions/replacement, but would ask
that the commission consider these most important remaining items before adopting the article:
A. Omit restriction on the use of cementitious siding (38.530.060.C.4 - page 20).
B. Clarify departure language and redundant departure criteria.
C. Incorporate added language in articulation through a single material (section 38.530.040. C. 7. –
page 3).
D. Revise the intent language of the building materials language to: (38.530.060.A.1 - page 17)
“To encourage the use of durable materials to provide visual interest from vehicular and
pedestrian vantage points with the highest priority at locations susceptible to damage from
maintenance and weathering.”
Thank you for your careful review of the submitted materials and ongoing efforts to make the code
better.
Submitted by Rob Pertzborn
On behalf of the Professional Design Community