HomeMy WebLinkAbout05-09-07 Design Review Board Minutes.docDESIGN REVIEW BOARD
WEDNESDAY, MAY 9, 2007
MINUTES
ITEM 1. CALL TO ORDER AND ATTENDANCE
Vice Chairperson Pentecost called the meeting to order at 5:40 p.m. and directed the secretary to record the attendance.
Members Present Staff Present
Walter Banziger Brian Krueger, Associate Planner
Michael Pentecost Tara Hastie, Recording Secretary
Bill Rea
Mel Howe
Joe Batcheller
Visitors Present
Tom Milleson
ITEM 2. MINUTES OF APRIL 25, 2007.
MOTION: Mr. Rea moved, Mr. Banziger seconded, to approve the minutes of April 25, 2007 as presented. The motion carried 5-0.
ITEM 3. PROJECT REVIEW
2. Buffalo Wild Wings CUP/COA #Z-06209 (Krueger)
1783 North 19th Avenue
* A Conditional Use Permit Application with a Certificate of Appropriateness to allow the construction of a 6,759 square foot restaurant including the sale of alcohol and related site
improvements
Tom Milleson joined the DRB. Associate Planner Brian Krueger presented the Staff Report noting he had put together an informal memo for the meeting as the revised plan for the proposal
had been submitted. He stated that the City Commission had commented that they were not satisfied with the DRB recommendations from the last meeting or the design of the building.
He stated the building had been reoriented to face south; adding that additional plaza and walkway areas had been instituted, but some parking stalls had been lost. He stated the Design
Objectives Plan encouraged the primary building entrance to face the roadway, but language in the plan allowed an alternate orientation if other amenities were instituted on the site.
He stated there were additional features highlighting the pedestrian walkway to the building; adding that the intent of the Design Objectives Plan had been met. He stated there would
be an inoperable window display case on the public façade of the structure and Staff had suggested a true window in that location instead. He stated Staff recommended the blackout spandrel
glass along the front elevation be replaced with a display window. He stated the applicant had provided a mix of materials and he was unsure how those materials would look on the ground;
adding they would provide a corrugated metal appearance to the structure. He stated Staff would require the applicant to submit a color/materials pallet before Final Site Plan approval.
He stated that, overall, Staff was supportive of the proposal and it had shown improvement. He stated the additional outdoor elements had helped the structure address the street.
Mr. Milleson stated that due to previous iterations of the structure, the owner had asked him to attempt to redesign the site and structure to address previous DRB and City Commission
comments. He stated the building had been rotated as a result of conversations between the Mayor and the owner of the property; adding that they had discussed the patio area and the
structure addressing the parking lot better. He stated the patio had been wrapped around the structure and a fire pit added to address the pond that would be included on the site.
He stated he had attempted to add elements to make the structure appear less square and boxy; i.e. the tower element, pergola elements, and alternate materials (no EFIS). He stated
the regularly cut stone had been changed to something more rustic to blend with the timber elements. He stated the brick would address Old Chicago across the street, the arched entry
had been replaced with a gabled entry, the bracket and supports would have similar detailing, and the parking had been reduced to make better use of the site. He stated the inoperable
window on the east elevation was planned as such to accommodate big screen TV’s; adding that the owner saw the TV’s as a big draw to his establishment. He asked if the walk could be
narrowed from 8 feet to 5 or 6 feet if the applicant would be required to pave it with scored concrete.
Mr. Batcheller asked if Planner Krueger had any other comments from City Commission or Staff that would need to be addressed. Planner Krueger responded that the Staff had not been a
party to the conversations between the owner and the Mayor, and the City Commission had made nonspecific comments with regard to the franchise appearance of the structure and that the
DRB would need to review the proposal after additional modifications had been made to the proposal. Mr. Batcheller asked if the submitted design would be unique to the Buffalo Wild
Wings franchise. Mr. Milleson responded it would look completely different and added that the corporate office had made a comment that the current proposal looked like a log cabin.
Planner Krueger added that he immediately investigated franchise design (using Google) when a proposal was submitted to Staff for review; adding there would be higher quality materials
used for this project. Mr. Batcheller asked why the applicant wanted a narrower scored concrete path. Mr. Milleson responded he thought it would look better.
Mr. Rea asked if the red in the signage was a corporate color. Mr. Milleson responded he thought it was. Mr. Rea asked if the metal would be a more prominent color and suggested the
use of a more vibrant color (red) would appease both the DRB and Buffalo Wild Wings. He stated he was assuming the cattails were located in a wetland area and would remain untouched.
Mr. Milleson responded there was nothing planned for that area and he thought the cattails would remain. Mr. Rea asked if the rooftop units would be screened. Mr. Milleson responded
there would be screening set back a couple feet from the parapet and there would be no E.F.I.S.
Mr. Howe asked to see the profile of the standing seam metal proposed for the structure. Mr. Milleson presented that rendering. Mr. Howe asked if anyone else thought the colors proposed
seemed somber. The DRB concurred. Mr. Howe asked what everyone thought of the vertical stone elements (if they added or subtracted from the building). He asked if the trellises would
support vines. Mr. Milleson responded they would support Ivy.
