HomeMy WebLinkAbout04-27-05 Design Review Board Minutes.docDESIGN REVIEW BOARD
WEDNESDAY, APRIL 27, 2005
MINUTES
ITEM 1. CALL TO ORDER AND ATTENDANCE
Chairperson Dawn Smith called the meeting to order at 3:36 p.m. and directed the secretary to record the attendance.
Members Present Staff Present
Brian Krueger Allyson Bristor,Historic Preservation Planner
Randy Carpenter Jami Morris, Associate Planner
Scott Hedglin Tara Hastie, Recording Secretary
Dawn Smith
Joseph Tomas
Visitors Present
Matt Madden
Joan Montagne
ITEM 2. MINUTES OF APRIL 13, 2005
Chairperson Dawn Smith called for corrections or additions to the minutes of April 13, 2005.
MOTION: Chairperson Smith moved, Mr. Hedglin seconded, to approve the minutes as presented. The motion carried 4-0.
Mr. Thomas joined the DRB.
ITEM 3. DISCUSSION ITEM
A. * Planning Staff liaison to the DRB – Jami Morris.
Recording Secretary Tara Hastie informed the DRB that the luncheon meeting to discuss the DRB by-laws and procedures would be held on Wednesday, May 4, 2005, at 11:30 a.m. and lunch
would be provided. She requested they make edits to the existing documents to bring to the luncheon with them.
ITEM 4. PROJECT REVIEW
A. Gakke Yama House SP/COA #Z-04285 (Bristor)
1105 South Tracy Avenue
* A Site Plan Application with a Certificate of Appropriateness to allow the demolition of the existing house and garage and the construction of a new house, garage, and rear house with
related site improvements.
Joan Montagne joined the DRB. Historic Preservation Planner Allyson Bristor presented the Staff Report noting there was no Historical and Architectural inventory file for the property
and an architectural survey had to be compiled and sent to the State Historic Preservation Office who replied that the structure was historically important. Per code requirements; the
demolition of contributing structures require Administrative Design Review, Design Review Board review, and
City Commission final approval. She noted the residence was structurally hazardous and had caused illness in the residents in the past.
Mr. Carpenter asked how Planner Bristor viewed the existing structure’s architectural character. Planner Bristor responded the significance was the whole stretch of houses on that block
and their location near the college campus. Mr. Carpenter asked how she felt about the mid-century modern design of the existing structure being replaced. Planner Bristor responded
that the Planning Office was sorry to see the historic building go, but structural issues on the residence would cause difficulties and significant expense to repair. Mr. Carpenter
asked what state the house was in structurally. Planner Bristor responded it was in a state of decay, there was no location for insulation, the house had been gutted, and for repair
there would have to be new roof, new foundation, etc. She added the floor layout of the structure was not accommodating to older residents and the owners would prefer the structure
on one level.
Chairperson Smith asked if the metal roofing was allowed as Staff was supporting the proposal. Planner Bristor responded that metal roofing was allowed, but the color of the proposed
roof was an issue for reflective reasons and would be reviewed by ADR Staff before Final Site Plan approval.
Mrs. Montagne stated that when one dug 6 inches into the dirt basement, they would hit water and added that residents had been sick because of the presence of mildew and mold.
Chairperson Smith asked if mechanisms would be in place for storage of rainwater. Mrs. Montagne responded there would be cisterns to contain the water.
Chairperson Smith asked if the property would be subdivided into two lots. Planner Bristor responded the lot would not be subdivided, and the residence on the rear of the lot required
review as a single-household added to one lot.
MOTION: Mr. Krueger moved, Mr. Hedglin seconded, to forward a recommendation of approval with Staff conditions to the City Commission for Gakke Yama House SP/COA #Z-04285. The motion
carried 5-0.
Mr. Carpenter stated it pained him to see the structure get demolished and mentioned that neighborhoods were not individual houses, but the conglomeration of the architecture of all
of them. He added he did not think the proposed project was compatible with the surrounding neighborhood.
Mr. Thomas stated he would not suggest re-using any old lumber as it had been saturated with mold spores and there was no way to completely remove the mold; aside from burning the structure
to the ground.
Chairperson Smith stated she agreed with Mr. Carpenter’s comments and she felt a little nostalgia regarding the removal of historic structures in Bozeman.
Mr. Carpenter added the home was not the best example of mid-century modern architecture.
Planner Bristor responded that the original architect had been working with the current architect on the proposal.
ITEM 5. NEW BUSINESS
Recording Secretary Tara Hastie, on behalf of Associate Planner Chris Saunders, informed the DRB of the second phase of editing for the Design Objectives Plan. She stated the DRB was
invited to attend a meeting with Planning Staff and the Design Objectives Plan consultant from Winter & Co. on Tuesday, May 10, 2005, at 1:00 p.m. at the Planning Office, 20 East Olive
Street and welcomed them to attend the formal presentation for Historic Preservation Days at the Emerson Cultural Center on Tuesday, May 10, 2005, at 7:00 p.m.
ITEM 6. 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 7. ADJOURNMENT
There being no further comments from the DRB, the meeting was adjourned at 4:05 p.m.
________________________________
Dawn Smith, Chairperson
City of Bozeman Design Review Board