HomeMy WebLinkAbout12-14-17 Public Comment - S. Freimuth (on behalf of the professional design community - UDC Update, Building DesignFrom:Scott Freimuth
To:Jeff Krauss; I-Ho Pomeroy; Cyndy Andrus; Carson Taylor; Chris Mehl
Cc:Agenda; Tom Rogers; Martin Matsen; Chris Saunders
Subject:RE: UDC - Article 5 Building Design - Cementitious wall board Paneling/ Siding
Date:Thursday, December 14, 2017 6:49:17 PM
Attachments:Cementitous wall board paneling - Design Community Letter and Exhibits to the Commision- 2017-12-14.pdf
City Commissioners,
Please see the attached letter and exhibit regarding the UDC section concerning “Cementitious wall
board paneling/ siding”.
The Bozeman design community is happy to provide more information if needed. Please let us know
if you have any questions or concerns.
Thank you,
Scott
Scott Freimuth
intrinsik architecture, inc.
111 north tracy avenue
bozeman, montana 59715
t. 406.582.8988 f. 406.582.8911
www.intrinsikarchitecture.com
14 December 2017
Bozeman City Commission
RE: UDC Update
SUBJECT: Article 5
Section 38.530.060.C.4 – Cementitious Wall Board Paneling / Siding
Dear City Commissioners,
We strongly recommend that the restrictions on cementitious wall board paneling/siding products
(38.530.060.C.4 ; Page 372 [version without markup]) be omitted from the UDC. We believe that this
material is appropriate for use on any type of building on our community based on its versatility and
durability. Restricting this material in commercial and mixed-use buildings is unnecessary; and is based
on unsubstantiated claims as to the materials lack of durability.
During the Commission meeting on December 4th, testimony was given by City Staff as to the reasoning
to why this material should be restricted. We believe that this testimony was unclear and misrepresents
the range of products in question. It appears that the Staff is misinformed as to the technical nature of
this range of products, both in durability and range of aesthetic applications.
“Cementitious Siding” encompasses a broad range of products that all utilize a cement based bonding
technology. These products include lap siding and wall panels as well as cultured stone and tile
products. This material technology has had great success as cladding products because of its versatility,
high durability, and ease of maintenance at a more affordable cost than other materials with similar
desirable properties. This is true of both high and low-density products. Because of this, it is one of the
most commonly used materials in our region and afar. Furthermore, this material technology is
constantly improving, and new innovative products are coming into the market at an increasing rate.
For all the reasons listed above, we believe this material technology is appropriate for use in our
community, and should not be restricted on commercial and mixed-use buildings. Restricting its use will
unduly burden the community and could add unnecessary development costs.
We have specifically addressed our concerns of each code item below:
38.530.060.C.4.a: It has already been established earlier in the building materials section (38.530.060.B ;
Page 369) that durable materials need to exist 18” above a sidewalk to avoid pedestrian abuse. We
believe that this is more appropriate than restricting the material on the entire first floor. As stated
above, there is no reason, from a durability standpoint, that cementitious siding material cannot be
used. Restricting the material on the entire first floor of commercial and mixed-use buildings is
particularly problematic for smaller commercial and mixed-use projects that are sited in a more
residential context.
38.530.060.C.4.b: Breaking up the façade into different/colors and textures is already covered in the
building articulation standards. This is redundant language that detracts from the clarity of the building
articulation standards and therefore should be omitted.
In summary, cementitious siding includes a broad range of versatile, durable products that should not be
discouraged in our community. These products are seeing increased use as cladding solutions because of
the durability and flexibility they provide. The restriction of this material seems to be based on
unsubstantiated claims of poor durability, and therefore this section should be removed.
Please reference the attached exhibit A for examples of commercial projects with cementitious cladding
that would be prohibited by the code as currently written.
Thank you for your careful considerations,
Submitted by Scott Freimuth
On behalf of the professional design community
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10