Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout08-10-05 Design Review Board Minutes.docDESIGN REVIEW BOARD WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 10, 2005 MINUTES ITEM 1. CALL TO ORDER AND ATTENDANCE Chairperson Dawn Smith called the meeting to order at 3:38 p.m. and directed the secretary to record the attendance. Members Present Staff Present Lee Hietala Jami Morris, Associate Planner (ADR Staff) Dawn Smith Susan Kozub, Planner I (ADR Staff) Scott Hedglin Ben Ehreth, Assistant Planner Tara Hastie, Recording Secretary Visitors Present Lowell Springer John Dunlap Clint Litle ITEM 2. MINUTES OF JULY 13, 2005 Continued to next meeting. ITEM 3. DISCUSSION ITEM A. * Planning Staff liaison to the DRB – Jami Morris. Chairperson Dawn Smith inquired about the status of the Verizon Building in Hastings Shopping Center. Mr. Springer responded that Verizon had not yet paid their lease, finished their landscaping, or completed their signage. Chairperson Smith asked if the rear of the structure would be outside storage. Mr. Springer responded the rear of the structure was for deliveries. Chairperson Smith asked the status of the windows in Magic Diamond II. Mr. Springer responded the glass was tinted green with the ladies restroom window being darker tinted glass. Planner Morris responded the green glass looked fine, but the darker tinted glass did not. Mr. Springer responded the darker tinted windows were in the ladies restroom and added that the windows facing Main Street were fake windows. He stated the darker windows did not look much different from the green tinted windows. ITEM 4. CONSENT ITEM A. Walton Homestead Mods to PUD #Z-05116 (Kozub) 1193 North 15th Avenue * A request for Modification to a Planned Unit Development to allow an expanded relaxation for a larger car wash than was previously approved with the original PUD. Chairperson Smith and Mr. Hedglin suggested forwarding a recommendation of approval to the City Commission for Walton Homestead Mods to PUD #Z-05116. ITEM 5. PROJECT REVIEW A. West Winds PUD Final Plan #Z-04050 (Morris) E. of Davis Lane, S. of Baxter Lane, W. of North 27th Avenue, N. of Oak Street * A Zoning Planned Unit Development Application to allow a unified development plan on 160.30 acres with single-household units, townhouse, apartment, senior housing units (assisted and independent), neighborhood community center facilities, and related park/open space improvements. John Dunlap and Clint Litle joined the DRB. Associate Planner Jami Morris presented the Staff Report noting there would be no need for a formal motion. Mr. Hedglin asked why there were two options for the arrangement of streets within the PUD. Mr. Dunlap responded that the City Commission had expressed concern that the applicant would have to rework the PUD proposal if the assisted living facility did not keep its site within the PUD. Mr. Hedglin asked if condition #1 (trail constructed away from streets) had been addressed as the plans depicted the trail right next to Durston Road. Planner Morris responded that the trail had been moved further from the street than originally proposed and had met Staff Condition #1. Mr. Hedglin asked if the proposed trail crossing mid-block was allowable. Planner Morris responded the trail ended mid-block, but the sidewalk would take the pedestrians the rest of the way to the intersection. Chairperson Smith responded she disagreed with the mid-block configuration as people on Durston Road were already crossing mid-block and not using the sidewalk to get to the intersection. She suggested constructing the trail all the way through to the intersection and added that duplicating Baxter Meadows poor trail design was not going to help the site circulation. Mr. Litle responded that the trail could be continued through to the intersection. Mr. Hedglin asked what condition #12 meant. Planner Morris responded it was an Engineering condition to ensure that no one have access onto the external streets of the subdivision. Mr. Hedglin asked how Engineering Certification for the crawl spaces would be enforced. Planner Morris responded the applicant would have to supply certification information for the Building Permit review process. Chairperson Smith asked if the “very low income” inclusion in the conditions was defined somewhere. Planner Morris responded the applicant would be working with the Affordable Housing Committee and would know the definition based on square footage. Mr. Hedglin asked if the PUD was strictly residential. Planner Morris responded it was residential. B. Stoneridge Business Park SP/COA #Z-05151 (Ehreth) 1091 & 1143 Stoneridge Drive * A Site Plan Application with a Certificate of Appropriateness to allow the construction of three office buildings with leasable interior spaces and related site improvements. Lowell Springer joined the DRB. Assistant Planner Ben Ehreth presented the Staff Report noting the proposal contained two parcels. He noted the presence of a linear trail and reiterated Staff conditions for ADR Staff present. He stated the current lot lines split the existing parking. He stated the façade plane height dictated a 20% jog in the façade to break up the mass. Mr. Hedglin