HomeMy WebLinkAbout05-11-04 Design Review Board Minutes.docDESIGN REVIEW BOARD
TUESDAY, MAY 11, 2004
MINUTES
ITEM 1. CALL TO ORDER AND ATTENDANCE
Chairperson Dawn Smith called the meeting to order at 3:32 p.m. and directed the secretary to record the attendance.
Members Present Staff Present
Christopher Livingston Jami Morris, Associate Planner
Dawn Smith Tara Hastie, Recording Secretary
Carol Asleson
Joseph Thomas
Bill Hanson
Randy Carpenter
Visitors Present
Scott Carpenter
ITEM 2. MINUTES OF APRIL 27, 2004
Chairperson Smith called for corrections or additions to the minutes of April 27, 2004.
MOTION: Mr. Livingston moved, Ms. Asleson seconded, to approve the minutes as presented. The motion carried 5-0.
Mr. Hanson arrived for the DRB meeting.
ITEM 3. PROJECT REVIEW
A. Bozeman Public Library Mods to FSP #Z-03246 (Morris)
626 East Main Street
* Final Site Plan review of the Landscape Plan, Plaza and Trail Plan, and Lighting Plan for the new public library.
Scott Carpenter joined the DRB. Planner Morris presented the Staff Report, noting the only Staff comment in regard to the light detail was that it had to have a flush lens. She stated
Staff did not agree with the number of landscape points proposed. Planner Morris asked if Ms. Asleson would count Quaking Aspen as drought tolerant plantings. Ms. Asleson responded
she would not. Planner Morris stated there was potentially a five point discrepancy on the landscape requirements. Scott Carpenter asked if there was an additional deflector required
for the lights along Main Street. Planner Morris responded there was not.
Ms. Asleson asked if there was supposed to be additional plantings under the trees in certain areas. Planner Morris responded that requirement was changed in the U.D.O.
Scott Carpenter stated if the Board counted the existing vegetation, the project would have more than enough landscaping points.
Mr. Hanson asked if, from a landscape and design point of view, the plaza was flat. Scott Carpenter responded it was level, but the plaza was intended to be concave to support the flooding
and freezing of water for the ice skating rink. Mr. Hanson asked if they had considered setting the whole plaza at a higher elevation. Scott Carpenter responded if they had elevated
the plaza further, it would be on the same level as Main Street. Mr. Hanson stated they were just trading one wall for another. Mr. Hanson stated it concerned him to have a six foot
difference between the plaza and the rest of the site, with the plaza nine feet, six inches below the tops of the boulders.
Mr. Thomas asked if people would actually be able to sit on the proposed boulders. Scott Carpenter responded it would be like crawling onto a natural boulder, but the applicant had
intended for people to sit at other locations.
Mr. Hanson stated the selection of aspen trees seemed too high maintenance for a building with such a civic image, but his primary concern was that the relationship of the plaza to the
surrounding hard-scape was going to be less aesthetically pleasing than the applicant thought. He suggested breaking down the perimeter boulder ring with a series of steps or raising
the elevation of the plaza. He added the handicapped access could be located along Main Street and the plaza could be elevated from that point. Scott Carpenter responded he thought
it would be odd to be in the sunken plaza, but the financial aspect of the project was preventing them from elevating the plaza. Mr. Hanson stated the core of the project was the plaza.
Ms. Asleson stated the design of the planting plan shocked and amazed her. She stated it would be nice to bring some evergreens into the project. She stated cottonwoods were the messiest,
most high maintenance, suckering plants ever and the locations in which they were proposed were not the best. She stated cherry plants were depicted on the proposal with a four foot
diameter, and they would grow to be far larger than that. She suggested knocking out the Virginia Creeper and replacing them with clematis so the brick work would not be wrecked. She
stated the skunk brush proposed at one of the main entrances was a bad idea because of the odor they exuded. She stated she loved monocultures, but they needed to be spread out so that
if one got sick, the others would not be affected and wipe out whole sections of landscaping. She stated Summit Ash would be a good option, as well as Black Ash, and Black Ash was in
the drought tolerant classification. She stated the cottonwoods on the corner were prone to cankers and fungus. She asked if the plants with the lines through them were honeysuckle.
Scott Carpenter responded they were. Ms. Asleson stated the berries from the honeysuckle were noxious to humans. She stated the project needed more evergreens, variety, and balance
on the site. She suggested Mountain Ash as another drought tolerant plant. She stated it would be nice to see grasses in the proposal. She asked where the concrete paving was located
on the site. Scott Carpenter indicated the location on the site plan. Ms. Asleson stated she would give Scott Carpenter information to pass on to the landscaper so the applicant would
have better access to native plantings. She suggested removing the cottonwoods, stating she liked mass planting, but the proposal contained too much mass planting and needed to be more
evenly distributed.
Randy Carpenter asked Ms. Asleson what she suggested in place of the cottonwoods or aspens. Ms. Asleson responded she would choose more ornamental and fruitless vegetation, but the
applicant would have to have native and drought tolerant vegetation. Randy Carpenter stated the plaza was extremely important, and the vegetation should be more varied. He stated he
shared Mr. Hanson’s concerns regarding the height of the plaza wall, people would feel closed in.
Mr. Livingston stated the exterior lighting and cut sheets looked good. He stated the trail plan was interesting in the way it weaved back and forth. He stated there was a grade problem
in the plaza and suggested having small walls in some spots instead of boulders. He stated he did not see the plaza as an extension of Main Street to the east because the building was
proposed so far removed from the street. He stated the only way the impact from Main Street would be lessened would be to conceal the building. He stated it was a poor use of tax dollars
to waste that much usable space with the plaza.
Chairperson Smith stated she did not see the reason for two different types of lighting on the site and she supported the historic type of lighting. She stated she thought the plaza’s
high side, closest to the building, would carry stairs going half way around the plaza, creating an amphitheater feeling. She stated the landscaping plan was disappointing and she felt
a project that was publicly funded should exceed the landscape requirements to set an example for the rest of the city. Scott Carpenter responded the applicant had difficulty with funding
and they had to be choosy.
Ms. Asleson asked if the planting around the turnabout service drive was for screening purposes. Scott Carpenter responded it was. Ms. Asleson suggested minimal screening around the
turnabout, if allowable, and more focus on the plaza area with regard to landscaping.
Mr. Hanson asked why the building had been elevated three feet. Scott Carpenter responded the building had been elevated because they were within 100 yards of the floodplain. Mr. Hanson
stated that, historically, the 100 year line was the high water mark. He suggested requesting from the City a height deduction of one foot for the structure itself. Mr. Hanson stated
he was looking at the grades on the site and if the stairway were turned into a ramp, the handicap access would still be there, and there could be a connection to the plaza from the
sidewalk making a transition with 18 inches of stairs. Scott Carpenter stated he would consider that suggestion.
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.
ITEM 5. ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business to come before the DRB, the meeting was adjourned at 4:35 p.m.
________________________________
Dawn Smith, Chairperson
City of Bozeman Design Review Board