Mr. Banziger asked the location of Staff’s recommendations for a true window in relation to the locations of the proposed big screen TV’s. Planner Krueger directed the DRB’s attention
to that location. Mr. Banziger suggested relocating the TV’s or using different sizes of TV’s and instituting a window on that elevation. Mr. Milleson responded there was a certain
amount of wall space that would be necessary to the establishment. Mr. Banziger asked if there was a roof
over the trellis area over the patio on the east side of the structure. Mr. Milleson responded there was and the fire pit would remain open.
Mr. Batcheller stated he could see a compromise in having the south elevation contain a true window and the east elevation contain a display case. He stated he would like to see a slate
color for the siding up above, as opposed to a brown color, to tie it into the proposed stone features. He stated he was not a fan of the pitched roof above the entrance, but understood
that it served a purpose; adding he thought it would look flimsy and suggesting depth and mass be included.
Mr. Rea suggested bumping up the color to be more vibrant, and the graphics on the east elevation would be too large to fit the space. He suggested the applicant get rid of the two
awnings under the portico on the east elevation to open up the windows on that facade. He stated he thought the pitched roof would be a pretty solid feature that would not appear flimsy
and he supported Staff’s recommendation for the window on the east elevation; adding that there would be creative ways to solve that with modifications to the floor plan. He stated
he supported making the patio larger (if the applicant so desired), though he would not make that a condition of approval. Mr. Rea stated he did not mind the tower feature as it was
becoming a sort of land mark around Bozeman. He stated he was more supportive of this proposal than any previous submittals and suggested the east elevation would need to be strong
and contain a true window.
Mr. Banziger stated the tower looked enclosed with a roof on top. Mr. Milleson responded it would actually be open from the bottom up. Mr. Banziger asked what the entryway would be
like. Mr. Milleson responded it would have a ceiling, but it would be 12 feet high. Mr. Banziger suggested opening those features up so that the approach to the restaurant would have
a better feel and an opening to the roof. He stated he agreed with Staff conditions and suggested there were other options available to the applicant regarding the locations of the
display and true windows. He stated he agreed with Mr. Rea and Mr. Howe’s comments regarding the colors being too somber.
Vice Chairperson Pentecost stated he agreed with Mr. Rea and Mr. Howe regarding the proposed colors being too somber. He stated the amenities that had been instituted on the site gave
him the impression that the shape of the structure had been avoided; adding that use of materials and colors would liven up the proposal as it seemed bland and depressing. He stated
the City Commission had stated the proposal did not enhance the area and the DRB should be excited about it; adding that he did not think any new energy or enhancement had occurred.
He stated this might be solved with a simple color and material pallet. He suggested the applicant could do better; adding that the tower features were becoming a well worn display.
He stated he was pushing for creativity in the proposal and he agreed with previous DRB comments regarding the lack of vibrant color which would create a more invigorating structure.
He suggested the establishment would be seen by 50,000 cars per week and stated the Billings Buffalo Wild Wings had once been a Rax building.
Mr. Banziger stated he enjoyed the patio feature as the applicant had taken advantage of multiple sides, but he was concerned that the TV’s on the patio were facing the street and it
would cause distraction to drivers passing by.
Mr. Rea stated that the extra amenities instituted on the site had been placed there in lieu of work to the actual facades of the structure and suggested some of those could be removed
to provide money for modifications to the elevations.
Vice Chairperson Pentecost asked if the applicant had thought of simplifying the materials pallet; suggesting the stone be removed and metal with a base of brick be used instead.
Mr. Rea stated the good news was that the proposal had made fundamental progress and that it did not need to be Montana-ized. He suggested it could be a standout building as long as
it was not a black and yellow checkered franchise building.
Mr. Milleson stated the owner had been reserved in his color choices due to his concern that it would not be approved by the City of Bozeman. He stated the size of the patio was driven
by the size of the kitchen and the owner preferred not to enlarge it further.
Mr. Rea asked if the idea of the TV’s being seen from the street would become a safety issue. Planner Krueger stated it would fall under the general nuisance section of the UDO and
would be checked before occupancy was granted; adding that the site was lower than North 19th Avenue and it may not be an issue at all.
MOTION: Mr. Banziger moved, Mr. Howe seconded, to open and continue the proposal to the next meeting of the DRB or until the applicant could submit a revised site plan and elevations.
The motion carried 5-0.
ITEM 4. PUBLIC COMMENT – (15 – 20 minutes)
{Limited to any public matter, within the jurisdiction of the Design Review Board, not on this agenda. Three-minute time limit per speaker.}
There was no public available for comment at this time.
ITEM 5. ADJOURNMENT
There being no further comments from the DRB, the meeting was adjourned at 7:00 p.m.
________________________________
Michael Pentecost, Vice Chairperson
City of Bozeman Design Review Board