asked if the AC pads (mechanical equipment) were outside of the setback line. Planner Ehreth responded the mechanical equipment was outside the five foot setback, but inside the 10 foot utility easement. Mr. Hedglin asked if the standards for sidewalks adjacent to parking were being met. Planner Ehreth responded they were. Chairperson Smith asked what was adjacent to the development in the Brentwood Subdivision. Planner Ehreth responded there were existing offices in Brentwood and added there were single-family residences to the west of the development. Mr. Springer stated there was 70 feet between this site and the residential area and added that the stream corridor ran along the rear of the offices coming out near the Holiday Gas Station on Durston Road and the eastern boundary of the Highgate House development. Chairperson Smith asked if sufficient screening had been proposed. Planner Ehreth responded there was sufficient buffering. Mr. Hedglin asked if there was a steep change in grade or was there another reason for trail connections not being made. Mr. Springer responded the site was level and trail connections would be integrated on the site. Mr. Springer stated the colors of the development would stay in keeping with the established structures in the Stoneridge development. Chairperson Smith stated the existing colors used along North 19th Avenue looked great. She asked if the applicant had considered reorienting building B to give more of a frontage to Stoneridge Drive. Mr. Springer responded the next phase of development would have more frontage to respond to Stoneridge Drive and the overall orientation worked best as proposed. Mr. Springer added that site circulation for emergency vehicles dictated the orientation of the structures. Mr. Hedglin asked if the project was allowed only one sign. Planner Ehreth responded that aggregation of the two lots would allow for only one free-standing monument sign. Mr. Springer added that a shared parking arrangement would be reached to avoid aggregating the lots so that two free-standing monument signs would be allowed. Mr. Hedglin stated the site seemed crowded to him, though he understood the need. Mr. Springer responded he understood how the site would seem crowded, but there was 30% open space throughout the Stoneridge development. Mr. Hedglin suggested it would be nice to have a front lawn on some of those buildings as opposed to a window and a vehicle bumper. Chairperson Smith suggested orienting all three buildings in the same direction unless the entrance was a “well done” entrance that did not present the ends of three buildings. Mr. Springer responded the entrance would be “well done”. Chairperson Smith stated the shared parking arrangement would be fine unless one of the establishments erected a sign stating the parking was for their establishment only (she cited the Wheat Montana/Bank shared parking agreement). She suggested specifying which parking spots would be shared and which were exclusively for that establishment. Chairperson Smith asked if Stoneridge Drive would go through to Stephens Street. Mr. Springer responded that the City Commission shot down the original proposal which contained Stoneridge Drive as a through street and the existing arrangement was the best way to allow traffic to get through. Mr. Hedglin asked if there would be connectivity between the sidewalks and the trail. Mr. Springer responded the retaining wall that was depicted was a mistake and there would be trail and sidewalk connectivity. Planner Morris added that railing was noted on a portion of the connection and suggested making certain the railing would have a break in it to accommodate the trail. Mr. Hedglin asked if the watercourse had been monitored throughout the gully wash that happened recently with the increased amount of precipitation. Mr. Springer responded he had not specifically been watching the watercourse, but he knew that with gully wash, the path of the watercourse was often altered slightly due to the force of the water. Mr. Springer added that the grief caused by the layout of Durston Road would be eased by the improvements to Oak Street. Planner Morris asked if the landscape grouping between the detention pond and the trail had adequate space. Mr. Springer responded he would check on the distance and ensure the grouping would be moved if need be. MOTION: Mr. Hedglin moved, Chairperson Smith seconded, to forward a recommendation of approval with Staff conditions to the City Commission for Stoneridge Business Park SP/COA #Z-05151. The motion carried 4-0 with Planner Morris and Planner Kozub obliging the lack of a quorum. 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.} Mr. Springer asked if the DRB considered itself an advocate for improvements to the design and construction requirements for the City Of Bozeman. Chairperson Smith responded she did not think the DRB possessed that authority, but would support a good idea and forward recommendations to the City Commission to that affect. ITEM 7. ADJOURNMENT There being no further comments from the DRB, the meeting was adjourned at 4:33 p.m. ________________________________ Dawn Smith, Chairperson City of Bozeman Design Review Board